<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"> P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} </style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
Hi Philip,</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
Yes, these constructs should really only be used by the compiler and probably always very late in the pipeline. To address your other points:</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
1) Agreed. loop.end has now renamed to 'loop.decrement'. I've also added 'loop.decrement.reg' which operates upon the updated loop counter, instead of some opaque system register.</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
2) It could be handled by normal IR, the vectorizer currently splits out the equivalent when folding the epilogue into the loop body. The reason why we need an intrinsic is to work around the limitations of basic block isel. In our new architecture, the lane
predication is implicit iff we can generate the hardware loop - but that doesn't prevent other instructions, predicated on something other than the loop index, from being generated too. At ISel <span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">we
can't guarantee whether a predicate is loop index based or otherwise, so it has to be explicit coming into ISel.</span></div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">3) The main difference here is the same as (2). As I understand SVE, has bank of predicate registers that are explicitly accessed, whereas MVE has a status
register that is used implicitly.</span></div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div id="Signature">
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper" dir="ltr" style="font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0); background-color:rgb(255,255,255); font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif,EmojiFont,"Apple Color Emoji","Segoe UI Emoji",NotoColorEmoji,"Segoe UI Symbol","Android Emoji",EmojiSymbols,EmojiFont,"Apple Color Emoji","Segoe UI Emoji",NotoColorEmoji,"Segoe UI Symbol","Android Emoji",EmojiSymbols">
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;"></p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;font-family:"Times New Roman""><span style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif">Sam Parker</span></p>
<span style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif"></span>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;font-family:"Times New Roman""><span style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif">Compilation Tools Engineer | Arm</span></p>
<span style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif"></span>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;font-family:"Times New Roman""><span style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif">. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .</span></p>
<span style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif"></span>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;font-family:"Times New Roman""><span style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif">Arm.com</span></p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;"></p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="appendonsend"></div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> Philip Reames <listmail@philipreames.com><br>
<b>Sent:</b> 28 May 2019 19:00<br>
<b>To:</b> Sam Parker; llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org<br>
<b>Cc:</b> nd<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Intrinsics for Hardware Loops</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div style="background-color:#FFFFFF">
<p>This seems like a generally reasonable approach. I have some hesitation about the potential separation of the control flow and the intrinsics (i.e. can we every confuse which loop they apply to?), but the basic notion seems reasonable. Particularly so
as Hal points out that we already have something like this in PPC. I'd suggest framing this as being an IR assist to backends rather than a canonical form or anything expected to be used by frontends though.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>A couple of random comments; there's no coherent message here, just a collection of thoughts.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>1) Your "loop.end" intrinsic is very confusingly named. I think you definitely need something different there name wise. Also, you fail to specify what the return value is.</p>
<p>2) Your get.active.mask.X is a generally useful construct, but I think it can be represented via bitmath and a bitcast right? (i.e. does it have to be an intrinsic?)</p>
<p>3) There seems to be a good amount of overlap with the SVE ideas. I'm not suggesting it needs to be reconciled, just pointing out many of the issues are common. (The more I see discussion of these topics, there more unsettled it all feels. Trying out
a couple of experimental designs, and iterating until one wins is feeling more and more like the right approach.)</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Philip<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="x_moz-cite-prefix">On 5/20/19 4:00 AM, Sam Parker via llvm-dev wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"><style type="text/css" style="display:none">
<!--
p
{margin-top:0;
margin-bottom:0}
-->
</style>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<span>Hi,<br>
</span>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Arm have recently announced the v8.1-M architecture specification for</div>
<div>our next generation microcontrollers. The architecture includes<br>
</div>
<div>vector extensions (MVE) and support for low-overhead branches (LoB),<br>
</div>
<div>which can be thought of a style of hardware loop. Hardware loops<br>
</div>
<div>aren't new to LLVM, other backends (at least Hexagon and PPC that I<br>
</div>
<div>know of) also include support. These implementations insert the loop<br>
</div>
<div>controlling instructions at the MachineInstr level and I'd like to<br>
</div>
<div>propose that we add intrinsics to support this notion at the IR<br>
</div>
<div>level; primarily to be able to use scalar evolution to understand the<br>
</div>
<div>loops instead of having to implement a machine-level analysis for<br>
</div>
<div>each target.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I've posted an RFC with a prototype implementation in<br>
</div>
<div><a class="x_moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://reviews.llvm.org/D62132">https://reviews.llvm.org/D62132</a>. It contains intrinsics that are<br>
</div>
<div>currently Arm specific, but I hope they're general enough to be used<br>
</div>
<div>by all targets. The Arm v8.1-m architecture supports do-while and<br>
</div>
<div>while loops, but for conciseness, here, I'd like to just focus on<br>
</div>
<div>while loops. There's two parts to this RFC: (1) the intrinsics<br>
</div>
<div>and (2) a prototype implementation in the Arm backend to enable<br>
</div>
<div>tail-predicated machine loops.<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>1. LLVM IR Intrinsics<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>In the following definitions, I use the term 'element' to describe<br>
</div>
<div>the work performed by an IR loop that has not been vectorized or<br>
</div>
<div>unrolled by the compiler. This should be equivalent to the loop at<br>
</div>
