RISC-V: costs: miscomputed shiftadd_cost triggering synth_mult [PR/108987]
Checks
Commit Message
This showed up as dynamic icount regression in SPEC 531.deepsjeng with upstream
gcc (vs. gcc 12.2). gcc was resorting to synthetic multiply using shift+add(s)
even when multiply had clear cost benefit.
|00000000000133b8 <see(state_t*, int, int, int, int) [clone .constprop.0]+0x382>:
| 133b8: srl a3,a1,s6
| 133bc: and a3,a3,s5
| 133c0: slli a4,a3,0x9
| 133c4: add a4,a4,a3
| 133c6: slli a4,a4,0x9
| 133c8: add a4,a4,a3
| 133ca: slli a3,a4,0x1b
| 133ce: add a4,a4,a3
vs. gcc 12 doing something lke below.
|00000000000131c4 <see(state_t*, int, int, int, int) [clone .constprop.0]+0x35c>:
| 131c4: ld s1,8(sp)
| 131c6: srl a3,a1,s4
| 131ca: and a3,a3,s11
| 131ce: mul a3,a3,s1
Bisected this to f90cb39235c4 ("RISC-V: costs: support shift-and-add in
strength-reduction"). The intent was to optimize cost for
shift-add-pow2-{1,2,3} corresponding to bitmanip insns SH*ADD, but ended
up doing that for all shift values which seems to favor synthezing
multiply among others.
The bug itself is trivial, IN_RANGE() calling pow2p_hwi() which returns bool
vs. exact_log2() returning power of 2.
This fix also requires update to the test introduced by the same commit
which now generates MUL vs. synthesizing it.
gcc/Changelog:
* config/riscv/riscv.cc (riscv_rtx_costs): Fixed IN_RANGE() to
use exact_log2().
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.target/riscv/zba-shNadd-07.c: f2(i*783) now generates MUL vs.
5 insn sh1add+slli+add+slli+sub.
* gcc.target/riscv/pr108987.c: New test.
Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>
---
gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc | 3 ++-
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/pr108987.c | 9 +++++++++
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/zba-shNadd-07.c | 6 +++---
3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/pr108987.c
Comments
On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 at 20:53, Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com> wrote:
>
> This showed up as dynamic icount regression in SPEC 531.deepsjeng with upstream
> gcc (vs. gcc 12.2). gcc was resorting to synthetic multiply using shift+add(s)
> even when multiply had clear cost benefit.
>
> |00000000000133b8 <see(state_t*, int, int, int, int) [clone .constprop.0]+0x382>:
> | 133b8: srl a3,a1,s6
> | 133bc: and a3,a3,s5
> | 133c0: slli a4,a3,0x9
> | 133c4: add a4,a4,a3
> | 133c6: slli a4,a4,0x9
> | 133c8: add a4,a4,a3
> | 133ca: slli a3,a4,0x1b
> | 133ce: add a4,a4,a3
>
> vs. gcc 12 doing something lke below.
>
> |00000000000131c4 <see(state_t*, int, int, int, int) [clone .constprop.0]+0x35c>:
> | 131c4: ld s1,8(sp)
> | 131c6: srl a3,a1,s4
> | 131ca: and a3,a3,s11
> | 131ce: mul a3,a3,s1
>
> Bisected this to f90cb39235c4 ("RISC-V: costs: support shift-and-add in
> strength-reduction"). The intent was to optimize cost for
> shift-add-pow2-{1,2,3} corresponding to bitmanip insns SH*ADD, but ended
> up doing that for all shift values which seems to favor synthezing
> multiply among others.
>
> The bug itself is trivial, IN_RANGE() calling pow2p_hwi() which returns bool
> vs. exact_log2() returning power of 2.
>
> This fix also requires update to the test introduced by the same commit
> which now generates MUL vs. synthesizing it.
