simd branch ready for review/merge
carter.schonwald at gmail.com
Fri Nov 8 01:07:06 UTC 2013
Hey Simon (and everyone else),
regarding matter #1: good idea!
the static literal idea i've been chewing on, if generalized to also make
sense in a DataKinds setting, would give the machinery for writing
something like "vecOf :: Static * -> Static Nat -> #" or something like
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 7:22 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones
<simonpj at microsoft.com>wrote:
> I'm too far from this stuff to give it a meaningful review, at least not
> without sitting beside you. So I suggest you just merge it! Simon Marlow
> may want to look.
> The wiki page http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/SIMD/Design describes
> the design, and I think it's up to date with your patches (correct?).
> Thanks for doing that!
> From our previous discussion, the bit I hate is this:
> 1 there are so many distinct data types (Int16x4, Int32x2, etc)
> 2 primops.txt.pp therefore has to grow a macro-like mechanism
> to ameliorate the burden of writing out all the zillions of
> types and primops
> Concerning (2), the obvious rejoinder is: well, primops.txt.pp is really a
> program written in a domain specific language -- and that language is
> getting more elaborate. Solution: stop building a new language, and
> instead make primops.txt.pp into an embedded DSL in Haskell; just a Haskell
> program that we run to generate the various outputs. Then all the
> mechanisms you had to add will be trivial.
> Concerning (1) what we want is a way to make types Int<16,4> where the
> parameters 16 and 4 are forced to be static literals, and where you
> absolutely do not get polymorphism like f :: Int<a><b> -> blah. There is
> some Trac discussion about this.
> It can't be that hard. I'm copying some FC friends!
> | -----Original Message-----
> | From: Geoffrey Mainland [mailto:mainland at apeiron.net]
> | Sent: 16 September 2013 20:17
> | To: Simon Peyton-Jones; Simon Marlow; Austin Seipp; ghc-devs at haskell.org
> | Subject: simd branch ready for review/merge
> | The SIMD branch, available as wip/simd, is ready for review/merge. It
> | could use some review---Simon and Simon, I'd be especially grateful if
> | you both had a quick look. Some major points:
> | 1) I have added support for AVX 512, although this is necessarily
> | untested. AVX and AVX2 are also both supported.
> | 2) After the recent churn regarding patching LLVM's GHC calling
> | convention, by default only 128-bit wide SIMD vectors are passed in
> | registers, and then only on X86_64. There is a "hidden" flag,
> | -fllvm-pass-vectors-in-regs, that causes GHC to generate LLVM code that
> | assumes all vectors are passed in registers by LLVM. This can be used
> | with a suitably patched version of LLVM, and if we get LLVM 3.4 patched,
> | we can consider turning it on by default for LLVM 3.4+. This would mean
> | that we couldn't mix LLVM <3.3-compiled object files with LLVM
> | >3.4-compiled object files, but I don't see that as much of a problem.
> | 3) utils/genprimcode has been hacked up to allow us to write vector
> | operations once and have them instantiated at multiple vector types. I'm
> | not thrilled with this solution, but after discussing with Simon PJ,
> | what I've implemented seems to be the minimal reasonable solution to the
> | problem of exploding primop boilerplate. The changes are documented in
> | compiler/prelude/primops.txt.pp.
> | 4) Error handling is sub-optimal. My patch checks to make sure that
> | vector primops can be compiled efficiently based on the current set of
> | dynamic flags. For example, if -mavx is not specified and the user tries
> | to use a primop that adds together two 256-bit wide vectors of
> | double-precision elements, the user will see an error message like:
> | ghc-stage2: sorry! (unimplemented feature or known bug)
> | (GHC version 7.7.20130916 for x86_64-unknown-linux):
> | 256-bit wide floating point SIMD vector instructions require at
> | least -mavx.
> | This is because the only good place to check for this kind of error is
> | during STG->Cmm translation (in compiler/codeGen/StgCmmPrim.hs), and we
> | don't have much of an error handling infrastructure there in contrast to
> | when we're working in the typechecking/renaming monad. If there is a
> | better way/place to do this, please let me know.
> | Thanks,
> | Geoff
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ghc-devs