1
0
mirror of https://github.com/RPCS3/llvm-mirror.git synced 2024-11-24 03:33:20 +01:00
llvm-mirror/include/llvm/MCA/Pipeline.h

77 lines
2.5 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

//===--------------------- Pipeline.h ---------------------------*- C++ -*-===//
//
// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM Exceptions.
// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception
//
//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
/// \file
///
/// This file implements an ordered container of stages that simulate the
/// pipeline of a hardware backend.
///
//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
#ifndef LLVM_MCA_PIPELINE_H
#define LLVM_MCA_PIPELINE_H
#include "llvm/MCA/Stages/Stage.h"
#include "llvm/Support/Error.h"
namespace llvm {
namespace mca {
class HWEventListener;
/// A pipeline for a specific subtarget.
///
/// It emulates an out-of-order execution of instructions. Instructions are
[llvm-mca] Introduce a pipeline Stage class and FetchStage. Summary: This is just an idea, really two ideas. I expect some push-back, but I realize that posting a diff is the most comprehensive way to express these concepts. This patch introduces a Stage class which represents the various stages of an instruction pipeline. As a start, I have created a simple FetchStage that is based on existing logic for how MCA produces instructions, but now encapsulated in a Stage. The idea should become more concrete once we introduce additional stages. The idea being, that when a stage completes, the next stage in the pipeline will be executed. Stages are chained together as a singly linked list to closely model a real pipeline. For now there is only one stage, so the stage-to-stage flow of instructions isn't immediately obvious. Eventually, Stage will also handle event notifications, but that functionality is not complete, and not destined for this patch. Ideally, an interested party can register for notifications from a particular stage. Callbacks will be issued to these listeners at various points in the execution of the stage. For now, eventing functionality remains similar to what it has been in mca::Backend. We will be building-up the Stage class as we move on, such as adding debug output. This patch also removes the unique_ptr<Instruction> return value from InstrBuilder::createInstruction. An Instruction pointer is still produced, but now it's up to the caller to decide how that item should be managed post-allocation (e.g., smart pointer). This allows the Fetch stage to create instructions and manage the lifetime of those instructions as it wishes, and not have to be bound to any specific managed pointer type. Other callers of createInstruction might have different requirements, and thus can manage the pointer to fit their needs. Another idea would be to push the ownership to the RCU. Currently, the FetchStage will wrap the Instruction pointer in a shared_ptr. This allows us to remove the Instruction container in Backend, which was probably going to disappear, or move, at some point anyways. Note that I did run these changes through valgrind, to make sure we are not leaking memory. While the shared_ptr comes with some additional overhead it relieves us from having to manage a list of generated instructions, and/or make lookup calls to remove the instructions. I realize that both the Stage class and the Instruction pointer management (mentioned directly above) are separate but related ideas, and probably should land as separate patches; I am happy to do that if either idea is decent. The main reason these two ideas are together is that Stage::execute() can mutate an InstRef. For the fetch stage, the InstRef is populated as the primary action of that stage (execute()). I didn't want to change the Stage interface to support the idea of generating an instruction. Ideally, instructions are to be pushed through the pipeline. I didn't want to draw too much of a specialization just for the fetch stage. Excuse the word-salad. Reviewers: andreadb, courbet, RKSimon Reviewed By: andreadb Subscribers: llvm-commits, mgorny, javed.absar, tschuett, gbedwell Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46741 llvm-svn: 332390
2018-05-15 22:21:04 +02:00
/// fetched from a MCInst sequence managed by an initial 'Fetch' stage.
/// Instructions are firstly fetched, then dispatched to the schedulers, and
/// then executed.
///
/// This class tracks the lifetime of an instruction from the moment where
/// it gets dispatched to the schedulers, to the moment where it finishes
/// executing and register writes are architecturally committed.
/// In particular, it monitors changes in the state of every instruction
/// in flight.
