Thanks Richard for comments.

> The convert looks odd to me given @0 is involved in both & operands.

The convert is introduced as the GIMPLE IL is somehow different for int8_t when 
compares to int32_t or int64_t.
There are some additional ops convert to unsigned for plus, see below line 8-9 
and line 22-23.
But we cannot see similar GIMPLE IL for int32_t and int64_t. To reconcile the 
types from int8_t to int64_t, add the
convert here.

Or may be I have some mistake in the example, let me revisit it and send v2 if 
no surprise.

   4   │ __attribute__((noinline))
   5   │ int8_t sat_s_add_int8_t_fmt_1 (int8_t x, int8_t y)
   6   │ {
   7   │   int8_t sum;
   8   │   unsigned char x.1_1;
   9   │   unsigned char y.2_2;
  10   │   unsigned char _3;
  11   │   signed char _4;
  12   │   signed char _5;
  13   │   int8_t _6;
  14   │   _Bool _11;
  15   │   signed char _12;
  16   │   signed char _13;
  17   │   signed char _14;
  18   │   signed char _22;
  19   │   signed char _23;
  20   │
  21   │   <bb 2> [local count: 1073741822]:
  22   │   x.1_1 = (unsigned char) x_7(D);
  23   │   y.2_2 = (unsigned char) y_8(D);
  24   │   _3 = x.1_1 + y.2_2;
  25   │   sum_9 = (int8_t) _3;
  26   │   _4 = x_7(D) ^ y_8(D);
  27   │   _5 = x_7(D) ^ sum_9;
  28   │   _23 = ~_4;
  29   │   _22 = _5 & _23;
  30   │   if (_22 < 0)
  31   │     goto <bb 3>; [41.00%]
  32   │   else
  33   │     goto <bb 4>; [59.00%]
  34   │
  35   │   <bb 3> [local count: 259738146]:
  36   │   _11 = x_7(D) < 0;
  37   │   _12 = (signed char) _11;
  38   │   _13 = -_12;
  39   │   _14 = _13 ^ 127;
  40   │
  41   │   <bb 4> [local count: 1073741824]:
  42   │   # _6 = PHI <_14(3), sum_9(2)>
  43   │   return _6;
  44   │
  45   │ }

Pan

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> 
Sent: Monday, August 5, 2024 7:16 PM
To: Li, Pan2 <pan2...@intel.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; kito.ch...@gmail.com; 
jeffreya...@gmail.com; rdapp....@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] Match: Support form 1 for scalar signed integer .SAT_ADD

