The existing way of managing clustered nodes was done through adding
weak edges between the neighbouring cluster nodes, which is a sort of
ordered queue. And this will be later recorded as `NextClusterPred` or
`NextClusterSucc` in `ScheduleDAGMI`.
But actually the instruction may be picked not in the exact order of the
queue. For example, we have a queue of cluster nodes A B C. But during
scheduling, node B might be picked first, then it will be very likely
that we only cluster B and C for Top-Down scheduling (leaving A alone).
Another issue is:
```
if (!ReorderWhileClustering && SUa->NodeNum > SUb->NodeNum)
std::swap(SUa, SUb);
if (!DAG->addEdge(SUb, SDep(SUa, SDep::Cluster)))
```
may break the cluster queue.
For example, we want to cluster nodes (order as in `MemOpRecords`): 1 3
2. 1(SUa) will be pred of 3(SUb) normally. But when it comes to (3, 2),
As 3(SUa) > 2(SUb), we would reorder the two nodes, which makes 2 be
pred of 3. This makes both 1 and 2 become preds of 3, but there is no
edge between 1 and 2. Thus we get a broken cluster chain.
To fix both issues, we introduce an unordered set in the change. This
could help improve clustering in some hard case.
One key reason the change causes so many test check changes is: As the
cluster candidates are not ordered now, the candidates might be picked
in different order from before.
The most affected targets are: AMDGPU, AArch64, RISCV.
For RISCV, it seems to me most are just minor instruction reorder, don't
see obvious regression.
For AArch64, there were some combining of ldr into ldp being affected.
With two cases being regressed and two being improved. This has more
deeper reason that machine scheduler cannot cluster them well both
before and after the change, and the load combine algorithm later is
also not smart enough.
For AMDGPU, some cases have more v_dual instructions used while some are
regressed. It seems less critical. Seems like test `v_vselect_v32bf16`
gets more buffer_load being claused.
This patch changes return type of tryCandidate from void to bool:
1. Methods in some targets already follow this convention.
2. This would help if some target wants to re-use generic code.
3. It looks more intuitive if these try-method returns the same type.
We may need to change return type of them from bool to some enum
further, to make it less confusing.
Reviewed By: foad
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103951
PowerPC has its custom scheduler heuristic. It calls parent classes'
tryCandidate in override version, but the function returns void, so this
way doesn't actually help. This patch duplicates code from base scheduler
into PPC machine scheduler class, which does what we wanted.
Reviewed By: steven.zhang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94464
The instruction addi is usually used to post increase the loop indvar, which looks like this:
label_X:
load x, base(i)
...
y = op x
...
i = addi i, 1
goto label_X
However, for PowerPC, if there are too many vsx instructions that between y = op x and i = addi i, 1,
it will use all the hw resource that block the execution of i = addi, i, 1, which result in the stall
of the load instruction in next iteration. So, a heuristic is added to move the addi as early as possible
to have the load hide the latency of vsx instructions, if other heuristic didn't apply to avoid the starve.
Reviewed By: jji
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80269
When we are scheduling the load and addi, if all other heuristic didn't take effect,
we will try to schedule the addi before the load, to hide the latency, and avoid the
true dependency added by RA. And this only take effects for Power9.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61930
llvm-svn: 361600
This patch lays the groundwork for extending the generic machine scheduler by providing a PPC-specific implementation.
There are no functional changes as this is an incremental patch that simply provides the necessary overrides which just
encapsulate the behavior of the generic scheduler. Subsequent patches will add specific behavior.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59284
llvm-svn: 357047
