home | help
LLVM-MCA(1)			      LLVM			     LLVM-MCA(1)

NAME
     llvm-mca - LLVM Machine Code Analyzer

SYNOPSIS
     llvm-mca [options] [input]

DESCRIPTION
     llvm-mca  is a performance analysis tool that uses information available in
     LLVM (e.g. scheduling models) to statically measure the performance of  ma-
     chine code in a specific CPU.

     Performance  is  measured	in  terms of throughput as well as processor re-
     source consumption. The tool currently works for processors with a  backend
     for which there is a scheduling model available in LLVM.

     The  main	goal  of this tool is not just to predict the performance of the
     code when run on the target, but also help with diagnosing  potential  per-
     formance issues.

     Given  an	assembly  code sequence, llvm-mca estimates the Instructions Per
     Cycle (IPC), as well as hardware resource pressure. The  analysis	and  re-
     porting style were inspired by the IACA tool from Intel.

     For  example, you can compile code with clang, output assembly, and pipe it
     directly into llvm-mca for analysis:

	$ clang foo.c -O2 -target x86_64-unknown-unknown -S -o - | llvm-mca -mcpu=btver2

     Or for Intel syntax:

	$ clang foo.c -O2 -target x86_64-unknown-unknown -mllvm -x86-asm-syntax=intel -S -o - | llvm-mca -mcpu=btver2

     (llvm-mca detects Intel syntax by the presence of an  .intel_syntax  direc-
     tive  at  the beginning of the input.  By default its output syntax matches
     that of its input.)

     Scheduling models are not just used to compute  instruction  latencies  and
     throughput,  but  also to understand what processor resources are available
     and how to simulate them.

     By design, the quality of the analysis conducted by llvm-mca is  inevitably
     affected by the quality of the scheduling models in LLVM.

     If  you  see  that  the performance report is not accurate for a processor,
     please file a bug against the appropriate backend.

OPTIONS
     If input is "-" or omitted, llvm-mca reads from standard input.  Otherwise,
     it will read from the specified filename.

     If the -o option is omitted, then llvm-mca will send its output to standard
     output  if  the  input  is from standard input.  If the -o option specifies
     "-", then the output will also be sent to standard output.

     -help  Print a summary of command line options.

     -o <filename>
	    Use <filename> as the output filename. See	the  summary  above  for
	    more details.

     -mtriple=<target triple>
	    Specify a target triple string.

     -march=<arch>
	    Specify  the architecture for which to analyze the code. It defaults
	    to the host default target.

     -mcpu=<cpuname>
	    Specify the processor for which to analyze the  code.   By	default,
	    the cpu name is autodetected from the host.

     -output-asm-variant=<variant id>
	    Specify  the output assembly variant for the report generated by the
	    tool.  On x86, possible values are [0, 1]. A value of 0 (vic. 1) for
	    this flag enables the AT&T (vic. Intel) assembly format for the code
	    printed out by the tool in the analysis report.

     -print-imm-hex
	    Prefer hex format  for  numeric  literals  in  the	output	assembly
	    printed as part of the report.

     -dispatch=<width>
	    Specify  a	different dispatch width for the processor. The dispatch
	    width defaults to field 'IssueWidth'  in  the  processor  scheduling
	    model.  If width is zero, then the default dispatch width is used.

     -register-file-size=<size>
	    Specify  the  size	of  the register file. When specified, this flag
	    limits how many physical registers are available for register renam-
	    ing purposes. A value of zero for this flag means "unlimited  number
	    of physical registers".

     -iterations=<number of iterations>
	    Specify  the  number of iterations to run. If this flag is set to 0,
	    then the tool sets the number of iterations to a default value (i.e.
	    100).

     -noalias=<bool>
	    If set, the tool assumes that loads and stores don't alias. This  is
	    the default behavior.

     -lqueue=<load queue size>
	    Specify  the  size of the load queue in the load/store unit emulated
	    by the tool.  By default, the tool assumes an unbound number of  en-
	    tries  in the load queue.  A value of zero for this flag is ignored,
	    and the default load queue size is used instead.

     -squeue=<store queue size>
	    Specify the size of the store queue in the load/store unit	emulated
	    by	the  tool. By default, the tool assumes an unbound number of en-
	    tries in the store queue. A value of zero for this flag is	ignored,
	    and the default store queue size is used instead.

     -timeline
	    Enable the timeline view.

     -timeline-max-iterations=<iterations>
	    Limit the number of iterations to print in the timeline view. By de-
	    fault, the timeline view prints information for up to 10 iterations.