<div>the source level.<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>void @llvm.arm.set.loop.iterations(i32)<br>
</div>
<div>- Takes as a single operand, the number of iterations to be executed.<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>i32 @llvm.arm.set.loop.elements(i32, i32)<br>
</div>
<div>- Takes two operands:<br>
</div>
<div> - The total number of elements to be processed by the loop.<br>
</div>
<div> - The maximum number of elements processed in one iteration of<br>
</div>
<div> the IR loop body.<br>
</div>
<div>- Returns the number of iterations to be executed.<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div><X x i1> @llvm.arm.get.active.mask.X(i32)<br>
</div>
<div>- Takes as an operand, the number of elements that still need<br>
</div>
<div> processing.<br>
</div>
<div>- Where 'X' denotes the vectorization factor, returns an array of i1<br>
</div>
<div> indicating which vector lanes are active for the current loop<br>
</div>
<div> iteration.<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>i32 @llvm.arm.loop.end(i32, i32)<br>
</div>
<div>- Takes two operands:<br>
</div>
<div> - The number of elements that still need processing.<br>
</div>
<div> - The maximum number of elements processed in one iteration of the<br>
</div>
<div> IR loop body.<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>The following gives an illustration of their intended usage:<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>entry:<br>
</div>
<div> %0 = call i32 @llvm.arm.set.loop.elements(i32 %N, i32 4)<br>
</div>
<div> %1 = icmp ne i32 %0, 0<br>
</div>
<div> br i1 %1, label %vector.ph, label %for.loopexit<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>vector.ph:<br>
</div>
<div> br label %vector.body<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>vector.body:<br>
</div>
<div> %elts = phi i32 [ %N, %vector.ph ], [ %elts.rem, %vector.body ]<br>
</div>
<div> %active = call <4 x i1> @llvm.arm.get.active.mask(i32 %elts, i32 4)<br>
</div>
<div> %load = tail call <4 x i32> @llvm.masked.load.v4i32.p0v4i32(<4 x i32>* %addr, i32 4, <4 x i1> %active, <4 x i32> undef)<br>
</div>
<div> tail call void @llvm.masked.store.v4i32.p0v4i32(<4 x i32> %load, <4 x i32>* %addr.1, i32 4, <4 x i1> %active)<br>
</div>
<div> %elts.rem = call i32 @llvm.arm.loop.end(i32 %elts, i32 4)<br>
</div>
<div> %cmp = icmp sgt i32 %elts.rem, 0<br>
</div>
<div> br i1 %cmp, label %vector.body, label %for.loopexit<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>for.loopexit:<br>
</div>
<div> ret void<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>As the example shows, control-flow is still ultimately performed<br>
</div>
<div>through the icmp and br pair. There's nothing connecting the<br>
</div>
<div>intrinsics to a given loop or any requirement that a set.loop.* call<br>
</div>
<div>needs to be paired with a loop.end call.<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>2. Low-overhead loops in the Arm backend<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>Disclaimer: The prototype is barebones and reuses parts of NEON and<br>
</div>
<div>I'm currently targeting the Cortex-A72 which does not support this<br>
</div>
<div>feature! opt and llc build and the provided test case doesn't cause a<br>
</div>
<div>crash...<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>The low-overhead branch extension can be combined with MVE to<br>
</div>
<div>generate vectorized loops in which the epilogue is executed within<br>
</div>
<div>the predicated vector body. The proposal is for this to be supported<br>
</div>
<div>through a series of pass:<br>
</div>
<div>1) IR LoopPass to identify suitable loops and insert the intrinsics<br>
</div>
<div> proposed above.<br>
</div>
<div>2) DAGToDAG ISel which makes the intrinsics, almost 1-1, to a pseduo<br>
</div>
<div> instruction.<br>
</div>
<div>3) A final MachineFunctionPass to expand the pseudo instructions.<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>To help / enable the lowering of of an i1 vector, the VPR register has<br>
</div>
<div>been added. This is a status register that contains the P0 predicate<br>
</div>
<div>and is also used to model the implicit predicates of tail-predicated<br>
</div>
<div>loops.<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>There are two main reasons why pseudo instructions are used instead<br>
</div>
<div>of generating MIs directly during ISel:<br>
</div>
<div>1) They gives us a chance of later inspecting the whole loop and<br>
</div>
<div> confirm that it's a good idea to generate such a loop. This is<br>
</div>
<div> trivial for scalar loops, but not really applicable for<br>
</div>
<div> tail-predicated loops.<br>
</div>
<div>2) It allows us to separate the decrementing of the loop counter with<br>
</div>
<div> the instruction that branches back, which should help us recover if<br>
</div>
<div> LR gets spilt between these two pseudo ops.<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>For Armv8.1-M, the while.setup intrinsic is used to generate the wls<br>
</div>
<div>and wlstp instructions, while loop.end generates the le and letp<br>
</div>
<div>instructions. The active.mask can just be removed because the lane<br>
</div>
<div>predication is handled implicitly.<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>I'm not sure of the vectorizers limitations of generating vector<br>
</div>
<div>instructions that operate across lanes, such as reductions, when<br>
</div>
<span>generating a predicated loop but this needs to be considered.</span><br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<span><br>
</span></div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<span>I'd welcome any feedback here or on Phabricator and I'd especially like</span></div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<span>to know if this would useful to current targets.</span></div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<span><br>
</span></div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<span>cheers,</span></div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div id="x_Signature">
<div id="x_divtagdefaultwrapper" dir="ltr" style="">
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; font-family:"Times New Roman""><span style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif">Sam Parker</span></p>
<span style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif"></span>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; font-family:"Times New Roman""><span style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif">Compilation Tools Engineer | Arm</span></p>
<span style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif"></span>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; font-family:"Times New Roman""><span style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif">. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .</span></p>
<span style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif"></span>
<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; font-family:"Times New Roman""><span style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif">Arm.com</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="x_mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="x_moz-quote-pre">_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
<a class="x_moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>
<a class="x_moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev">https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
</body>
</html>