Skip to content

[AMDGPU][NFC] Use getScoreUB for XCNT insertion. #162448

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
easyonaadit merged 1 commit into from
Oct 13, 2025
Merged

[AMDGPU][NFC] Use getScoreUB for XCNT insertion. #162448

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion llvm/lib/Target/AMDGPU/SIInsertWaitcnts.cpp
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1019,7 +1019,7 @@ void WaitcntBrackets::updateByEvent(WaitEventType E, MachineInstr &Inst) {
// SMEM and VMEM operations. So there will never be
// outstanding address translations for both SMEM and
// VMEM at the same time.
setScoreLB(T, CurrScore - 1);
setScoreLB(T, getScoreUB(T) - 1);
Copy link
Contributor

@jayfoad jayfoad Oct 9, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why do you still subtract 1? Is that required for some reason?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@easyonaadit easyonaadit Oct 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I want to keep exactly one pending Xcnt event.
UBScore gets updated at the start of this function, if I use that as-is, it'll mark all xcnt events as completed.

Copy link
Contributor

@jayfoad jayfoad Oct 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see. I think this is a hint that you're doing this too late, and it might work out cleaner to implement it at the end of generateWaitcntInstBefore near where we handle S_BARRIER.

Copy link
Contributor

@jayfoad jayfoad Oct 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@easyonaadit easyonaadit Oct 13, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Right, I'll look into it in a follow up patch.

PendingEvents &= ~(1 << OtherEvent);
}
for (const MachineOperand &Op : Inst.all_uses())
Expand Down