[llvm-dev] [GlobalISel][AArch64] Toward flipping the switch for O0: Please give it a try!

Diana Picus via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Apr 4 06:55:15 PDT 2017


Here's my results so far:

On the test-suite, we get 2 timeouts during execution (paq8p and
scimark2). Other than that, everything seems to run just fine. We have
about 7410 unique fallbacks out of 52367 unique functions. Assuming I
counted right (please let me know if this looks fishy, I personally
find the total number of functions terrifyingly small).

On a stage 2 build of clang, we run check-all successfully. We have
about 64784 unique fallbacks out of 661461 functions.

I'm currently trying to run a stage 3 build to compare binaries (just
for kicks) and I'll also try to do some runs without fallbacks and
count what problems we run into most often.

The way I've been counting the total number of functions was to run
objdump -t on all the .o files in the build directory, grab everything
with an "F" flag and remove duplicates. If anyone knows a better way
to do this I'm all ears.


On 3 April 2017 at 17:10, Kristof Beyls <Kristof.Beyls at arm.com> wrote:
> I've kicked off a run to compare "-O0 -g" versus "-O0 -g -mllvm -global-isel
> -mllvm -global-isel-abort=2".
> I've selected the test-suite (albeit a version which is a couple of months
> old now) and a few short-running proprietary benchmarks to get data back
> quickly for an initial feel of where things are.
> This was running on Cortex-A57 AArch64 Linux.
> I saw one assertion failure in GlobalISel, see
> http://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32471. This is in a program compiled at
> -O2 (my out-dated test-suite still overrides -O0 and instead uses -O for
> that program). The root cause of the failure seems to be due to LowLevelType
> not supporting vectors of pointers. I think this demonstrates that for
> correctness, we should be trying to test more than -O0, or even more than
> just LLVM-IR produced by clang, as other front-ends could run into this even
> at -O0.
> Due to this assertion failure and the infrastructure I used, the numbers
> below do not include test-suite/MultiSource/Benchmarks results.
> On the non-correctness aspects, LNT tells me that:
> - The programs that report execution time, on geomean are about 17% slower.
> - The programs that report scores, on geomean are about 21% slower.
> - Code size is up on geomean about 11%.
> I'm afraid I don't have compile time numbers, nor any feel for debug info
> quality.
> I'll need quite a bit more time to dig into the details to come up with
> something actionable, although the fact that LowLevelType doesn't support
> vectors of pointers is already actionable.
> Nevertheless, I thought to share what I see as is, to see if others see
> similar results so far.
> I thought Diana was going to look into fallback rate on the test-suite on
> AArch64 linux?
> Thanks,
> Kristof
> On 30 Mar 2017, at 10:54, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote:
> On 30 March 2017 at 00:27, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com> wrote:
> On iOS we are at 100% pass rate in 00 g for the LLVM test suite, standard
> benchmarks and unit tests. In about 5% of all functions GlobalIsel falls
> back to SDIsel.
> (Kristof Beyls would have the linux numbers.)
> The self host compiler correctly builds and runs the LLVM test suite in O0.
> Having done no tests at all on my side, I think we need to have
> similar numbers on Linux to be able to flip across the board.
> I don't want to flip it only for Darwin and not Linux, as that will
> fragment the effort too much.
> I'll check with Diana and Kristof to know what's the best way forward,
> but it should be reasonably quick.
> cheers,
> --renato

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list