<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:DengXian;
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@DengXian";
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.xmsonormal, li.xmsonormal, div.xmsonormal
{mso-style-name:x_msonormal;
margin:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-GB" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">I’d be in favour of enabling loop distribution by default as long as it doesn’t hurt compile-time when it’s not needed.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">FWIW GCC enables this by default to get the speedup on hmmer. I don’t know enough about the LLVM implementation to compare with GCC’s, but GCC’s loop distribution pass aims to help vectorisation and help detect manual memset, memcpy implementations
(I think LLVM does that detection in another pass).<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">You can read the high-level GCC design in the source: <a href="https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=blob;f=gcc/tree-loop-distribution.c;h=65aa1df4abae2c6acf40299f710bc62ee6bacc07;hb=HEAD#l39">
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=blob;f=gcc/tree-loop-distribution.c;h=65aa1df4abae2c6acf40299f710bc62ee6bacc07;hb=HEAD#l39</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Kyrill<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US"> llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Sjoerd Meijer via llvm-dev<br>
<b>Sent:</b> 17 June 2021 16:07<br>
<b>To:</b> llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org; Jingu Kang <Jingu.Kang@arm.com><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [llvm-dev] Enabling Loop Distribution Pass as default in the pipeline of new pass manager<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">My 2 cents:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">It's not really convincing if a pass trigger on only benchmark case. But on the other hand, if it is a really cheap pass to run (compile-times) and benefits a case, then why not? Perhaps you need
to quantify this to make it more convincing. Additional benefit of enabling it by default is that it gets more exposure and testing, which I think is a good thing.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">Lastly, is there anything we can learn from GCC here? E.g., do they have this enabled, and perhaps support more/other cases?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center">
<hr size="2" width="98%" align="center">
</div>
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:black">From:</span></b><span style="color:black"> llvm-dev <<a href="mailto:llvm-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org">llvm-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org</a>> on behalf of Jingu Kang via llvm-dev <<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>><br>
<b>Sent:</b> 17 June 2021 13:51<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a> <<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [llvm-dev] Enabling Loop Distribution Pass as default in the pipeline of new pass manager</span>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US">Hi All,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US">My colleague Sanne has found performance improvement with ‘-enable-loop-distribute’ option from hmmer on SPEC2006.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US">On the hmmer, there is a loop with dependence. The Loop Distribute pass splits the loop into three sperate loops. One loop has still dependence, another is vectorizable, the other is vectorizable after running LoopBoundSplit
pass which needs to be updated a bit. On AArch64, we have seen 40% improvement with enabling Loop Distribute pass and 80% improvement with enabling Loop Distribute pass and LoopBoundSplit from hmmer on SPEC2006.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US">From llvm-test-suite and spec benchmarks, I have not seen any performance degradation with enabling the Loop Distribute pass because almost all tests are not handled by Loop Distribute pass with mainly below messages.
I think the messages are reasonable.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US">Skipping; memory operations are safe for vectorization<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US">Skipping; no unsafe dependences to isolate<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US">Skipping; multiple exit blocks<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US">For compile time, there is no big change because the almost all tests are not handled by the pass due to mainly above three reasons which comes from cached analysis information.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US">At this moment, we can enable the pass with metadata or command line option. If possible, can we enable the Loop Distribute pass as default in the pipeline of new pass manager please?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US">Thanks<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="xmsonormal"><span lang="EN-US">JinGu Kang<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>