Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:8c0a:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id go10csp55919pxb; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 00:50:41 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzn5L1yObzrUDFrYlPshZ1JVtgBg61WsYpC/dDk1INW9RoYC4eiqQMN9+juNvur8oBsncEh X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:388b:: with SMTP id q11mr8544312ejd.421.1611219041004; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 00:50:41 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1611219040; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=IsVeiKJn/cIYx7/CxvNGZPegzDLkSNqkeMfhX8PvP2Irae1+pYy76cgZbk+SIF8grb QtwGH+80eRpU66aRoeO8mb3FeHWcwA5e9N9evo7ETi0Fta3Thx8ZIVv1VW63H1i3nTTx iw4gcT0xsK05d8VRcGqF6TusEdgeI3Hswyr3hbTMXOVwNNmNDO+MQUceG4Ct4YKF/i4D IrzeBvXx6tqrWalcX9pEPB2DDOKjk+3wR7hv5qgwU271QkN4xaVl7eqhuSZcPnKi//xk sUlb7LMbUKFHwYScoRvPQQufKnAw23oqf3OtFS0zzHWX+ISN/AoqgIBCYG7yeD657tkc bG4Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=CldY/6iWoD+rjZ1u59yX5+1uBpONWw/+jC6ajKv/rGY=; b=K+msFo3k3HLp/TFx408ST+MhCiRZ5Q5kdKbK1ZDtUwKlbUhJsgvDTSTy69mZ5yf05b sgzaFAis76s2UG0pQ3aGl2D9lqsUIfjsGFpY+bxuz5iUu4MRyIZa9w8J04SSotNZ55BY uz4YUmnuPOEeNdWNcHv4Jw89wshOgagfaOnxngfWknKLA/RTUQg/O806i4s4n0bpVieE E09mXxnUMCmoUlv+99vVVwBu3pGCQfvQZ4ymE1e484rw10EPr6A1/+NUof8Zd46IQ/XN a5JInWKig8iyL6MsUpY16LjJAm0xketMh3AqqfWrXSUrm4KVMsuJzm6Oit+li+cmowLF RBPg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=dpmeUZ58; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id q26si1929248edr.555.2021.01.21.00.50.17; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 00:50:40 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=dpmeUZ58; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728137AbhAUItD (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 21 Jan 2021 03:49:03 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:60292 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728066AbhAUIrV (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jan 2021 03:47:21 -0500 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B5DF5239CF for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 08:46:30 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1611218791; bh=A7dzYX1WsIR/ZnVt2MQcZkXX5OVwc6fA8JUVQ7nzhB8=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=dpmeUZ58F4d7jPC/UwAaSySnYU1zZ4lhkG27a9p1/MsVpRTuwqViNMaBHgyVb5350 vz+NJJXDe53yNrlD0B2/mRX5gAsF201SrpLBsPNSMdU2zQrEq+D9xfXD+khgkLddPw pcXgQZugloGvBA7F6jw2jyJbp2sKvEX7edpzVO6h+bSFqVyomNvrckXBNnLqePg+Yg k22f+Qxz4qm4JBcPxnWFGiPmfjzogqeVtQww5SjCcJiPThsqXfX74/ePbg6E7qDYGQ lwAFV/g5tSYXwgbo1NhTrfAKhgYtpLjAgFNm7CnVqJMoLS6E5MsDSgPHoyeVkq6o7L tjfnojp31RaLw== Received: by mail-lj1-f169.google.com with SMTP id b10so1566020ljp.6 for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 00:46:30 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Jrh8DqIaXa4KfWv+L1ccXUpWl+jZ4vkpWoAI2KymmWiAw30Or cDprY6rmrqOu9+X6t7Aa9KmKmZDZlGcUYp9xK/4= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:6a04:: with SMTP id f4mr6390528ljc.255.1611218788873; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 00:46:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210119131724.308884-1-adrian.ratiu@collabora.com> <20210119131724.308884-2-adrian.ratiu@collabora.com> In-Reply-To: From: Ard Biesheuvel Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 09:46:17 +0100 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] arm: lib: xor-neon: remove unnecessary GCC < 4.6 warning To: Arvind Sankar Cc: Nick Desaulniers , Arnd Bergmann , Adrian Ratiu , Arnd Bergmann , Linux ARM , Nathan Chancellor , Russell King , clang-built-linux , Collabora Kernel ML , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 at 05:13, Arvind Sankar wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 03:09:53PM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 1:35 PM Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 10:18 PM 'Nick Desaulniers' via Clang Built > > > Linux wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 5:17 AM Adrian Ratiu wrote: > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/lib/xor-neon.c b/arch/arm/lib/xor-neon.c > > > > > index b99dd8e1c93f..f9f3601cc2d1 100644 > > > > > --- a/arch/arm/lib/xor-neon.c > > > > > +++ b/arch/arm/lib/xor-neon.c > > > > > @@ -14,20 +14,22 @@ MODULE_LICENSE("GPL"); > > > > > #error You should compile this file with '-march=armv7-a -mfloat-abi=softfp -mfpu=neon' > > > > > #endif > > > > > > > > > > +/* > > > > > + * TODO: Even though -ftree-vectorize is enabled by default in Clang, the > > > > > + * compiler does not produce vectorized code due to its cost model. > > > > > + * See: https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/503 > > > > > + */ > > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_CC_IS_CLANG > > > > > +#warning Clang does not vectorize code in this file. > > > > > +#endif > > > > > > > > Arnd, remind me again why it's a bug that the compiler's cost