[llvm-commits] [llvm][PATCH - REVISED][Commit request] X86 Instruction scheduler for the Intel Atom

[Andrew Trick]

Committed r149558.

And added -relocation-model=static to atom-sched.ll.

-Andy

On Jan 31, 2012, at 1:42 PM, "Gurd, Preston" <preston.gurd at intel.com> wrote:

> Hello Andy,
>  
> Thank you for your comments. I have revised the patch as you suggested.
>  
> I have also added “-mcpu=generic” to two additional tests (2010-02-19-TailCallRetAddrBug.ll and peep-test-3.ll) which were failing when run on Atom, after I applied a Evan’s suggestion to change the scheduling preference to “Hybrid”.
>  
> Unless you have any other comments, please commit the attached patch.
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Preston
>  
>  
> From: Andrew Trick [mailto:atrick at apple.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 2:22 AM
> To: Gurd, Preston
> Cc: Evan Cheng; llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> Subject: Re: [llvm-commits] [llvm][PATCH - REVISED][Review request] X86 Instruction scheduler for the Intel Atom
>  
> On Jan 23, 2012, at 3:05 PM, "Gurd, Preston" <preston.gurd at intel.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Revision 2: Tests which were failing, when run on an Atom, due to the tests finding a schedule different from what was expected, have been changed to use “-mcpu=generic” in order to prevent the Atom scheduler from running, so that all “make check” tests pass.
>  
> From: Gurd, Preston 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 4:29 PM
> To: Evan Cheng
> Cc: llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> Subject: [llvm-commits] [llvm][PATCH - REVISED][Review request] X86 Instruction scheduler for the Intel Atom
>  
> The attached patch implements most of an instruction scheduler for the Intel Atom.
>  
> It adds an instruction itinerary to all x86 instructions, giving each a default latency of 1, using the InstrItinClass IIC_DEFAULT.
>  
> It sets specific latencies for Atom for the instructions in files X86InstrCMovSetCC.td, X86InstrArithmetic.td, X86InstrControl.td, and X86InstrShiftRotate.td. The Atom latencies for the remainder of the x86 instructions will be set in subsequent patches.
>  
> It adds a test to verify that the scheduler is working.
>  
> I realize that this patch is kind of large, but please consider that the vast majority of the changes consist only of adding an instruction itinerary class name to an instruction.
>  
> Revision: the patch also changes the scheduling preference to “Hybrid” for i386 Atom, while leaving x86_64 as ILP.
>  
> Please commit the patch if it seems acceptable.
>  
> Preston
>  
>  
> From: Evan Cheng [mailto:evan.cheng at apple.com] 
> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 12:01 PM
> To: Gurd, Preston
> Cc: llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> Subject: Re: [llvm-commits] [llvm][PATCH][Review request] X86 Instruction scheduler for the Intel Atom
>  
> Very nice. One question, I noticed you haven't changed the scheduling preference so x86_64 is still using ILP scheduler while i386 is using register pressure reduction scheduler. Have you tried changing the preference to latency scheduler for Atom?
>  
> Evan
>  
> On Jan 13, 2012, at 3:26 PM, Gurd, Preston wrote:
>  
> 
> The attached patch implements most of an instruction scheduler for the Intel Atom.
>  
> It adds an instruction itinerary to all x86 instructions, giving each a default latency of 1, using the InstrItinClass IIC_DEFAULT.
>  
> It sets specific latencies for Atom for the instructions in files X86InstrCMovSetCC.td, X86InstrArithmetic.td, X86InstrControl.td, and X86InstrShiftRotate.td. The Atom latencies for the remainder of the x86 instructions will be set in subsequent patches.
>  
> It adds a test to verify that the scheduler is working.
>  
> I realize that this patch is kind of large, but please consider that the vast majority of the changes consist only of adding an instruction itinerary class name to an instruction.
>  
> Hi Preston,
>  
> I just have a couple minor questions I'd like you to address before I commit this:
>  
> +def : AtomProc<"atom",        [ProcIntelAtom, FeatureSSE3, FeatureCMPXCHG16B,
> +                               FeatureMOVBE, FeatureSlowBTMem]>;
>  
> These features are already included in the ProcIntelAtom family. Why do you need to list them again? Please verify, but subtarget features should be transitively implied.
>  
> +  //CriticalPathRCs.push_back(&X86::GPRRegClass);
>  
> If you want to leave this disabled, please add comments.
>  
> Thanks,
> -Andy
> <llvm-x86-scheduler.diff>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20120201/84907c86/attachment.html>