[llvm-mca] Introduce a pipeline Stage class and FetchStage. Summary: This is just an idea, really two ideas. I expect some push-back, but I realize that posting a diff is the most comprehensive way to express these concepts. This patch introduces a Stage class which represents the various stages of an instruction pipeline. As a start, I have created a simple FetchStage that is based on existing logic for how MCA produces instructions, but now encapsulated in a Stage. The idea should become more concrete once we introduce additional stages. The idea being, that when a stage completes, the next stage in the pipeline will be executed. Stages are chained together as a singly linked list to closely model a real pipeline. For now there is only one stage, so the stage-to-stage flow of instructions isn't immediately obvious. Eventually, Stage will also handle event notifications, but that functionality is not complete, and not destined for this patch. Ideally, an interested party can register for notifications from a particular stage. Callbacks will be issued to these listeners at various points in the execution of the stage. For now, eventing functionality remains similar to what it has been in mca::Backend. We will be building-up the Stage class as we move on, such as adding debug output. This patch also removes the unique_ptr<Instruction> return value from InstrBuilder::createInstruction. An Instruction pointer is still produced, but now it's up to the caller to decide how that item should be managed post-allocation (e.g., smart pointer). This allows the Fetch stage to create instructions and manage the lifetime of those instructions as it wishes, and not have to be bound to any specific managed pointer type. Other callers of createInstruction might have different requirements, and thus can manage the pointer to fit their needs. Another idea would be to push the ownership to the RCU. Currently, the FetchStage will wrap the Instruction pointer in a shared_ptr. This allows us to remove the Instruction container in Backend, which was probably going to disappear, or move, at some point anyways. Note that I did run these changes through valgrind, to make sure we are not leaking memory. While the shared_ptr comes with some additional overhead it relieves us from having to manage a list of generated instructions, and/or make lookup calls to remove the instructions. I realize that both the Stage class and the Instruction pointer management (mentioned directly above) are separate but related ideas, and probably should land as separate patches; I am happy to do that if either idea is decent. The main reason these two ideas are together is that Stage::execute() can mutate an InstRef. For the fetch stage, the InstRef is populated as the primary action of that stage (execute()). I didn't want to change the Stage interface to support the idea of generating an instruction. Ideally, instructions are to be pushed through the pipeline. I didn't want to draw too much of a specialization just for the fetch stage. Excuse the word-salad. Reviewers: andreadb, courbet, RKSimon Reviewed By: andreadb Subscribers: llvm-commits, mgorny, javed.absar, tschuett, gbedwell Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46741 llvm-svn: 332390
2018-05-15 22:21:04 +02:00
///
/// Instructions are executed in a loop of iterations. The number of iterations
[llvm-mca] Introduce a pipeline Stage class and FetchStage. Summary: This is just an idea, really two ideas. I expect some push-back, but I realize that posting a diff is the most comprehensive way to express these concepts. This patch introduces a Stage class which represents the various stages of an instruction pipeline. As a start, I have created a simple FetchStage that is based on existing logic for how MCA produces instructions, but now encapsulated in a Stage. The idea should become more concrete once we introduce additional stages. The idea being, that when a stage completes, the next stage in the pipeline will be executed. Stages are chained together as a singly linked list to closely model a real pipeline. For now there is only one stage, so the stage-to-stage flow of instructions isn't immediately obvious. Eventually, Stage will also handle event notifications, but that functionality is not complete, and not destined for this patch. Ideally, an interested party can register for notifications from a particular stage. Callbacks will be issued to these listeners at various points in the execution of the stage. For now, eventing functionality remains similar to what it has been in mca::Backend. We will be building-up the Stage class as we move on, such as adding debug output. This patch also removes the unique_ptr<Instruction> return value from InstrBuilder::createInstruction. An Instruction pointer is still produced, but now it's up to the caller to decide how that item should be managed post-allocation (e.g., smart pointer). This allows the Fetch stage to create instructions and manage the lifetime of those instructions as it wishes, and not have to be bound to any specific managed pointer type. Other callers of createInstruction might have different requirements, and thus can manage the pointer to fit their needs. Another idea would be to push the ownership to the RCU. Currently, the FetchStage will wrap the Instruction pointer in a shared_ptr. This allows us to remove the Instruction container in Backend, which was probably going to disappear, or move, at some point anyways. Note that I did run these changes through valgrind, to make sure we are not leaking memory. While the shared_ptr comes with some additional overhead it relieves us from having to manage a list of generated instructions, and/or make lookup calls to remove the instructions. I realize that both the Stage class and the Instruction pointer management (mentioned directly above) are separate but related ideas, and probably should land as separate patches; I am happy to do that if either idea is decent. The main reason these two ideas are together is that Stage::execute() can mutate an InstRef. For the fetch stage, the InstRef is populated as the primary action of that stage (execute()). I didn't want to change the Stage interface to support the idea of generating an instruction. Ideally, instructions are to be pushed through the pipeline. I didn't want to draw too much of a specialization just for the fetch stage. Excuse the word-salad. Reviewers: andreadb, courbet, RKSimon Reviewed By: andreadb Subscribers: llvm-commits, mgorny, javed.absar, tschuett, gbedwell Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46741 llvm-svn: 332390
2018-05-15 22:21:04 +02:00
/// is defined by the SourceMgr object, which is managed by the initial stage
/// of the instruction pipeline.
///
/// The Pipeline entry point is method 'run()' which executes cycles in a loop
/// until there are new instructions to dispatch, and not every instruction
/// has been retired.
