> -----Original Message-----
> From: MayShao-oc <mayshao...@zhaoxin.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2024 11:20 AM
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; hubi...@ucw.cz; Liu, Hongtao
> <hongtao....@intel.com>; ubiz...@gmail.com
> Cc: ti...@zhaoxin.com; silviaz...@zhaoxin.com; loui...@zhaoxin.com;
> cobec...@zhaoxin.com
> Subject: [PATCH] [x86_64] Add flag to control tight loops alignment opt
> 
> Hi all:
>     This patch add -malign-tight-loops flag to control pass_align_tight_loops.
>     The motivation is that pass_align_tight_loops may cause performance
> regression in nested loops.
> 
>     The example code as follows:
> 
>     #define ITER 20000
>     #define ITER_O 10
> 
>     int i, j,k;
>     int array[ITER];
> 
>     void loop()
>     {
>       int i;
>       for(k = 0; k < ITER_O; k++)
>       for(j = 0; j < ITER; j++)
>       for(i = 0; i < ITER; i++)
>       {
>         array[i] += j;
>         array[i] += i;
>         array[i] += 2*j;
>         array[i] += 2*i;
>       }
>     }
> 
>     When I compile it with gcc -O1 loop.c, the output assembly as follows.
> It is not optimal, because of too many nops insert in the outer loop.
> 
> 0000000000400540 <loop>:
>   400540:     48 83 ec 08             sub    $0x8,%rsp
>   400544:     bf 0a 00 00 00          mov    $0xa,%edi
>   400549:     b9 00 00 00 00          mov    $0x0,%ecx
>   40054e:     8d 34 09                lea    (%rcx,%rcx,1),%esi
>   400551:     b8 00 00 00 00          mov    $0x0,%eax
>   400556:     66 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00    data16 nopw %cs:0x0(%rax,%rax,1)
>   40055d:     00 00 00 00
>   400561:     66 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00    data16 nopw %cs:0x0(%rax,%rax,1)
>   400568:     00 00 00 00
>   40056c:     66 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00    data16 nopw %cs:0x0(%rax,%rax,1)
>   400573:     00 00 00 00
>   400577:     66 0f 1f 84 00 00 00    nopw   0x0(%rax,%rax,1)
>   40057e:     00 00
>   400580:     89 ca                   mov    %ecx,%edx
>   400582:     03 14 85 60 10 60 00    add    0x601060(,%rax,4),%edx
>   400589:     01 c2                   add    %eax,%edx
>   40058b:     01 f2                   add    %esi,%edx
>   40058d:     8d 14 42                lea    (%rdx,%rax,2),%edx
>   400590:     89 14 85 60 10 60 00    mov    %edx,0x601060(,%rax,4)
>   400597:     48 83 c0 01             add    $0x1,%rax
>   40059b:     48 3d 20 4e 00 00       cmp    $0x4e20,%rax
>   4005a1:     75 dd                   jne    400580 <loop+0x40>
> 
>    I benchmark this program in the intel Xeon, and find the optimization may
> cause a 40% performance regression (6.6B cycles VS 9.3B cycles).
>    So I propose to add -malign-tight-loops flag to control tight loop
> optimization to avoid this, we could disalbe this optimization by default.
>    Bootstrapped X86_64.
>    Ok for trunk?
> 
> BR
> Mayshao
> 
> gcc/ChangeLog:
> 
>       * config/i386/i386-features.cc (ix86_align_tight_loops): New flag.
>       * config/i386/i386.opt (malign-tight-loops): New option.
>       * doc/invoke.texi (-malign-tight-loops): Document.
> ---
>  gcc/config/i386/i386-features.cc | 4 +++-
>  gcc/config/i386/i386.opt         | 4 ++++
>  gcc/doc/invoke.texi              | 7 ++++++-
>  3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386-features.cc b/gcc/config/i386/i386-
> features.cc
> index e2e85212a4f..f9546e00b07 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386-features.cc
> +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386-features.cc
> @@ -3620,7 +3620,9 @@ public:
>    /* opt_pass methods: */
>    bool gate (function *) final override
>      {
> -      return optimize && optimize_function_for_speed_p (cfun);
> +      return ix86_align_tight_loops
> +        && optimize
> +        && optimize_function_for_speed_p (cfun);
>      }
> 
>    unsigned int execute (function *) final override diff --git
> a/gcc/config/i386/i386.opt b/gcc/config/i386/i386.opt index
> 64c295d344c..ec41de192bc 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.opt
> +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.opt
> @@ -1266,6 +1266,10 @@ mlam=
>  Target RejectNegative Joined Enum(lam_type) Var(ix86_lam_type)
> Init(lam_none)  -mlam=[none|u48|u57] Instrument meta data position in
> user data pointers.
> 
> +malign-tight-loops
> +Target Var(ix86_align_tight_loops) Init(0) Optimization Enable align
> +tight loops.

I'd like it to be on by default, so Init (1)?

> +
>  Enum
>  Name(lam_type) Type(enum lam_type) UnknownError(unknown lam
> type %qs)
> 
> diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi index
> 07920e07b4d..9ec1e1f0095 100644
> --- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
> +++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
> @@ -1510,7 +1510,7 @@ See RS/6000 and PowerPC Options.
>  -mindirect-branch=@var{choice}  -mfunction-return=@var{choice}  -
> mindirect-branch-register -mharden-sls=@var{choice}  -mindirect-branch-cs-
> prefix -mneeded -mno-direct-extern-access --munroll-only-small-loops -
> mlam=@var{choice}}
> +-munroll-only-small-loops -mlam=@var{choice} -malign-tight-loops}
> 
>  @emph{x86 Windows Options}
> 
> @@ -36530,6 +36530,11 @@ LAM(linear-address masking) allows special
> bits in the pointer to be used  for metadata. The default is @samp{none}. With
> @samp{u48}, pointer bits in  positions 62:48 can be used for metadata; With
> @samp{u57}, pointer bits in  positions 62:57 can be used for metadata.
> +
> +@opindex malign-tight-loops
> +@opindex mno-align-tight-loops
> +@item -malign-tight-loops
> +Controls tight loop alignment optimization.
>  @end table
> 
>  @node x86 Windows Options
> --
> 2.27.0

Reply via email to