model > > > > says it's faster to not produce a vectorized version of these loops? > > > > I stand by my previous comment: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40976#c8 > > > > > > The point is that without vectorizing the code, there is no point in building > > > both the default xor code and a "neon" version that has to save/restore > > > the neon registers but doesn't actually use them. > > > > Doesn't that already happen today with GCC when the pointer arguments > > are overlapping? The loop is "versioned" and may not actually use the > > NEON registers at all at runtime for such arguments. > > https://godbolt.org/z/q48q8v See also: > > https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40976#c11. Or am I missing > > something? > > The gcc version is at least useful when the arguments _don't_ overlap, > which is presumably most/all the time. > Indeed > There's no point to building this file if it's not going to produce a > vectorized version at all. The warning seems unnecessary, and it's not > really a compiler bug either -- until we agree on a way to get clang to > produce a vectorized version, the best thing would be for the neon > version to not be built at all with clang. Is that too messy to achieve? > +1 > > > > So I'm thinking if we extend out this pattern to the rest of the > > functions, we can actually avoid calls to > > kernel_neon_begin()/kernel_neon_end() for cases in which pointers > > would be too close to use the vectorized loop version; meaning for GCC > > this would be an optimization (don't save neon registers when you're > > not going to use them). I would probably consider moving > > include/asm-generic/xor.h somewhere under arch/arm/ > > perhaps...err...something for the other users of . > > We can't directly do the patch below since there are other users of the > asm-generic/xor.h implementations than just the neon file. If it's too > much work to check and add __restrict everywhere, I think we'd either > need to copy the code into the xor-neon file, or maybe do some ifdeffery > so __restrict is only used for the neon version. > Don't mess with the code, please. It's really not worth it. The current implementation works fine with overlapping inputs, but works better when they don't. I don't see why we would change that. If Clang cannot be forced to vectorize this code, then just disable it for Clang - it's not the end of the world, who runs xor_blocks() on a hot path on 32-bit ARM anyway? > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/xor.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/xor.h > > index aefddec79286..abd748d317e8 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/xor.h > > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/xor.h > > @@ -148,12 +148,12 @@ extern struct xor_block_template const > > xor_block_neon_inner; > > static void > > xor_neon_2(unsigned long bytes, unsigned long *p1, unsigned long *p2) > > { > > - if (in_interrupt()) { > > - xor_arm4regs_2(bytes, p1, p2); > > - } else { > > + if (!in_interrupt() && abs((uintptr_t)p1, (uintptr_t)p2) >= 8) { > > kernel_neon_begin(); > > xor_block_neon_inner.do_2(bytes, p1, p2); > > kernel_neon_end(); > > + } else { > > + xor_arm4regs_2(bytes, p1, p2); > > } > > } > > diff --git a/arch/arm/lib/xor-neon.c b/arch/arm/lib/xor-neon.c > > index b99dd8e1c93f..0e8e474c0523 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/lib/xor-neon.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/lib/xor-neon.c > > @@ -14,22 +14,6 @@ MODULE_LICENSE("GPL"); > > #error You should compile this file with '-march=armv7-a > > -mfloat-abi=softfp -mfpu=neon' > > #endif > > > > -/* > > - * Pull in the reference implementations while instructing GCC (through > > - * -ftree-vectorize) to attempt to exploit implicit parallelism and emit > > - * NEON instructions. > > - */ > > -#if __GNUC__ > 4 || (__GNUC__ == 4 && __GNUC_MINOR__ >= 6) > > -#pragma GCC optimize "tree-vectorize" > > -#else > > -/* > > - * While older versions of GCC do not generate incorrect code, they fail to > > - * recognize the parallel nature of these functions, and emit plain ARM code, > > - * which is known to be slower than the optimized ARM code in asm-arm/xor.h. > > - */ > > -#warning This code requires at least version 4.6 of GCC > > -#endif > > - > > #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-variable" > > #include > > diff --git a/include/asm-generic/xor.h b/include/asm-generic/xor.h > > index b62a2a56a4d4..69df62095c33 100644 > > --- a/include/asm-generic/xor.h > > +++ b/include/asm-generic/xor.h > > @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ > > #include > > > > static void > > -xor_8regs_2(unsigned long bytes, unsigned long *p1, unsigned long *p2) > > +xor_8regs_2(unsigned long bytes, unsigned long * __restrict p1, > > unsigned long * __restrict p2) > > { > > long lines = bytes / (sizeof (long)) / 8; > > > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > ~Nick Desaulniers