     -timeline-max-cycles=<cycles>
	    Limit  the	number	of  cycles in the timeline view, or use 0 for no
	    limit. By default, the number of cycles is set to 80.

     -resource-pressure
	    Enable the resource pressure view. This is enabled by default.

     -register-file-stats
	    Enable register file usage statistics.

     -dispatch-stats
	    Enable extra dispatch statistics. This view  collects  and	analyzes
	    instruction  dispatch  events,  as	well  as static/dynamic dispatch
	    stall events. This view is disabled by default.

     -scheduler-stats
	    Enable extra scheduler statistics. This view collects  and	analyzes
	    instruction issue events. This view is disabled by default.

     -retire-stats
	    Enable  extra  retire control unit statistics. This view is disabled
	    by default.

     -instruction-info
	    Enable the instruction info view. This is enabled by default.

     -show-encoding
	    Enable the printing of instruction encodings within the  instruction
	    info view.

     -show-barriers
	    Enable the printing of LoadBarrier and StoreBarrier flags within the
	    instruction info view.

     -all-stats
	    Print all hardware statistics. This enables extra statistics related
	    to	the  dispatch  logic,  the  hardware  schedulers,  the	register
	    file(s), and the retire control unit. This option is disabled by de-
	    fault.

     -all-views
	    Enable all the view.

     -instruction-tables
	    Prints resource pressure information based on the static information
	    available from the processor model. This differs from  the	resource
	    pressure view because it doesn't require that the code is simulated.
	    It	instead  prints the theoretical uniform distribution of resource
	    pressure for every instruction in sequence.

     -bottleneck-analysis
	    Print information about bottlenecks that affect the throughput. This
	    analysis can be expensive, and it is disabled  by  default.  Bottle-
	    necks  are	highlighted  in the summary view. Bottleneck analysis is
	    currently not supported for processors with an in-order backend.

     -json  Print the requested views in valid JSON format. The instructions and
	    the processor resources are printed as members of special top  level
	    JSON objects.  The individual views refer to them by index. However,
	    not  all views are currently supported. For example, the report from
	    the bottleneck analysis is not printed out in JSON. All the  default
	    views are currently supported.

     -disable-cb
	    Force  usage  of  the  generic  CustomBehaviour and InstrPostProcess
	    classes rather than using the target  specific  implementation.  The
	    generic  classes  never  detect  any custom hazards or make any post
	    processing modifications to instructions.

EXIT STATUS
     llvm-mca returns 0 on success. Otherwise, an error message  is  printed  to
     standard error, and the tool returns 1.

USING MARKERS TO ANALYZE SPECIFIC CODE BLOCKS
     llvm-mca allows for the optional usage of special code comments to mark re-
     gions  of	the  assembly code to be analyzed.  A comment starting with sub-
     string LLVM-MCA-BEGIN marks the beginning	of  a  code  region.  A  comment
     starting  with  substring LLVM-MCA-END marks the end of a code region.  For
     example:

	# LLVM-MCA-BEGIN
	  ...
	# LLVM-MCA-END

     If no user-defined region is specified, then llvm-mca assumes a default re-
     gion which contains every instruction in the input file.  Every  region  is
     analyzed in isolation, and the final performance report is the union of all
     the reports generated for every code region.

     Code regions can have names. For example:

	# LLVM-MCA-BEGIN A simple example
	  add %eax, %eax
	# LLVM-MCA-END

     The  code	from the example above defines a region named "A simple example"
     with a single instruction in it. Note how the region name doesn't	have  to
     be  repeated  in  the LLVM-MCA-END directive. In the absence of overlapping
     regions, an anonymous LLVM-MCA-END directive always ends the currently  ac-
     tive user defined region.

     Example of nesting regions:

	# LLVM-MCA-BEGIN foo
	  add %eax, %edx
	# LLVM-MCA-BEGIN bar
	  sub %eax, %edx
	# LLVM-MCA-END bar
	# LLVM-MCA-END foo

     Example of overlapping regions:

	# LLVM-MCA-BEGIN foo
	  add %eax, %edx
	# LLVM-MCA-BEGIN bar
	  sub %eax, %edx
	# LLVM-MCA-END foo
	  add %eax, %edx
	# LLVM-MCA-END bar

     Note  that multiple anonymous regions cannot overlap. Also, overlapping re-
     gions cannot have the same name.