[llvm-mca] Introduce a pipeline Stage class and FetchStage. Summary: This is just an idea, really two ideas. I expect some push-back, but I realize that posting a diff is the most comprehensive way to express these concepts. This patch introduces a Stage class which represents the various stages of an instruction pipeline. As a start, I have created a simple FetchStage that is based on existing logic for how MCA produces instructions, but now encapsulated in a Stage. The idea should become more concrete once we introduce additional stages. The idea being, that when a stage completes, the next stage in the pipeline will be executed. Stages are chained together as a singly linked list to closely model a real pipeline. For now there is only one stage, so the stage-to-stage flow of instructions isn't immediately obvious. Eventually, Stage will also handle event notifications, but that functionality is not complete, and not destined for this patch. Ideally, an interested party can register for notifications from a particular stage. Callbacks will be issued to these listeners at various points in the execution of the stage. For now, eventing functionality remains similar to what it has been in mca::Backend. We will be building-up the Stage class as we move on, such as adding debug output. This patch also removes the unique_ptr<Instruction> return value from InstrBuilder::createInstruction. An Instruction pointer is still produced, but now it's up to the caller to decide how that item should be managed post-allocation (e.g., smart pointer). This allows the Fetch stage to create instructions and manage the lifetime of those instructions as it wishes, and not have to be bound to any specific managed pointer type. Other callers of createInstruction might have different requirements, and thus can manage the pointer to fit their needs. Another idea would be to push the ownership to the RCU. Currently, the FetchStage will wrap the Instruction pointer in a shared_ptr. This allows us to remove the Instruction container in Backend, which was probably going to disappear, or move, at some point anyways. Note that I did run these changes through valgrind, to make sure we are not leaking memory. While the shared_ptr comes with some additional overhead it relieves us from having to manage a list of generated instructions, and/or make lookup calls to remove the instructions. I realize that both the Stage class and the Instruction pointer management (mentioned directly above) are separate but related ideas, and probably should land as separate patches; I am happy to do that if either idea is decent. The main reason these two ideas are together is that Stage::execute() can mutate an InstRef. For the fetch stage, the InstRef is populated as the primary action of that stage (execute()). I didn't want to change the Stage interface to support the idea of generating an instruction. Ideally, instructions are to be pushed through the pipeline. I didn't want to draw too much of a specialization just for the fetch stage. Excuse the word-salad. Reviewers: andreadb, courbet, RKSimon Reviewed By: andreadb Subscribers: llvm-commits, mgorny, javed.absar, tschuett, gbedwell Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46741 llvm-svn: 332390
2018-05-15 22:21:04 +02:00
///
/// Internally, the Pipeline collects statistical information in the form of
/// histograms. For example, it tracks how the dispatch group size changes
/// over time.
class Pipeline {
Pipeline(const Pipeline &P) = delete;
Pipeline &operator=(const Pipeline &P) = delete;
/// An ordered list of stages that define this instruction pipeline.
SmallVector<std::unique_ptr<Stage>, 8> Stages;
std::set<HWEventListener *> Listeners;
[llvm-mca] Introduce a pipeline Stage class and FetchStage. Summary: This is just an idea, really two ideas. I expect some push-back, but I realize that posting a diff is the most comprehensive way to express these concepts. This patch introduces a Stage class which represents the various stages of an instruction pipeline. As a start, I have created a simple FetchStage that is based on existing logic for how MCA produces instructions, but now encapsulated in a Stage. The idea should become more concrete once we introduce additional stages. The idea being, that when a stage completes, the next stage in the pipeline will be executed. Stages are chained together as a singly linked list to closely model a real pipeline. For now there is only one stage, so the stage-to-stage flow of instructions isn't immediately obvious. Eventually, Stage will also handle event notifications, but that functionality is not complete, and not destined for this patch. Ideally, an interested party can register for notifications from a particular stage. Callbacks will be issued to these listeners at various points in the execution of the stage. For now, eventing functionality remains similar to what it has been in mca::Backend. We will be building-up the Stage class as we move on, such as adding debug output. This patch also removes the unique_ptr<Instruction> return value from InstrBuilder::createInstruction. An Instruction pointer is still produced, but now it's up to the caller to decide how that item should be managed post-allocation (e.g., smart pointer). This allows the Fetch stage to create instructions and manage the lifetime of those instructions as it wishes, and not have to be bound to any specific managed pointer type. Other callers of createInstruction might have different requirements, and thus can manage the pointer to fit their needs. Another idea would be to push the ownership to the RCU. Currently, the FetchStage will wrap the Instruction pointer in a shared_ptr. This allows us to remove the Instruction container in