[Mesa-dev] [PATCH] i965/fs: Extend the live ranges of VGRFs which leave loops

[Jason Ekstrand]

Bah!  This one's bogus too.  I think it messes up register coalesce but I'm
not 100% sure...

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 8:22 PM, Jason Ekstrand <jason at jlekstrand.net> wrote:

> Cc: mesa-stable at lists.freedesktop.org
> ---
>  src/intel/compiler/brw_fs_live_variables.cpp | 55
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 55 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/src/intel/compiler/brw_fs_live_variables.cpp
> b/src/intel/compiler/brw_fs_live_variables.cpp
> index c449672..23ec280 100644
> --- a/src/intel/compiler/brw_fs_live_variables.cpp
> +++ b/src/intel/compiler/brw_fs_live_variables.cpp
> @@ -223,6 +223,61 @@ fs_live_variables::compute_start_end()
>           }
>        }
>     }
> +
> +   /* Due to the explicit way the SIMD data is handled on GEN, we need to
> be a
> +    * bit more careful with live ranges and loops.  Consider the following
> +    * example:
> +    *
> +    *    vec4 color2;
> +    *    while (1) {
> +    *       vec4 color = texture();
> +    *       if (...) {
> +    *          color2 = color * 2;
> +    *          break;
> +    *       }
> +    *    }
> +    *    gl_FragColor = color2;
> +    *
> +    * In this case, the definition of color2 dominates the use because the
> +    * loop only has the one exit.  This means that the live range
> interval for
> +    * color2 goes from the statement in the if to it's use below the loop.
> +    * Now suppose that the texture operation has a header register that
> gets
> +    * assigned one of the registers used for color2.  If the loop
> condition is
> +    * non-uniform and some of the threads will take the and others will
> +    * continue.  In this case, the next pass through the loop, the WE_all
> +    * setup of the header register will stomp the disabled channels of
> color2
> +    * and corrupt the value.
> +    *
> +    * This same problem can occur if you have a mix of 64, 32, and 16-bit
> +    * registers because the channels do not line up or if you have a
> SIMD16
> +    * program and the first half of one value overlaps the second half of
> the
> +    * other.
> +    *
> +    * To solve this problem, we take any VGRFs whose live ranges cross the
> +    * while instruction of a loop and extend their live ranges to the top
> of
> +    * the loop.  This more accurately models the hardware because the
> value in
> +    * the VGRF needs to be carried through subsequent loop iterations in
> order
> +    * to remain valid when we finally do break.
> +    */
> +   foreach_block (block, cfg) {
> +      if (block->end()->opcode != BRW_OPCODE_WHILE)
> +         continue;
> +
> +      /* This is a WHILE instrution. Find the DO block. */
> +      bblock_t *do_block = NULL;
> +      foreach_list_typed(bblock_link, child_link, link,
> &block->children) {
> +         if (child_link->block->start_ip < block->end_ip) {
> +            assert(do_block == NULL);
> +            do_block = child_link->block;
> +         }
> +      }
> +      assert(do_block);
> +
> +      for (int i = 0; i < num_vars; i++) {
> +         if (start[i] < block->end_ip && end[i] > block->end_ip)
> +            start[i] = do_block->start_ip;
> +      }
> +   }
>  }
>
>  fs_live_variables::fs_live_variables(fs_visitor *v, const cfg_t *cfg)
> --
> 2.5.0.400.gff86faf
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/attachments/20171004/98a43301/attachment.html>