Hongtao Liu via Gcc-patches <[email protected]> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 8:52 PM Richard Sandiford
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Richard Biener <[email protected]> writes:
>> > On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 8:28 AM Hongtao Liu <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 7:56 PM Richard Biener
>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 12:18 PM Hongtao Liu <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 8:25 PM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
>> >> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 8:53 AM liuhongt <[email protected]>
>> >> > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > When gimple simplifcation try to combine op and vec_cond_expr
>> >> > > > > to cond_op,
>> >> > > > > it doesn't check if mask type matches. It causes an ICE when
>> >> > > > > expand cond_op
>> >> > > > > with mismatched mode.
>> >> > > > > This patch add a function named
>> >> > > > > cond_vectorized_internal_fn_supported_p
>> >> > > > > to additionally check mask type than
>> >> > > > > vectorized_internal_fn_supported_p.
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-linux-gnu{-m32,}.
>> >> > > > > Ok for trunk?
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > gcc/ChangeLog:
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > PR middle-end/102080
>> >> > > > > * internal-fn.c
>> >> > > > > (cond_vectorized_internal_fn_supported_p): New functions.
>> >> > > > > * internal-fn.h
>> >> > > > > (cond_vectorized_internal_fn_supported_p): New declaration.
>> >> > > > > * match.pd: Check the type of mask while generating
>> >> > > > > cond_op in
>> >> > > > > gimple simplication.
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > PR middle-end/102080
>> >> > > > > * gcc.target/i386/pr102080.c: New test.
>> >> > > > > ---
>> >> > > > > gcc/internal-fn.c | 22
>> >> > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++
>> >> > > > > gcc/internal-fn.h | 1 +
>> >> > > > > gcc/match.pd | 24
>> >> > > > > ++++++++++++++++--------
>> >> > > > > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr102080.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>> >> > > > > 4 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>> >> > > > > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr102080.c
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > diff --git a/gcc/internal-fn.c b/gcc/internal-fn.c
>> >> > > > > index 1360a00f0b9..8b2b65db1a7 100644
>> >> > > > > --- a/gcc/internal-fn.c
>> >> > > > > +++ b/gcc/internal-fn.c
>> >> > > > > @@ -4102,6 +4102,28 @@ expand_internal_call (gcall *stmt)
>> >> > > > > expand_internal_call (gimple_call_internal_fn (stmt), stmt);
>> >> > > > > }
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > +/* Check cond_op for vector modes since
>> >> > > > > vectorized_internal_fn_supported_p
>> >> > > > > + doesn't check if mask type matches. */
>> >> > > > > +bool
>> >> > > > > +cond_vectorized_internal_fn_supported_p (internal_fn ifn, tree
>> >> > > > > type,
>> >> > > > > + tree mask_type)
>> >> > > > > +{
>> >> > > > > + if (!vectorized_internal_fn_supported_p (ifn, type))
>> >> > > > > + return false;
>> >> > > > > +
>> >> > > > > + machine_mode mask_mode;
>> >> > > > > + machine_mode vmode = TYPE_MODE (type);
>> >> > > > > + int size1, size2;
>> >> > > > > + if (VECTOR_MODE_P (vmode)
>> >> > > > > + && targetm.vectorize.get_mask_mode
>> >> > > > > (vmode).exists(&mask_mode)
>> >> > > > > + && GET_MODE_SIZE (mask_mode).is_constant (&size1)
>> >> > > > > + && GET_MODE_SIZE (TYPE_MODE (mask_type)).is_constant
>> >> > > > > (&size2)
>> >> > > > > + && size1 != size2)
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Why do we check for equal size rather than just mode equality which
>> >> > > I originally thought TYPE_MODE of vector(8) <signed-boolean:1> was
>> >> > > not QImode, Changed the patch to check mode equality.
>> >> > > Update patch.
>> >> >
>> >> > Looking at all this it seems the match.pd patterns should have not
>> >> > used vectorized_internal_fn_supported_p but
>> >> > direct_internal_fn_supported_p
>> >> > which is equivalent here because we're always working with vector modes?
>>
>> Yeah, looks like it.
>>
>> >> > And then shouldn't we look at the actual optab whether the mask mode
>> >> > matches
>> >> > the expectation rather than going around via the target hook which may
>> >> > not have
>> >> > enough context to decide which mask mode to use?
>> >> How about this?