Backend, which was probably going to disappear, or move, at some point anyways. Note that I did run these changes through valgrind, to make sure we are not leaking memory. While the shared_ptr comes with some additional overhead it relieves us from having to manage a list of generated instructions, and/or make lookup calls to remove the instructions. I realize that both the Stage class and the Instruction pointer management (mentioned directly above) are separate but related ideas, and probably should land as separate patches; I am happy to do that if either idea is decent. The main reason these two ideas are together is that Stage::execute() can mutate an InstRef. For the fetch stage, the InstRef is populated as the primary action of that stage (execute()). I didn't want to change the Stage interface to support the idea of generating an instruction. Ideally, instructions are to be pushed through the pipeline. I didn't want to draw too much of a specialization just for the fetch stage. Excuse the word-salad. Reviewers: andreadb, courbet, RKSimon Reviewed By: andreadb Subscribers: llvm-commits, mgorny, javed.absar, tschuett, gbedwell Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46741 llvm-svn: 332390
2018-05-15 22:21:04 +02:00
unsigned Cycles;
Error runCycle();
[llvm-mca] Introduce a sequential container of Stages Summary: Remove explicit stages and introduce a list of stages. A pipeline should be composed of an arbitrary list of stages, and not any predefined list of stages in the Backend. The Backend should not know of any particular stage, rather it should only be concerned that it has a list of stages, and that those stages will fulfill the contract of what it means to be a Stage (namely pre/post/execute a given instruction). For now, we leave the original set of stages defined in the Backend ctor; however, I imagine these will be moved out at a later time. This patch makes an adjustment to the semantics of Stage::isReady. Specifically, what the Backend really needs to know is if a Stage has unfinished work. With that said, it is more appropriately renamed Stage::hasWorkToComplete(). This change will clean up the check in Backend::run(), allowing us to query each stage to see if there is unfinished work, regardless of what subclass a stage might be. I feel that this change simplifies the semantics too, but that's a subjective statement. Given how RetireStage and ExecuteStage handle data in their preExecute(), I've had to change the order of Retire and Execute in our stage list. Retire must complete any of its preExecute actions before ExecuteStage's preExecute can take control. This is mainly because both stages utilize the RCU. In the meantime, I want to see if I can adjust that or remove that coupling. Reviewers: andreadb, RKSimon, courbet Reviewed By: andreadb Subscribers: tschuett, gbedwell, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46907 llvm-svn: 335361
2018-06-22 18:17:26 +02:00
bool hasWorkToProcess();
void notifyCycleBegin();
void notifyCycleEnd();
public:
Pipeline() : Cycles(0) {}
[llvm-mca] Refactor how execution is orchestrated by the Pipeline. This patch changes how instruction execution is orchestrated by the Pipeline. In particular, this patch makes it more explicit how instructions transition through the various pipeline stages during execution. The main goal is to simplify both the stage API and the Pipeline execution. At the same time, this patch fixes some design issues which are currently latent, but that are likely to cause problems in future if people start defining custom pipelines. The new design assumes that each pipeline stage knows the "next-in-sequence". The Stage API has gained three new methods: - isAvailable(IR) - checkNextStage(IR) - moveToTheNextStage(IR). An instruction IR can be executed by a Stage if method `Stage::isAvailable(IR)` returns true. Instructions can move to next stages using method moveToTheNextStage(IR). An instruction cannot be moved to the next stage if method checkNextStage(IR) (called on the current stage) returns false. Stages are now responsible for moving instructions to the next stage in sequence if necessary. Instructions are allowed to transition through multiple stages during a single cycle (as long as stages are available, and as long as all the calls to `checkNextStage(IR)` returns true). Methods `Stage::preExecute()` and `Stage::postExecute()` have now become redundant, and those are removed by this patch. Method Pipeline::runCycle() is now simpler, and it correctly visits stages on every begin/end of cycle. Other changes: - DispatchStage no longer requires a reference to the Scheduler. - ExecuteStage no longer needs to directly interact with the RetireControlUnit. Instead, executed instructions are now directly moved to the next stage (i.e. the retire stage). - RetireStage gained an execute method. This allowed us to remove the dependency with the RCU in ExecuteStage. - FecthStage now updates the "program counter" during cycleBegin() (i.e. before we start executing new instructions). - We no longer need Stage::Status to be returned by method execute(). It has been dropped in favor of a more lightweight llvm::Error. Overally, I measured a ~11% performance gain w.r.t. the previous design. I also think that the Stage interface is probably easier to read now. That being said, code comments have to be improved, and I plan to do it in a follow-up patch. Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50849 llvm-svn: 339923
2018-08-16 21:00:48 +02:00
void appendStage(std::unique_ptr<Stage> S);
/// Returns the total number of simulated cycles.
Expected<unsigned> run();
void addEventListener(HWEventListener *Listener);
};
} // namespace mca
} // namespace llvm
#endif // LLVM_MCA_PIPELINE_H