Introduce basic schedule model for AMD Zen 3 CPU's, a.k.a `znver3`.
This is fully built from scratch, from llvm-mca measurements
and documented reference materials.
Nothing was copied from `znver2`/`znver1`.
I believe this is in a reasonable state of completion for inclusion,
probably better than D52779 `bdver2` was :)
Namely:
* uops are pretty spot-on (at least what llvm-mca can measure)
{F16422596}
* latency is also pretty spot-on (at least what llvm-mca can measure)
{F16422601}
* throughput is within reason
{F16422607}
I haven't run much benchmarks with this,
however RawSpeed benchmarks says this is beneficial:
{F16603978}
{F16604029}
I'll call out the obvious problems there:
* i didn't really bother with X87 instructions
* i didn't really bother with obviously-microcoded/system instructions
* There are large discrepancy in throughput for `mr` and `rm` instructions.
I'm not really sure if it's a modelling defect that needs to be fixed,
or it's a defect of measurments.
* Pipe distributions are probably bad :)
I can't do much here until AMD allows that to be fixed
by documenting the appropriate counters and updating libpfm
That being said, as @RKSimon notes:
>>! In D94395#2647381, @RKSimon wrote:
> I'll mention again that all the znver* models appear to be very inaccurate wrt SIMD/FPU instructions <...>
so how much worse this could possibly be?!
Things that aren't there:
* Various tunings: zero idioms, etc. That is follow-ups.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94395
There is no need to use `--check-prefix` multiple times.
It helps to improve readability/test maintainability.
This patch does it for all tools at once.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78217
The patch gives out the details of the znver2 scheduler model.
There are few improvements with respect to execution units, latencies and
throughput when compared with znver1.
The tests that were present for znver1 for llvm-mca tool were replicated.
The latencies, execution units, timeline and throughput information are updated for znver2.
Reviewers: craig.topper, Simon Pilgrim
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66088
I've started this cleanup more several times now, but got sidetracked
elsewhere, e.g. by llvm-exegesis problems. Not this time, finally!
This is mainly cleaning up the inverse throughput values,
and a few latencies/uops, based on the llvm-exegesis measured values.
Though this is not complete by any means,
there's certainly more cleanup to be done.
The performance numbers (i've only checked by RawSpeed benchmark) aren't
really surprising - overall this *slightly* (< -1%) improves perf.
llvm-svn: 360341
Adding the baseline tests in a preparatory NFC commit,
so that the actual commit shows the *diff*.
Yes, i'm aware that a few of these codegen-based sched tests
are testing wrong instructions, i will fix that afterwards.
For https://reviews.llvm.org/D52779
llvm-svn: 345462
This patch adds two new fields to the perf report generated by the SummaryView.
Fields are now logically organized into two small groups; only the second group
contains throughput indicators.
Example:
```
Iterations: 100
Instructions: 300
Total Cycles: 414
Total uOps: 700
Dispatch Width: 4
uOps Per Cycle: 1.69
IPC: 0.72
Block RThroughput: 4.0
```
This patch also updates the docs for llvm-mca.
Due to the nature of this change, several tests in the tools/llvm-mca directory
were affected, and had to be updated using script `update_mca_test_checks.py`.
llvm-svn: 340946
Summary:
It's super irritating.
[properly configured] git client then complains about that double-newline,
and you have to use `--force` to ignore the warning, since even if you
fix it manually, it will be reintroduced the very next runtime :/
Reviewers: RKSimon, andreadb, courbet, craig.topper, javed.absar, gbedwell
Reviewed By: gbedwell
Subscribers: javed.absar, tschuett, gbedwell, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47697
llvm-svn: 333887
Previously update_mca_test_checks worked entirely at "block" level where
a block is some sequence of lines delimited by at least one empty line.
This generally worked well, but could sometimes lead to excessive
repetition of check lines for various prefixes if some block was almost
identical between prefixes, but not quite (for example, due to a
different dispatch width in the otherwise identical summary views).
This new analyis attempts to split blocks further in the case where the
following conditions are met:
a) There is some prefix common to every RUN line (typically 'ALL').
b) The first line of the block is common to the output with every prefix.
c) The block has the same number of lines for the output with every prefix.
Also, regenerated all llvm-mca test files with the following command:
update_mca_test_checks.py "../test/tools/llvm-mca/*/*.s" "../test/tools/llvm-mca/*/*/*.s"
The new analysis showed a "multiple lines not disambiguated by prefixes" warning
for test "AArch64/Exynos/scheduler-queue-usage.s" so I've also added some
explicit prefixes to each of the RUN lines in that test.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47321
llvm-svn: 333204
llvm-mca is an LLVM based performance analysis tool that can be used to
statically measure the performance of code, and to help triage potential
problems with target scheduling models.
llvm-mca uses information which is already available in LLVM (e.g. scheduling
models) to statically measure the performance of machine code in a specific cpu.
Performance is measured in terms of throughput as well as processor resource
consumption. The tool currently works for processors with an out-of-order
backend, for which there is a scheduling model available in LLVM.
The main goal of this tool is not just to predict the performance of the code
when run on the target, but also help with diagnosing potential performance
issues.
Given an assembly code sequence, llvm-mca estimates the IPC (instructions per
cycle), as well as hardware resources pressure. The analysis and reporting style
were mostly inspired by the IACA tool from Intel.
This patch is related to the RFC on llvm-dev visible at this link:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-March/121490.html
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D43951
llvm-svn: 326998
Roman Lebedev