On Mon, Aug 5, 2024 at 9:14 AM <pan2...@intel.com> wrote:
>
> From: Pan Li <pan2...@intel.com>
>
> This patch would like to support the form 1 of the scalar signed
> integer .SAT_ADD.  Aka below example:
>
> Form 1:
>   #define DEF_SAT_S_ADD_FMT_1(T)             \
>   T __attribute__((noinline))                \
>   sat_s_add_##T##_fmt_1 (T x, T y)           \
>   {                                          \
>     T min = (T)1u << (sizeof (T) * 8 - 1);   \
>     T max = min - 1;                         \
>     return (x ^ y) < 0                       \
>       ? (T)(x + y)                           \
>       : ((T)(x + y) ^ x) >= 0                \
>         ? (T)(x + y)                         \
>         : x < 0 ? min : max;                 \
>   }
>
> DEF_SAT_S_ADD_FMT_1 (int64_t)
>
> We can tell the difference before and after this patch if backend
> implemented the ssadd<m>3 pattern similar as below.
>
> Before this patch:
>    4   │ __attribute__((noinline))
>    5   │ int64_t sat_s_add_int64_t_fmt_1 (int64_t x, int64_t y)
>    6   │ {
>    7   │   long int _1;
>    8   │   long int _2;
>    9   │   long int _3;
>   10   │   int64_t _4;
>   11   │   long int _7;
>   12   │   _Bool _9;
>   13   │   long int _10;
>   14   │   long int _11;
>   15   │   long int _12;
>   16   │   long int _13;
>   17   │
>   18   │ ;;   basic block 2, loop depth 0
>   19   │ ;;    pred:       ENTRY
>   20   │   _1 = x_5(D) ^ y_6(D);
>   21   │   _13 = x_5(D) + y_6(D);
>   22   │   _3 = x_5(D) ^ _13;
>   23   │   _2 = ~_1;
>   24   │   _7 = _2 & _3;
>   25   │   if (_7 >= 0)
>   26   │     goto <bb 4>; [59.00%]
>   27   │   else
>   28   │     goto <bb 3>; [41.00%]
>   29   │ ;;    succ:       4
>   30   │ ;;                3
>   31   │
>   32   │ ;;   basic block 3, loop depth 0
>   33   │ ;;    pred:       2
>   34   │   _9 = x_5(D) < 0;
>   35   │   _10 = (long int) _9;
>   36   │   _11 = -_10;
>   37   │   _12 = _11 ^ 9223372036854775807;
>   38   │ ;;    succ:       4
>   39   │
>   40   │ ;;   basic block 4, loop depth 0
>   41   │ ;;    pred:       2
>   42   │ ;;                3
>   43   │   # _4 = PHI <_13(2), _12(3)>
>   44   │   return _4;
>   45   │ ;;    succ:       EXIT
>   46   │
>   47   │ }
>
> After this patch:
>    4   │ __attribute__((noinline))
>    5   │ int64_t sat_s_add_int64_t_fmt_1 (int64_t x, int64_t y)
>    6   │ {
>    7   │   int64_t _4;
>    8   │
>    9   │ ;;   basic block 2, loop depth 0
>   10   │ ;;    pred:       ENTRY
>   11   │   _4 = .SAT_ADD (x_5(D), y_6(D)); [tail call]
>   12   │   return _4;
>   13   │ ;;    succ:       EXIT
>   14   │
>   15   │ }
>
> The below test suites are passed for this patch.
> * The rv64gcv fully regression test.
> * The x86 bootstrap test.
> * The x86 fully regression test.
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
>         * match.pd: Add the matching for signed .SAT_ADD.
>         * tree-ssa-math-opts.cc (gimple_signed_integer_sat_add): Add new
>         matching func decl.
>         (match_unsigned_saturation_add): Try signed .SAT_ADD and rename
>         to ...
>         (match_saturation_add): ... here.
>         (math_opts_dom_walker::after_dom_children): Update the above renamed
>         func from caller.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pan Li <pan2...@intel.com>
> ---
>  gcc/match.pd              | 14 +++++++++++++
>  gcc/tree-ssa-math-opts.cc | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>  2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/match.pd b/gcc/match.pd
> index c9c8478d286..0a2ffc733d3 100644
> --- a/gcc/match.pd
> +++ b/gcc/match.pd
> @@ -3311,6 +3311,20 @@ DEFINE_INT_AND_FLOAT_ROUND_FN (RINT)
>    }
>    (if (otype_precision < itype_precision && wi::eq_p (trunc_max, 
> int_cst))))))
>
> +/* Signed saturation add, case 1:
> +   T min = (T)1u << (sizeof (T) * 8 - 1);
> +   T max = min - 1;
> +   SAT_S_ADD = (X ^ Y) < 0
> +     ? (X + Y)
> +     : ((T)(X + Y) ^ X) >= 0 ? (X + Y) : X < 0 ? min : max.  */
> +(match (signed_integer_sat_add @0 @1)
> +  (cond^ (ge (bit_and:c (bit_xor @0 (convert? @2)) (bit_not (bit_xor @0 @1)))

This matches arbitrary Z in (X ^ (T)Z) & ~(X ^ Y) which cannot be intended.
The GIMPLE IL in the comment below suggests Z == X + Y?

The convert looks odd to me given @0 is involved in both & operands.
The comment above has the same logic error.

I believe the bit_xor lack :c

> +   integer_zerop)

Please indent this to line up with the first operand of the 'ge' to make it
better readable.

> +   (convert? (plus@2 (convert1? @0) (convert1? @1)))

Same with the converts.  The plus needs :c I think.  Is this about
common sign-conversions being hoisted from (int)x + (int)y -> (int)(x+y)?

Note all the :c and conditional converts makes this a quite heavy pattern
(all combinations of swaps and converts gets code).

