[llvm-dev] RFC: Generalizing Hexagon's VLIWMachineScheduler
Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Fri Oct 29 12:25:34 PDT 2021
If you have a patch somewhere, we can give it a try.
Krzysztof Parzyszek kparzysz at quicinc.com<mailto:kparzysz at quicinc.com> AI tools development
From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Nagurne, James via llvm-dev
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2021 11:59 AM
To: 'llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org' <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Subject: [llvm-dev] RFC: Generalizing Hexagon's VLIWMachineScheduler
WARNING: This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.
The VLIW-aware pre-allocation scheduler used by Hexagon is a mostly-generic alternative to the default MachineScheduler implementation that attempts to order instructions in such a way as to optimize the number of instructions issued per cycle. It does this by tracking available resources (DFAPacketizer) and balancing register pressure. This is a departure from the default list scheduler, which has no resource tracking and does not attempt to model instructions executing in parallel, instead optimizing the straight-line path length of the DAG.
I intend to generalize these data structures...
...by encapsulating Hexagon-specific behavior in virtual overloads of a generic API. There are only a couple places where target-specific behavior is explicit. These are identified quickly by uses of HexagonInstrInfo as identifier 'QII'. The algorithm itself is likely tuned specifically for Hexagon, but is still generally applicable.
The port is relatively straightforward, requiring only 3 overrides. Testing is less defined at the moment. I'm currently running a full LLVM regression, but this type of change certainly prefers performance regressions.
Are there any opinions on lifting this pass?
Are there any publicly available Hexagon benchmarks with which I can verify my changes? Alternatively, are any in the Hexagon development team available to test such a change internally?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the llvm-dev