On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 3:28 PM Feng Xue OS <f...@os.amperecomputing.com> wrote: > > >> Hi, > >> > >> The patch was updated with the newest trunk, and also contained some minor > >> changes. > >> > >> I am working on another new feature which is meant to support pattern > >> recognition > >> of lane-reducing operations in affine closure originated from loop > >> reduction variable, > >> like: > >> > >> sum += cst1 * dot_prod_1 + cst2 * sad_2 + ... + cstN * lane_reducing_op_N > >> > >> The feature WIP depends on the patch. It has been a little bit long time > >> since its post, > >> would you please take a time to review this one? Thanks. > > > This seems to do multiple things so I wonder if you can split up the > > patch a bit? > > OK. Will send out split patches in new mails.
Thanks. > > For example adding lane_reducing_op_p can be split out, it also seems like > > the vect_transform_reduction change to better distribute work can be done > > separately? Likewise refactoring like splitting out > > vect_reduction_use_partial_vector. > > > > When we have > > > > sum += d0[i] * d1[i]; // dot-prod <vector(16) char> > > sum += w[i]; // widen-sum <vector(16) short> > > sum += abs(s0[i] - s1[i]); // sad <vector(8) short> > > sum += n[i]; // normal <vector(4) int> > > > > the vector DOT_PROD and friend ops can end up mixing different lanes > > since it is not specified which lanes are reduced into which output lane. > > So, DOT_PROD might combine 0-3, 4-7, ... but SAD might combine > > 0,4,8,12; 1,5,9,13; ... I think this isn't worse than what one op itself > > is doing, but it's worth pointing out (it's probably unlikely a target > > mixes different reduction strategies anyway). > > Yes. But even on a peculiar target, DOT_PROD and SAD have different reduction > strategies, it does not impact result correctness, at least for integer > operation. > Is there anything special that we need to consider? I couldn't think of any case, it's just these operations are only useful for reductions. > > > > Can you make sure to add at least one SLP reduction example to show > > this works for SLP as well? > OK. The patches contains the cases for SLP reduction chain. Will add one for > SLP reduction, this should be a negative case. Yes. > Thanks, > Feng
