[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201110221511.GA1373528@rani.riverdale.lan>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 17:15:11 -0500
From: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc: Adrian Ratiu <adrian.ratiu@...labora.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Collabora Kernel ML <kernel@...labora.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm: lib: xor-neon: disable clang vectorization
On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 01:41:17PM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 11:51 AM Adrian Ratiu <adrian.ratiu@...labora.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 06 Nov 2020, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
> > wrote:
> > > +#pragma clang loop vectorize(enable)
> > > do {
> > > p1[0] ^= p2[0] ^ p3[0] ^ p4[0] ^ p5[0]; p1[1] ^=
> > > p2[1] ^ p3[1] ^ p4[1] ^ p5[1];
> > > ``` seems to generate the vectorized code.
> > >
> > > Why don't we find a way to make those pragma's more toolchain
> > > portable, rather than open coding them like I have above rather
> > > than this series?
> >
> > Hi again Nick,
> >
> > How did you verify the above pragmas generate correct vectorized
> > code? Have you tested this specific use case?
>
> I read the disassembly before and after my suggested use of pragmas;
> look for vld/vstr. You can also add -Rpass-missed=loop-vectorize to
> CFLAGS_xor-neon.o in arch/arm/lib/Makefile and rebuild
> arch/arm/lib/xor-neon.o with CONFIG_BTRFS enabled.
>
https://godbolt.org/z/1oo9M6
With the __restrict__ keywords added, clang seems to vectorize the loop,
but still reports that vectorization wasn't beneficial -- any idea
what's going on?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists