[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 2/9] i965/fs: Register allocator shoudn't use grf127 for sends dest
Caio Marcelo de Oliveira Filho
caio.oliveira at intel.com
Tue Jul 10 23:08:37 UTC 2018
> Since Gen8+ Intel PRM states that "r127 must not be used for return
> address when there is a src and dest overlap in send instruction."
The previous patch, that verifies the condition above is causing
tests/spec/arb_compute_shader/linker/bug-93840.shader_test
to crash with
shader_runner: ../src/intel/compiler/brw_fs_generator.cpp:2455: int fs_generator::generate_code(const cfg_t*, int): Assertion `validated' failed.
I also could reproduce the crash locally. It happens even with this
patch (which adds the hack) applied.
> This patch implements this restriction creating new grf127_send_hack_node
> at the register allocator. This node has a fixed assignation to grf127.
>
> For vgrf that are used as destination of send messages we create node
> interfereces with the grf127_send_hack_node. So the register allocator
> will never assign to these vgrf a register that involves grf127.
>
> If dispatch_width > 8 we don't create these interferences to the because
> all instructions have node interferences between sources and destination.
> That is enough to avoid the r127 restriction.
I think for both widths will not be enough. The instruction that fails
the validation is:
mov(8) g126<1>UD g0<8,8,1>UD { align1 WE_all 1Q };
mov(1) g126.2<1>UD 0x00000090UD { align1 WE_all 1N };
send(16) g126<1>UW g126<8,8,1>UD
data ( DC OWORD block read, 253, 3) mlen 1 rlen 2 { align1 WE_all 1H };
ERROR: r127 must not be used for return address when there is a src and dest overlap
Which if I understood correctly comes from the scratch reading being
created by the spilling logic. In brw_oword_block_read_scratch() we
see
if (p->devinfo->gen >= 7) {
/* On gen 7 and above, we no longer have message registers and we can
* send from any register we want. By using the destination register
* for the message, we guarantee that the implied message write won't
* accidentally overwrite anything. This has been a problem because
* the MRF registers and source for the final FB write are both fixed
* and may overlap.
*/
mrf = retype(dest, BRW_REGISTER_TYPE_UD);
} else {
mrf = retype(mrf, BRW_REGISTER_TYPE_UD);
}
dest = retype(dest, BRW_REGISTER_TYPE_UW);
It seems to me we'll have to handle r127 there as well.
Thanks,
Caio
>
> This fixes CTS tests that raised this issue as they were executed as SIMD8:
>
> dEQP-VK.spirv_assembly.instruction.graphics.8bit_storage.8struct_to_32struct.storage_buffer_*int_geom
>
> Shader-db results on Skylake:
> total instructions in shared programs: 7686798 -> 7686797 (<.01%)
> instructions in affected programs: 301 -> 300 (-0.33%)
> helped: 1
> HURT: 0
>
> total cycles in shared programs: 337092322 -> 337091919 (<.01%)
> cycles in affected programs: 22420415 -> 22420012 (<.01%)
> helped: 712
> HURT: 588
>
> Shader-db results on Broadwell:
>
> total instructions in shared programs: 7658574 -> 7658625 (<.01%)
> instructions in affected programs: 19610 -> 19661 (0.26%)
> helped: 3
> HURT: 4
>
> total cycles in shared programs: 340694553 -> 340676378 (<.01%)
> cycles in affected programs: 24724915 -> 24706740 (-0.07%)
> helped: 998
> HURT: 916
>
> total spills in shared programs: 4300 -> 4311 (0.26%)
> spills in affected programs: 333 -> 344 (3.30%)
> helped: 1
> HURT: 3
>
> total fills in shared programs: 5370 -> 5378 (0.15%)
> fills in affected programs: 274 -> 282 (2.92%)
> helped: 1
> HURT: 3
>
> v2: Avoid duplicating register classes without grf127. Let's use a node
> with a fixed assignation to grf127 and create interferences to send
> message vgrf destinations. (Eric Anholt)
> v3: Update reference to CTS VK_KHR_8bit_storage failing tests.
> (Jose Maria Casanova)
> ---
> src/intel/compiler/brw_fs_reg_allocate.cpp | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/src/intel/compiler/brw_fs_reg_allocate.cpp b/src/intel/compiler/brw_fs_reg_allocate.cpp
> index ec8e116cb38..59e047483c0 100644
> --- a/src/intel/compiler/brw_fs_reg_allocate.cpp
> +++ b/src/intel/compiler/brw_fs_reg_allocate.cpp
> @@ -548,6 +548,9 @@ fs_visitor::assign_regs(bool allow_spilling, bool spill_all)
> int first_mrf_hack_node = node_count;
> if (devinfo->gen >= 7)
> node_count += BRW_MAX_GRF - GEN7_MRF_HACK_START;
> + int grf127_send_hack_node = node_count;
> + if (devinfo->gen >= 8 && dispatch_width == 8)
> + node_count ++;
> struct ra_graph *g =
> ra_alloc_interference_graph(compiler->fs_reg_sets[rsi].regs, node_count);
>
> @@ -653,6 +656,28 @@ fs_visitor::assign_regs(bool allow_spilling, bool spill_all)
> }
> }
>
> + if (devinfo->gen >= 8 && dispatch_width == 8) {
> + /* At Intel Broadwell PRM, vol 07, section "Instruction Set Reference",
> + * subsection "EUISA Instructions", Send Message (page 990):
> + *
> + * "r127 must not be used for return address when there is a src and
> + * dest overlap in send instruction."
> + *
> + * We are avoiding using grf127 as part of the destination of send
> + * messages adding a node interference to the grf127_send_hack_node.
> + * This node has a fixed asignment to grf127.
> + *
> + * We don't apply it to SIMD16 because previous code avoids any register
> + * overlap between sources and destination.
> + */
> + ra_set_node_reg(g, grf127_send_hack_node, 127);
> + foreach_block_and_inst(block, fs_inst, inst, cfg) {
> + if (inst->is_send_from_grf() && inst->dst.file == VGRF) {
> + ra_add_node_interference(g, inst->dst.nr, grf127_send_hack_node);
> + }
> + }
> + }
> +
> /* Debug of register spilling: Go spill everything. */
> if (unlikely(spill_all)) {
> int reg = choose_spill_reg(g);
> --
> 2.17.1
>
> _______________________________________________
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
More information about the mesa-dev
mailing list