> +   (bit_xor (negate (convert (lt @0 integer_zerop))) max_value))
> + (if (INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (type) && !TYPE_UNSIGNED (type)
> +      && types_match (type, @0, @1))))
> +
>  /* x >  y  &&  x != XXX_MIN  -->  x > y
>     x >  y  &&  x == XXX_MIN  -->  false . */
>  (for eqne (eq ne)
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-math-opts.cc b/gcc/tree-ssa-math-opts.cc
> index 8d96a4c964b..d5c9b475f72 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-ssa-math-opts.cc
> +++ b/gcc/tree-ssa-math-opts.cc
> @@ -4023,6 +4023,8 @@ extern bool gimple_unsigned_integer_sat_add (tree, 
> tree*, tree (*)(tree));
>  extern bool gimple_unsigned_integer_sat_sub (tree, tree*, tree (*)(tree));
>  extern bool gimple_unsigned_integer_sat_trunc (tree, tree*, tree (*)(tree));
>
> +extern bool gimple_signed_integer_sat_add (tree, tree*, tree (*)(tree));
> +
>  static void
>  build_saturation_binary_arith_call (gimple_stmt_iterator *gsi, internal_fn 
> fn,
>                                     tree lhs, tree op_0, tree op_1)
> @@ -4072,7 +4074,8 @@ match_unsigned_saturation_add (gimple_stmt_iterator 
> *gsi, gassign *stmt)
>  }
>
>  /*
> - * Try to match saturation unsigned add with PHI.
> + * Try to match saturation add with PHI.
> + * For unsigned integer:
>   *   <bb 2> :
>   *   _1 = x_3(D) + y_4(D);
>   *   if (_1 >= x_3(D))
> @@ -4086,10 +4089,38 @@ match_unsigned_saturation_add (gimple_stmt_iterator 
> *gsi, gassign *stmt)
>   *   # _2 = PHI <255(2), _1(3)>
>   *   =>
>   *   <bb 4> [local count: 1073741824]:
> - *   _2 = .SAT_ADD (x_4(D), y_5(D));  */
> + *   _2 = .SAT_ADD (x_4(D), y_5(D));
> + *
> + * For signed integer:
> + *   _1 = x_5(D) ^ y_6(D);
> + *   _13 = x_5(D) + y_6(D);
> + *   _3 = x_5(D) ^ _13;
> + *   _2 = ~_1;
> + *   _7 = _2 & _3;
> + *   if (_7 >= 0)
> + *     goto <bb 4>; [59.00%]
> + *   else
> + *     goto <bb 3>; [41.00%]
> + *   ;;    succ:       4
> + *   ;;                3
> + *   ;;   basic block 3, loop depth 0
> + *   ;;    pred:       2
> + *   _9 = x_5(D) < 0;
> + *   _10 = (long int) _9;
> + *   _11 = -_10;
> + *   _12 = _11 ^ 9223372036854775807;
> + *   ;;    succ:       4
> + *   ;;   basic block 4, loop depth 0
> + *   ;;    pred:       2
> + *   ;;                3
> + *   # _4 = PHI <_13(2), _12(3)>
> + *   =>
> + *   ;;   basic block 2, loop depth 0
> + *   ;;    pred:       ENTRY
> + *   _4 = .SAT_ADD (x_5(D), y_6(D)); [tail call]  */
>
>  static void
> -match_unsigned_saturation_add (gimple_stmt_iterator *gsi, gphi *phi)
> +match_saturation_add (gimple_stmt_iterator *gsi, gphi *phi)
>  {
>    if (gimple_phi_num_args (phi) != 2)
>      return;
> @@ -4097,7 +4128,8 @@ match_unsigned_saturation_add (gimple_stmt_iterator 
> *gsi, gphi *phi)
>    tree ops[2];
>    tree phi_result = gimple_phi_result (phi);
>
> -  if (gimple_unsigned_integer_sat_add (phi_result, ops, NULL))
> +  if (gimple_unsigned_integer_sat_add (phi_result, ops, NULL)
> +      || gimple_signed_integer_sat_add (phi_result, ops, NULL))
>      build_saturation_binary_arith_call (gsi, phi, IFN_SAT_ADD, phi_result,
>                                         ops[0], ops[1]);
>  }
> @@ -6097,7 +6129,7 @@ math_opts_dom_walker::after_dom_children (basic_block 
> bb)
>      gsi_next (&psi))
>      {
>        gimple_stmt_iterator gsi = gsi_after_labels (bb);
> -      match_unsigned_saturation_add (&gsi, psi.phi ());
> +      match_saturation_add (&gsi, psi.phi ());
>        match_unsigned_saturation_sub (&gsi, psi.phi ());
>      }
>
> --
> 2.43.0
>

Reply via email to