[cfe-dev] [RFC] implementation of _Float16

Wed May 10 07:01:31 PDT 2017

Yes, I see how this would be an issue if it is necessary to keep the
storage-only versus native types separate.

At the moment I have 'short float' internally associated with OpenCL's
'half' but I do not enable 'half' as a keyword.  Independently I have made
'__fp16' when used with our target also be a synonym for 'short float/half'
(simply to avoid adding a new keyword).  This in turn is bound to the IEEE
FP16 using 'HalfFormat = &llvm::APFloat::IEEEhalf();'.

In our case it is always a native type and never a storage only type, so
coupling '__fp16' to 'half' made sense.  Certainly if the native versus
storage-only variants were distinct, then this association I have made would
have to be decoupled (not a big-deal).

Another approach might be to always work with FP16 as-if native, but to
provide only Load/Store instructions in the TableGen descriptions for FP16,
and to adapt lowering to always perform the arithmetic using FP32 if the
selected target does not support native FP16 - would that be feasible in
your case?  In this way it is not really any different to how targets that
have no FPU can use an alternative integer based implementation (with the
help of 'compiler-rt').

I can certainly see how something like 'ADD' of 'f16' could be changed to
use 'Expand' in lowering rather than 'Legal' as a function of the selected
target (or some other target specific option) - we just marked it 'Legal'
and provided the corresponding instructions in TableGen with very little
custom lowering necessary.  I have a mild concern that LLVM would have to
have an 'f16' which is native and another kind-of 'f16' restricted to being
only storage.

Thanks,

            MartinO

From: Sjoerd Meijer [mailto:Sjoerd.Meijer at arm.com] 
Sent: 10 May 2017 14:19
To: Martin J. O'Riordan <martin.oriordan at movidius.com>; 'Hal Finkel'
<hfinkel at anl.gov>
Cc: 'clang developer list' <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Subject: RE: [cfe-dev] [RFC] implementation of _Float16

Hi Hal, Martin,

Thanks for the feedback.

Yes, the issue indeed is that '__fp16' is already used to implement a
storage-only type.  And earlier I wrote that I don't expect LLVM IR changes,
but now I am not so sure anymore if both types map onto the same half LLVM
IR type. With  two half precision types, __fp16 and _Float16, where one is a
storage only type and the other a native type, somehow the distinction
between these two must be made I think. 

Cheers,

Sjoerd.

From: Martin J. O'Riordan [mailto:martin.oriordan at movidius.com] 
Sent: 10 May 2017 14:13
To: 'Hal Finkel'; Sjoerd Meijer
Cc: 'clang developer list'
Subject: RE: [cfe-dev] [RFC] implementation of _Float16

Our Out-of-Tree target implements fully native FP16 operations based on
'__fp16' (scalar and SIMD vector), so is the issue for ARM that '__fp16' is
already used to implement a storage-only type and that another type is
needed to differentiate between a native and a storage-only type?  Once the
'f16' type appears in the IR (and the vector variants) the code-generation
is straightforward enough.

Certainly we have had to make many changes to CLang and to LLVM to fully
implement this including suppression of implicit conversion to 'double', but
nothing scary or obscure.  Many of these changes are simply to enable
something that is already normal for OpenCL, but to do so for C and C++.

More controversially we also added a "synonym" for this using 'short float'
rather than '_Float16' (or OpenCL's 'half'), and created a parallel set of
the ISO C library functions using 's' to suffix the usual names (e.g. 'tan',
'tanf', 'tanl' plus 'tans').  The 's' suffix was unambiguous (though we
actually use the double-underscore prefix, e.g. '__tans' to avoid conflict
with the user's names) and the type 'short float' was available too without
breaking anything.  Enabling the 'h' suffix for FP constants (again from
OpenCL) makes the whole fit smoothly with the normal FP types.

However, for variadic functions (such as 'printf') we do promote to 'double'
because there are no formatting specifiers available for 'half' any more
than there is support for 'float' - it is also consistent with 'va_arg'
usage for 'char' and 'short' as 'int'.  My feeling is that using
implementation defined types 'float', 'double' and 'long double' can be
extended to include 'short float' without dictating that they have any
particular bit-sizes (e.g. FP16 for 'half').

This solution has worked very well over the past few years and is symmetric
with the other floating-point data types.

There are some issues with C++ and overloading because '__fp16' to other FP
types (and INT types) is not ranked in exactly the same way as for example
'float' is to other FP types; but this is really only because it is not a
1st class citizen of the type-system and the rules would need to be
specified to make this valid.  I have not tried to fix this as it works
reasonably well as it is, and it would really be an issue for the C++
committee to decide if they ever choose to adopt another FP data type.  I
did add it to the traits in the C++ library though so that it is considered
legal for floating-point types.

I'd love to see this adopted as a formal type in a future version of ISO C
and ISO C++.

            MartinO

From: cfe-dev [mailto:cfe-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Hal
Finkel via cfe-dev
Sent: 10 May 2017 11:39
To: Sjoerd Meijer <Sjoerd.Meijer at arm.com <mailto:Sjoerd.Meijer at arm.com> >;
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> 
Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] [RFC] implementation of _Float16

On 05/10/2017 05:18 AM, Sjoerd Meijer via cfe-dev wrote:

Hi,

ARMv8.2-A introduces as an optional extension half-precision data-processing
instructions for Advanced SIMD and floating-point in both AArch64 and
AArch32 states [1], and we are looking into implementing C/C++-language
support for these new ARMv8.2-A half-precision instructions.

We would like to introduce a new Clang type. The reason is that we e.g.
cannot use type __fp16 (defined in the ARM C Language Extensions [2])
because it is a storage type only. This means when using standard C
operators values of __fp16 type promote to float when used in arithmetic
operations, which we would like to avoid for the ARMv8.2-A half-precision
instructions. Please note that the LLVM IR already has a half precision
type, onto which for example __fp16 is mapped, so there are no changes or
additions required for the LLVM IR.

As a new Clang type we would like to propose _Float16 as defined in a C11
extension, see [3]. Arithmetic is well defined, it is not only a storage
type as __fp16. Our question is whether a partial implementation, just
implementing this type and not claiming (full) C11 conformance is
acceptable?

I would very much like to see fp16 as a first-class floating-point type in
Clang and LLVM (i.e. handling that is not just a storage type). Doing this
in Clang in a way that is specified by C11 seems like the right approach. I
don't see why implementing this would be predicated on implementing other
parts of C11.

 -Hal

IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the
information in any medium. Thank you. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20170510/2a008788/attachment.html>