[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 01/10] x86emul: support AVX512_BF16 insns
On 24/03/2020 12:30, Jan Beulich wrote: > --- a/tools/tests/x86_emulator/evex-disp8.c > +++ b/tools/tests/x86_emulator/evex-disp8.c > @@ -550,6 +550,12 @@ static const struct test avx512_4vnniw_5 > INSN(p4dpwssds, f2, 0f38, 53, el_4, d, vl), > }; > > +static const struct test avx512_bf16_all[] = { > + INSN(vcvtne2ps2bf16, f2, 0f38, 72, vl, d, vl), > + INSN(vcvtneps2bf16, f3, 0f38, 72, vl, d, vl), > + INSN(vdpbf16ps, f3, 0f38, 52, vl, d, vl), > +}; > + > static const struct test avx512_bitalg_all[] = { > INSN(popcnt, 66, 0f38, 54, vl, bw, vl), > INSN(pshufbitqmb, 66, 0f38, 8f, vl, b, vl), > @@ -984,6 +990,7 @@ void evex_disp8_test(void *instr, struct > RUN(avx512pf, 512); > RUN(avx512_4fmaps, 512); > RUN(avx512_4vnniw, 512); > + RUN(avx512_bf16, all); > RUN(avx512_bitalg, all); > RUN(avx512_ifma, all); > RUN(avx512_vbmi, all); > --- a/tools/tests/x86_emulator/test_x86_emulator.c > +++ b/tools/tests/x86_emulator/test_x86_emulator.c > @@ -4516,6 +4516,80 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) > else > printf("skipped\n"); > > + if ( stack_exec && cpu_has_avx512_bf16 ) > + { > + decl_insn(vcvtne2ps2bf16); > + decl_insn(vcvtneps2bf16); > + decl_insn(vdpbf16ps); > + static const struct { > + float f[16]; > + } in1 = {{ > + 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 > + }}, in2 = {{ > + 1, -2, 3, -4, 5, -6, 7, -8, 9, -10, 11, -12, 13, -14, 15, -16 > + }}, out = {{ > + 1 * 1 + 2 * 2, 3 * 3 + 4 * 4, > + 5 * 5 + 6 * 6, 7 * 7 + 8 * 8, > + 9 * 9 + 10 * 10, 11 * 11 + 12 * 12, > + 13 * 13 + 14 * 14, 15 * 15 + 16 * 16, > + 1 * 1 - 2 * 2, 3 * 3 - 4 * 4, > + 5 * 5 - 6 * 6, 7 * 7 - 8 * 8, > + 9 * 9 - 10 * 10, 11 * 11 - 12 * 12, > + 13 * 13 - 14 * 14, 15 * 15 - 16 * 16 > + }}; > + > + printf("%-40s", "Testing vcvtne2ps2bf16 64(%ecx),%zmm1,%zmm2..."); > + asm volatile ( "vmovups %1, %%zmm1\n" > + put_insn(vcvtne2ps2bf16, > + /* vcvtne2ps2bf16 64(%0), %%zmm1, %%zmm2 */ > + ".byte 0x62, 0xf2, 0x77, 0x48, 0x72, 0x51, > 0x01") > + :: "c" (NULL), "m" (in2) ); > + set_insn(vcvtne2ps2bf16); > + regs.ecx = (unsigned long)&in1 - 64; > + rc = x86_emulate(&ctxt, &emulops); > + if ( rc != X86EMUL_OKAY || !check_eip(vcvtne2ps2bf16) ) > + goto fail; > + printf("pending\n"); > + > + printf("%-40s", "Testing vcvtneps2bf16 64(%ecx),%ymm3..."); > + asm volatile ( put_insn(vcvtneps2bf16, > + /* vcvtneps2bf16 64(%0), %%ymm3 */ > + ".byte 0x62, 0xf2, 0x7e, 0x48, 0x72, 0x59, > 0x01") > + :: "c" (NULL) ); > + set_insn(vcvtneps2bf16); > + rc = x86_emulate(&ctxt, &emulops); > + if ( rc != X86EMUL_OKAY || !check_eip(vcvtneps2bf16) ) > + goto fail; > + asm ( "vmovdqa %%ymm2, %%ymm5\n\t" > + "vpcmpeqd %%zmm3, %%zmm5, %%k0\n\t" > + "kmovw %%k0, %0" > + : "=g" (rc) : "m" (out) ); > + if ( rc != 0xffff ) > + goto fail; > + printf("pending\n"); > + > + printf("%-40s", "Testing vdpbf16ps 128(%ecx),%zmm2,%zmm4..."); > + asm volatile ( "vmovdqa %%ymm3, %0\n\t" > + "vmovdqa %%ymm3, %1\n" > + put_insn(vdpbf16ps, > + /* vdpbf16ps 128(%2), %%zmm2, %%zmm4 */ > + ".byte 0x62, 0xf2, 0x6e, 0x48, 0x52, 0x61, > 0x02") > + : "=&m" (res[0]), "=&m" (res[8]) > + : "c" (NULL) > + : "memory" ); > + set_insn(vdpbf16ps); > + regs.ecx = (unsigned long)res - 128; > + rc = x86_emulate(&ctxt, &emulops); > + if ( rc != X86EMUL_OKAY || !check_eip(vdpbf16ps) ) > + goto fail; > + asm ( "vcmpeqps %1, %%zmm4, %%k0\n\t" > + "kmovw %%k0, %0" > + : "=g" (rc) : "m" (out) ); > + if ( rc != 0xffff ) > + goto fail; > + printf("okay\n"); > + } I've just tried this out on an SDP. Testing vcvtne2ps2bf16 64(%ecx),%zmm1,%zmm2...pending Testing vcvtneps2bf16 64(%ecx),%ymm3... pending Testing vdpbf16ps 128(%ecx),%zmm2,%zmm4...okay ... Testing avx512_bf16/all disp8 handling...okay What is the "pending" supposed to signify? I can see that these three are linked, and that is fine, but at the point we've checked the intermediate results, it should be "okay", no? ~Andrew
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |