Will GCC eventually support SSE2 or SSE4.1?
Stefan Kanthak
stefan.kanthak@nexgo.de
Fri May 26 11:36:01 GMT 2023
"Jakub Jelinek" <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 10:59:03AM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>> 3) SSE4.1 is supported since Core2, but -march=core2 fails to enable it.
>> That's bad, REALITY CHECK, please!
>
> You're wrong.
> SSE4.1 first appeared in the 45nm versions of Core2, the 65nm versions
> didn't have it.
That's correct, I failed to see this difference.
> The supported CPU names don't distinguish between core2 submodels,
> so if you have core2 with sse4.1, you should either be using -march=native
> if compiling on such a machine, or use -march=core2 -msse4.1,
This is one of the combinations I didn't test until now; with it (and with
-m32 -msse4.1 too) GCC generates SSE4.1 instructions, but FAILS to optimise:
# Compilation provided by Compiler Explorer at https://godbolt.org/
ispowerof2(unsigned long long):
movq xmm1, QWORD PTR [esp+4]
pcmpeqd xmm0, xmm0
xor eax, eax
paddq xmm0, xmm1
pand xmm0, xmm1 # SUPERFLUOUS!
punpcklqdq xmm0, xmm0 # SUPERFLUOUS!
ptest xmm0, xmm0 # ptest xmm0, xmm1
sete al
ret
9 instructions in 36 bytes instead of 7 instructions in 26 bytes.
JFTR: the documentation of MOVQ specifies
| when the destination operand is an XMM register, the quadword is
| stored to the low quadword of the register, and the high quadword
| is cleared to all 0s.
> there is no -march={conroe,allendale,wolfdale,merom,penryn,...}.
>
>> 4) If the documenation is right, then the behaviour of GCC is wrong: it
>> doesn't allow to use SSE4.1 without SSE4.2!
>
> If you aren't able to read the documentation, it is hard to argue.
When the documentation is wrong or incomplete it's hard to trust it!
| -m32
...
| The -m32 option sets int, long, and pointer types to 32 bits, and
| generates code that runs on any i386 system.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OUCH: as shown in https://godbolt.org/z/b43cjGdY9 -m32 ALONE but
generates SSE2 instructions which DONT run on ANY i386 system!
OOPS: as shown above, -m32 -msse4.1 (or another -msse*) also generates
code that does NOT run on ANY i386 system!
Where is the precedence of the different -m* feature options for the CPU
type documented?
Where is their influence on each other documented?
Why does the documentation FAIL to specify that CPU features given by
-m* override -m32 or enables them in ADDITION to those enabled by -march=?
| -march=cpu-type
...
| Specifying -march=cpu-type implies -mtune=cpu-type, except where noted
| otherwise.
...
| -mtune=cpu-type
...
| the compiler does not generate any code that cannot run on the default
| machine type unless you use a -march=cpu-type option.
Why is the "default machine type" not mentioned/specified with -march=?
Stefan
More information about the Gcc
mailing list