This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH/AARCH64] Enable software prefetching (-fprefetch-loop-arrays) for ThunderX 88xxx


On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 4:00 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov
<maxim.kuvyrkov@linaro.org> wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> I took the liberty of rebasing your patch on top of my patchset.  Does it look correct?

Yes this looks correct.

Thanks,
Andrew

>
> I think I addressed all the comments you had about my review and posted updated patches.
>
> --
> Maxim Kuvyrkov
> www.linaro.org
>
>
>
>> On Jan 30, 2017, at 7:25 PM, Andrew Pinski <apinski@cavium.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 6:49 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov
>> <maxim.kuvyrkov@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>> On Jan 27, 2017, at 6:59 PM, Andrew Pinski <apinski@cavium.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 4:11 AM, Richard Biener
>>>> <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 1:10 PM, Richard Biener
>>>>> <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 9:56 PM, Andrew Pinski <apinski@cavium.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> This patch enables -fprefetch-loop-arrays for -mcpu=thunderxt88 and
>>>>>>> -mcpu=thunderxt88p1.  I filled out the tuning structures for both
>>>>>>> thunderx and thunderx2t99.  No other core current enables software
>>>>>>> prefetching so I set them to 0 which does not change the default
>>>>>>> parameters.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OK?  Bootstrapped and tested on both ThunderX2 CN99xx and ThunderX
>>>>>>> CN88xx with no regressions.  I got a 2x improvement for 462.libquantum
>>>>>>> on CN88xx, overall a 10% improvement on SPEC INT on CN88xx at -Ofast.
>>>>>>> CN99xx's SPEC did not change.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Heh, quite impressive for this kind of bit-rotten (and broken?) pass ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> And I wonder if most benefit comes from the unrolling the pass might do
>>>>> rather than from the prefetches...
>>>>
>>>> Not in this case.  The main reason why I know is because the number of
>>>> L1 and L2 misses drops a lot.
>>>
>>> I can confirm this.  In my experiments loop unrolling hurts several tests.
>>
>> Not on the cores I tried it.  I tried it on both ThunderX CN88xx and
>> ThunderX CN99xx, I did not get any regressions due to unrolling.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Andrew
>>
>>>
>>> The prefetching approach I'm testing for -O2 includes disabling of loop unrolling to prevent code bloat.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Maxim Kuvyrkov
>>> www.linaro.org
>


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]