Welcome to OStack Knowledge Sharing Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

Categories

0 votes
591 views
in Technique[技术] by (71.8m points)

c - Make gcc use conditional moves

Is there a gcc pragma or something I can use to force gcc to generate branch-free instructions on a specific section of code?

I have a piece of code that I want gcc to compile to branch-free code using cmov instructions:

int foo(int *a, int n, int x) {
    int i = 0, j = n;

    while (i < n) {
#ifdef PREFETCH
        __builtin_prefetch(a+16*i + 15);
#endif /* PREFETCH */
        j = (x <= a[i]) ? i : j;
        i = (x <= a[i]) ? 2*i + 1 : 2*i + 2;
    }
    return j;
}

and, indeed, it does so:

morin@soprano$ gcc -O4 -S -c test.c -o -    
    .file   "test.c"
    .text
    .p2align 4,,15
    .globl  foo
    .type   foo, @function
foo:
.LFB0:
    .cfi_startproc
    testl   %esi, %esi
    movl    %esi, %eax
    jle .L2
    xorl    %r8d, %r8d
    jmp .L3
    .p2align 4,,10
    .p2align 3
.L6:
    movl    %ecx, %r8d
.L3:
    movslq  %r8d, %rcx
    movl    (%rdi,%rcx,4), %r9d
    leal    (%r8,%r8), %ecx      # put 2*i in ecx
    leal    1(%rcx), %r10d       # put 2*i+1 in r10d
    addl    $2, %ecx             # put 2*i+2 in ecx
    cmpl    %edx, %r9d
    cmovge  %r10d, %ecx          # put 2*i+1 in ecx if appropriate
    cmovge  %r8d, %eax           # set j = i if appropriate
    cmpl    %esi, %ecx
    jl  .L6
.L2:
    rep ret
    .cfi_endproc
.LFE0:
    .size   foo, .-foo
    .ident  "GCC: (Ubuntu 4.8.2-19ubuntu1) 4.8.2"
    .section    .note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits

(Yes, I realize the loop is a branch, but I'm talking about the choice operators inside the loop.)

Unfortunately, when I enable the __builtin_prefetch call, gcc generates branchy code:

morin@soprano$ gcc -DPREFETCH -O4 -S -c test.c -o -
    .file   "test.c"
    .text
    .p2align 4,,15
    .globl  foo
    .type   foo, @function
foo:
.LFB0:
    .cfi_startproc
    testl   %esi, %esi
    movl    %esi, %eax
    jle .L7
    xorl    %ecx, %ecx
    jmp .L5
    .p2align 4,,10
    .p2align 3
.L3:
    movl    %ecx, %eax           # this is the x <= a[i] branch
    leal    1(%rcx,%rcx), %ecx
    cmpl    %esi, %ecx
    jge .L11
.L5:
    movl    %ecx, %r8d           # this is the main branch
    sall    $4, %r8d             # setup the prefetch
    movslq  %r8d, %r8            # setup the prefetch
    prefetcht0  60(%rdi,%r8,4)   # do the prefetch
    movslq  %ecx, %r8
    cmpl    %edx, (%rdi,%r8,4)   # compare x with a[i]
    jge .L3
    leal    2(%rcx,%rcx), %ecx   # this is the x > a[i] branch
    cmpl    %esi, %ecx
    jl  .L5
.L11:
    rep ret
.L7:
    .p2align 4,,5
    rep ret
    .cfi_endproc
.LFE0:
    .size   foo, .-foo
    .ident  "GCC: (Ubuntu 4.8.2-19ubuntu1) 4.8.2"
    .section    .note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits

I've tried using __attribute__((optimize("if-conversion2"))) on this function, but that has no effect.

The reason I care so much is that I haved hand-edited compiler-generated branch-free code (from the first example) to include the prefetcht0 instructions and it runs considerably faster than both of the versions gcc produces.

See Question&Answers more detail:os

与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

1 Answer

0 votes
by (71.8m points)

If you really rely on that level of optimization, you have to write your own assembler stubs.

Reason is that even a modification elsewhere in the code might change the code the compiler (that is not gcc specific) emits. Also, a different version of gcc, different options (e.g. -fomit-frame-pointer) can change the code dramatically.

You should really only do this if you have to. Other influences might have much more impact, like cache configuration, memory allocation (DRAM-page/bank), execution order compared with concurrently run programs, CPU association, and much more. Play with compiler optimizations first. Command line options you will find in the docs (you did not post the version used, therefore not more specific).

A (serious) alternative would be to use clang/llvm. Or just help the gcc team improve their optimizers. You would not be the first. Note also that gcc has made massive improvements specifically for ARM over the last versions.


与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
Welcome to OStack Knowledge Sharing Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share
Click Here to Ask a Question

...