This patch includes cost tests for bit reverse as well as some adjustments to the cost model.
Details
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rG LLVM Github Monorepo
Event Timeline
llvm/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64TargetTransformInfo.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
259 | I think that these types should have a slightly higher cost than just 1 (or 1*LT.first, the legalization cost). It's common in these cost functions to have a table of operand and type, giving a cost to each. That way they can be controlled a little better. Like the getShuffleCost at the end of this file. Would it be worth adding something similar here? (We could also maybe optimize the v4i32 case better using a vrev32. But it's probably best to use the current cost over what we expect it could be later). |
llvm/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64TargetTransformInfo.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
295 | Can we change it to only call getTypeLegalizationCost once. | |
llvm/test/Analysis/CostModel/AArch64/bitreverse-cost-model.ll | ||
8 | I see this doesn't give a cost of 2. I think it is trying to use the legal type that i8 will be converted to (i32) for the costs. Maybe.. can we add something that says "if the original element type is not the same as the legal element type, add 1"? | |
llvm/test/Analysis/CostModel/AArch64/bitreverse.ll | ||
2 | I'm not sure why this testcase was added when there was already one in review adding the same thing. It seems strange. Especially as it missed half of the important cases. Can you combine the two tests into one? Making sure we have the tests from both. Less boilerplate in them would be good too. |
Hey @Rin,
I don't think you need bitreverse-cost-model.ll, you can use only bitreverse.ll.
Why some costs are not being changed in bitreverse.ll?
llvm/test/Analysis/CostModel/AArch64/bitreverse-cost-model.ll | ||
---|---|---|
2 | Do you need to use -cost-kind=code-size -mtriple=aarch64-none-eabi ? I believe you can have the same command as bitreverse.ll, no? nit: |
Hi Carol, yeah, you're right, I'll remove it. And I'm working on making the costs adequate as well, which will require adjustments in bitreverse.ll
llvm/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64TargetTransformInfo.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
295 | nit: | |
298 | Is the '+1' added because the ICA.getID() is informing the type is MVT::i32? {Intrinsic::bitreverse, MVT::i8, 2}, {Intrinsic::bitreverse, MVT::i16, 2} ? |
llvm/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64TargetTransformInfo.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
298 |
If so, then should we remove these types from the table Yes, that's a good point. I'll remove them. I think David mentioned the reason why the table does not sole the problem. Because it's trying to use the legal type that i8 will be converted to (i32) for the costs. Which is why I added that if. I'll add a comment in the code to highlight that. |
Costs look good, as far as I can tell.
llvm/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64TargetTransformInfo.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
299 | Should this be if (Entry) return LegalisationCost.first * Entry->Cost; now? |
llvm/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64TargetTransformInfo.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
299 | Yeah, you're right, I have changed it. |
I think that these types should have a slightly higher cost than just 1 (or 1*LT.first, the legalization cost).
It's common in these cost functions to have a table of operand and type, giving a cost to each. That way they can be controlled a little better. Like the getShuffleCost at the end of this file. Would it be worth adding something similar here?
(We could also maybe optimize the v4i32 case better using a vrev32. But it's probably best to use the current cost over what we expect it could be later).