[LLVMdev] Adding masked vector load and store intrinsics

Hal Finkel hfinkel at anl.gov
Fri Oct 24 05:50:21 PDT 2014

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Elena Demikhovsky" <elena.demikhovsky at intel.com>
> To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu
> Cc: dag at cray.com
> Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 6:24:15 AM
> Subject: [LLVMdev] Adding masked vector load and store intrinsics
> Hi,
> We would like to add support for masked vector loads and stores by
> introducing new target-independent intrinsics. The loop vectorizer
> will then be enhanced to optimize loops containing conditional
> memory accesses by generating these intrinsics for existing targets
> such as AVX2 and AVX-512. The vectorizer will first ask the target
> about availability of masked vector loads and stores. The SLP
> vectorizer can potentially be enhanced to use these intrinsics as
> well.
> The intrinsics would be legal for all targets; targets that do not
> support masked vector loads or stores will scalarize them.
> The addressed memory will not be touched for masked-off lanes. In
> particular, if all lanes are masked off no address will be accessed.
> call void @llvm.masked.store (i32* %addr, <16 x i32> %data, i32 4,
> <16 x i1> %mask)
> %data = call <8 x i32> @llvm.masked.load (i32* %addr, <8 x i32>
> %passthru, i32 4, <8 x i1> %mask)
> where %passthru is used to fill the elements of %data that are
> masked-off (if any; can be zeroinitializer or undef).
> Comments so far, before we dive into more details?

For the stores, I think this is a reasonable idea. The alternative is to represent them in scalar form with a lot of control flow, and I think that expecting the backend to properly pattern match that after isel is not realistic.

For the loads, I'm must less sure. Why can't we represent the loads as select(mask, load(addr), passthru)? It is true, that the load might get separated from the select so that isel might not see it (because isel if basic-block local), but we can add some code in CodeGenPrep to fix that for targets on which it is useful to do so (which is a more-general solution than the intrinsic anyhow). What do you think?

Thanks again,

> Thank you.
> - Elena and Ayal
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Intel Israel (74) Limited
> This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
> the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
> by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

Hal Finkel
Assistant Computational Scientist
Leadership Computing Facility
Argonne National Laboratory

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list