>> >>
>> >> +/* Return true if target supports cond_op with data TYPE and
>> >> + mask MASK_TYPE. */
>> >> +bool
>> >> +cond_internal_fn_supported_p (internal_fn ifn, tree type,
>> >> + tree mask_type)
>> >> +{
>> >> + tree_pair types = tree_pair (type, type);
>> >> + optab tmp = direct_internal_fn_optab (ifn, types);
>> >> + machine_mode vmode = TYPE_MODE (type);
>> >> + insn_code icode = direct_optab_handler (tmp, vmode);
>> >> + if (icode == CODE_FOR_nothing)
>> >> + return false;
>> >> +
>> >> + machine_mode mask_mode = TYPE_MODE (mask_type);
>> >> + /* Can't create rtx and use insn_operand_matches here. */
>> >> + return insn_data[icode].operand[0].mode == vmode
>> >> + && insn_data[icode].operand[1].mode == mask_mode;
>> >> +}
>> >> +
>> >
>> > Yeah, sth like that, though the operand[0].mode test should be
>> > redudnant. I think we should assert or have a whiltelist
>> > for the internal function we support to be queried this way.
>> > Not sure if we can directly access the 'cond_binary/cond_ternary'
>> > classification used in internal-fn.def, that would be best.
>> >
>> > Richard, what are your thoughts about all this?
>>
>> IMO using get_mask_mode was right. The optab documentation says:
>>
>> Operands 0, 2, 3 and 4 all have mode @var{m}. Operand 1 is a scalar
>> integer if @var{m} is scalar, otherwise it has the mode returned by
>> @code{TARGET_VECTORIZE_GET_MASK_MODE}.
>>
>> Allowing targets to use optabs to enforce different mask modes for
>> different operations would open up a mess of combinations.
>>
>> In other words, I think cond_vectorized_internal_fn_supported_p
>> is really testing two things:
>>
>> (1) is the mask type/vector type combination well-formed?
>> (2) is the internal function supported for the vector type?
>>
>> where (1) is a gimple question and (2) is a target question.
>>
>> I guess there's an argument that (1) should be part of the match.pd
>> condition instead, alongside the element_precision check. That would
>> add to the cut-&-paste though. :-(
>>
>> Alternatively, I guess we would add:
>>
>> bool is_truth_type_for (tree type, tree truth_type);
>>
>> to return true if truth_type is equal to truth_type_for (type)
>> (but without having to call truth_type_for). We could then use:
>>
>> is_truth_type_for (op_type, TREE_TYPE (@0))
>>
>> instead of:
>>
>> element_precision (type) == element_precision (op_type)
>>
>> since it should be a strictly stronger condition.
> Thanks for your advice, it sounds more reasonable.
> Here is the updated patch.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Richard
>
>
>
> --
> BR,
> Hongtao
>
> From ae192d4a164b8d73adb06d6e28864f717741158c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: liuhongt <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2021 13:05:54 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH v4] Check mask type when doing cond_op related gimple
> simplification.
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> PR middle-end/102080
> * match.pd: Check mask type when doing cond_op related gimple
> simplification.
> * tree.c (is_truth_type_for): New function.
> * tree.h (is_truth_type_for): New declaration.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> PR middle-end/102080
> * gcc.target/i386/pr102080.c: New test.
> ---
> gcc/match.pd | 8 ++++----
> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr102080.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> gcc/tree.c | 7 +++++++
> gcc/tree.h | 1 +
> 4 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr102080.c
>
> diff --git a/gcc/match.pd b/gcc/match.pd
> index f421c74b62c..c9a27f46ed2 100644
> --- a/gcc/match.pd
> +++ b/gcc/match.pd
> @@ -6988,13 +6988,13 @@ DEFINE_INT_AND_FLOAT_ROUND_FN (RINT)
> (vec_cond @0 (view_convert? (uncond_op@4 @1 @2)) @3)
> (with { tree op_type = TREE_TYPE (@4); }
> (if (vectorized_internal_fn_supported_p (as_internal_fn (cond_op),
> op_type)
> - && element_precision (type) == element_precision (op_type))
> + && is_truth_type_for (type, TREE_TYPE (@0)))
Why pass “type” rather than “op_type”? “type” is the type of the
original expression, and if the original vec_cond is well-formed,
@0 should already have the right truth type for “type”. Here we're
trying to convert the expression into a conditional operation on
“op_type”, so we need to test whether that's valid.