>
> gcc/Changelog:
>
> * config/riscv/riscv.cc (riscv_rtx_costs): Fixed IN_RANGE() to
> use exact_log2().
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> * gcc.target/riscv/zba-shNadd-07.c: f2(i*783) now generates MUL vs.
> 5 insn sh1add+slli+add+slli+sub.
> * gcc.target/riscv/pr108987.c: New test.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>
Reviewed-by: Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu>
Committed 2 weeks ago but apparently I didn't send mail to say that,
thanks Vineet.
On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 3:56 AM Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 at 20:53, Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com> wrote:
> >
> > This showed up as dynamic icount regression in SPEC 531.deepsjeng with upstream
> > gcc (vs. gcc 12.2). gcc was resorting to synthetic multiply using shift+add(s)
> > even when multiply had clear cost benefit.
> >
> > |00000000000133b8 <see(state_t*, int, int, int, int) [clone .constprop.0]+0x382>:
> > | 133b8: srl a3,a1,s6
> > | 133bc: and a3,a3,s5
> > | 133c0: slli a4,a3,0x9
> > | 133c4: add a4,a4,a3
> > | 133c6: slli a4,a4,0x9
> > | 133c8: add a4,a4,a3
> > | 133ca: slli a3,a4,0x1b
> > | 133ce: add a4,a4,a3
> >
> > vs. gcc 12 doing something lke below.
> >
> > |00000000000131c4 <see(state_t*, int, int, int, int) [clone .constprop.0]+0x35c>:
> > | 131c4: ld s1,8(sp)
> > | 131c6: srl a3,a1,s4
> > | 131ca: and a3,a3,s11
> > | 131ce: mul a3,a3,s1
> >
> > Bisected this to f90cb39235c4 ("RISC-V: costs: support shift-and-add in
> > strength-reduction"). The intent was to optimize cost for
> > shift-add-pow2-{1,2,3} corresponding to bitmanip insns SH*ADD, but ended
> > up doing that for all shift values which seems to favor synthezing
> > multiply among others.
> >
> > The bug itself is trivial, IN_RANGE() calling pow2p_hwi() which returns bool
> > vs. exact_log2() returning power of 2.
> >
> > This fix also requires update to the test introduced by the same commit
> > which now generates MUL vs. synthesizing it.
> >
> > gcc/Changelog:
> >
> > * config/riscv/riscv.cc (riscv_rtx_costs): Fixed IN_RANGE() to
> > use exact_log2().
> >
> > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * gcc.target/riscv/zba-shNadd-07.c: f2(i*783) now generates MUL vs.
> > 5 insn sh1add+slli+add+slli+sub.
> > * gcc.target/riscv/pr108987.c: New test.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu>
@@ -2496,7 +2496,8 @@ riscv_rtx_costs (rtx x, machine_mode mode, int outer_code, int opno ATTRIBUTE_UN
&& GET_CODE (XEXP (x, 0)) == MULT
&& REG_P (XEXP (XEXP (x, 0), 0))
&& CONST_INT_P (XEXP (XEXP (x, 0), 1))
- && IN_RANGE (pow2p_hwi (INTVAL (XEXP (XEXP (x, 0), 1))), 1, 3))
+ && pow2p_hwi (INTVAL (XEXP (XEXP (x, 0), 1)))
+ && IN_RANGE (exact_log2 (INTVAL (XEXP (XEXP (x, 0), 1))), 1, 3))
{
*total = COSTS_N_INSNS (1);
return true;
new file mode 100644
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-march=rv64gc_zba -mabi=lp64 -O2" } */
+
+unsigned long long f5(unsigned long long i)
+{
+ return i * 0x0202020202020202ULL;
+}
+
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "mul" 1 } } */
@@ -26,6 +26,6 @@ f4 (unsigned long i)
}
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sh2add" 2 } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sh1add" 2 } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "slli" 5 } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "mul" 1 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sh1add" 1 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "slli" 3 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "mul" 2 } } */