> (view_convert (cond_op @0 @1 @2 (view_convert:op_type @3))))))
> (simplify
> (vec_cond @0 @1 (view_convert? (uncond_op@4 @2 @3)))
> (with { tree op_type = TREE_TYPE (@4); }
> (if (vectorized_internal_fn_supported_p (as_internal_fn (cond_op),
> op_type)
> - && element_precision (type) == element_precision (op_type))
> + && is_truth_type_for (type, TREE_TYPE (@0)))
> (view_convert (cond_op (bit_not @0) @2 @3 (view_convert:op_type @1)))))))
>
> /* Same for ternary operations. */
> @@ -7004,13 +7004,13 @@ DEFINE_INT_AND_FLOAT_ROUND_FN (RINT)
> (vec_cond @0 (view_convert? (uncond_op@5 @1 @2 @3)) @4)
> (with { tree op_type = TREE_TYPE (@5); }
> (if (vectorized_internal_fn_supported_p (as_internal_fn (cond_op),
> op_type)
> - && element_precision (type) == element_precision (op_type))
> + && is_truth_type_for (type, TREE_TYPE (@0)))
> (view_convert (cond_op @0 @1 @2 @3 (view_convert:op_type @4))))))
> (simplify
> (vec_cond @0 @1 (view_convert? (uncond_op@5 @2 @3 @4)))
> (with { tree op_type = TREE_TYPE (@5); }
> (if (vectorized_internal_fn_supported_p (as_internal_fn (cond_op),
> op_type)
> - && element_precision (type) == element_precision (op_type))
> + && is_truth_type_for (type, TREE_TYPE (@0)))
> (view_convert (cond_op (bit_not @0) @2 @3 @4
> (view_convert:op_type @1)))))))
> #endif
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr102080.c
> b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr102080.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..4c5ee32ee63
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr102080.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
> +/* { dg-do compile } */
> +/* { dg-options "-O2" } */
> +
> +#include<immintrin.h>
> +typedef float __m256 __attribute__((__vector_size__(32)));
> +__m256 _mm256_blendv_ps___Y, _mm256_blendv_ps___M, _mm256_mul_ps___A,
> + _mm256_mul_ps___B, IfThenElse___trans_tmp_9;
> +
> +void
> +__attribute__ ((target("avx")))
> +IfThenElse (__m256 no) {
> + IfThenElse___trans_tmp_9 = _mm256_blendv_ps (no, _mm256_blendv_ps___Y,
> _mm256_blendv_ps___M);
> +}
> +void
> +__attribute__ ((target("avx512vl")))
> +EncodedFromDisplay() {
> + __m256 __trans_tmp_11 = _mm256_mul_ps___A * _mm256_mul_ps___B;
> + IfThenElse(__trans_tmp_11);
> +}
> diff --git a/gcc/tree.c b/gcc/tree.c
> index cba3bca41b3..88c2221eabb 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree.c
> +++ b/gcc/tree.c
> @@ -10723,6 +10723,13 @@ signed_type_for (tree type)
> return signed_or_unsigned_type_for (0, type);
> }
>
> +bool
> +is_truth_type_for (tree type, tree truth_type)
> +{
> + tree tmp = truth_type_for (type);
> + return tmp == truth_type;
> +}
The idea was to try to avoid calling truth_type to create a type.
Instead we can use similar logic to truth_type to tell whether type
has the right form. I think the rules are:
- For VECTOR_TYPEs:
- The truth type must be a VECTOR_BOOLEAN_TYPE.
- The number of elements must match (known_eq).
- Also:
- If !VECTOR_BOOLEAN_TYPE_P and targetm.vectorize.get_mask_mode
exists, the truth type must have that mode.
- Otherwise, the types must have the same size.
- Otherwise, the truth type must be a BOOLEAN_TYPE.
(Richi please correct me if I'm wrong.)
Thanks,
Richard
> +
> /* If TYPE is a vector type, return a signed integer vector type with the
> same width and number of subparts. Otherwise return boolean_type_node. */
>
> diff --git a/gcc/tree.h b/gcc/tree.h
> index 060a41f6991..c8542bfd476 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree.h
> +++ b/gcc/tree.h
> @@ -4556,6 +4556,7 @@ extern tree build_string_literal (unsigned, const char
> * = NULL,
> extern tree signed_or_unsigned_type_for (int, tree);
> extern tree signed_type_for (tree);
> extern tree unsigned_type_for (tree);
> +bool is_truth_type_for (tree, tree);
> extern tree truth_type_for (tree);
> extern tree build_pointer_type_for_mode (tree, machine_mode, bool);
> extern tree build_pointer_type (tree);