     There is no support for marking regions from high-level source code, like C
     or C++. As a workaround, inline assembly directives may be used:

	int foo(int a, int b) {
	  __asm volatile("# LLVM-MCA-BEGIN foo":::"memory");
	  a += 42;
	  __asm volatile("# LLVM-MCA-END":::"memory");
	  a *= b;
	  return a;
	}

     However, this interferes with optimizations like loop vectorization and may
     have an impact on the code generated. This is because the __asm  statements
     are  seen	as real code having important side effects, which limits how the
     code around them can be transformed. If users want to make  use  of  inline
     assembly  to emit markers, then the recommendation is to always verify that
     the output assembly is equivalent to the assembly generated in the  absence
     of  markers.   The Clang options to emit optimization reports can also help
     in detecting missed optimizations.

HOW LLVM-MCA WORKS
     llvm-mca takes assembly code as input. The assembly code is parsed  into  a
     sequence  of  MCInst  with  the  help  of the existing LLVM target assembly
     parsers. The parsed sequence of MCInst is then analyzed by a Pipeline  mod-
     ule to generate a performance report.

     The Pipeline module simulates the execution of the machine code sequence in
     a	loop  of  iterations (default is 100). During this process, the pipeline
     collects a number of execution related  statistics.  At  the  end	of  this
     process, the pipeline generates and prints a report from the collected sta-
     tistics.

     Here  is  an  example  of	a performance report generated by the tool for a
     dot-product of two packed float vectors of four elements. The  analysis  is
     conducted for target x86, cpu btver2.  The following result can be produced
     via    the    following	command    using    the   example   located   at
     test/tools/llvm-mca/X86/BtVer2/dot-product.s:

	$ llvm-mca -mtriple=x86_64-unknown-unknown -mcpu=btver2 -iterations=300 dot-product.s

	Iterations:	   300
	Instructions:	   900
	Total Cycles:	   610
	Total uOps:	   900

	Dispatch Width:    2
	uOps Per Cycle:    1.48
	IPC:		   1.48
	Block RThroughput: 2.0

	Instruction Info:
	[1]: #uOps
	[2]: Latency
	[3]: RThroughput
	[4]: MayLoad
	[5]: MayStore
	[6]: HasSideEffects (U)

	[1]    [2]    [3]    [4]    [5]    [6]	  Instructions:
	 1	2     1.00			  vmulps      %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm2
	 1	3     1.00			  vhaddps     %xmm2, %xmm2, %xmm3
	 1	3     1.00			  vhaddps     %xmm3, %xmm3, %xmm4

	Resources:
	[0]   - JALU0
	[1]   - JALU1
	[2]   - JDiv
	[3]   - JFPA
	[4]   - JFPM
	[5]   - JFPU0
	[6]   - JFPU1
	[7]   - JLAGU
	[8]   - JMul
	[9]   - JSAGU
	[10]  - JSTC
	[11]  - JVALU0
	[12]  - JVALU1
	[13]  - JVIMUL

	Resource pressure per iteration:
	[0]    [1]    [2]    [3]    [4]    [5]	  [6]	 [7]	[8]    [9]    [10]   [11]   [12]   [13]
	 -	-      -     2.00   1.00   2.00   1.00	  -	 -	-      -      -      -	    -

	Resource pressure by instruction:
	[0]    [1]    [2]    [3]    [4]    [5]	  [6]	 [7]	[8]    [9]    [10]   [11]   [12]   [13]   Instructions:
	 -	-      -      -     1.00    -	  1.00	  -	 -	-      -      -      -	    -	  vmulps      %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm2
	 -	-      -     1.00    -	   1.00    -	  -	 -	-      -      -      -	    -	  vhaddps     %xmm2, %xmm2, %xmm3
	 -	-      -     1.00    -	   1.00    -	  -	 -	-      -      -      -	    -	  vhaddps     %xmm3, %xmm3, %xmm4

     According to this report, the dot-product	kernel	has  been  executed  300
     times, for a total of 900 simulated instructions. The total number of simu-
     lated micro opcodes (uOps) is also 900.

     The  report  is  structured in three main sections.  The first section col-
     lects a few performance numbers; the goal of this section is to give a very
     quick overview of the performance throughput. Important performance indica-
     tors are IPC, uOps Per Cycle,  and   Block  RThroughput  (Block  Reciprocal
     Throughput).

     Field  DispatchWidth  is  the maximum number of micro opcodes that are dis-
     patched to the out-of-order backend every simulated cycle.  For  processors
     with  an in-order backend, DispatchWidth is the maximum number of micro op-
     codes issued to the backend every simulated cycle.

     IPC is computed dividing the total number of simulated instructions by  the
     total number of cycles.

     Field  Block  RThroughput	is the reciprocal of the block throughput. Block
     throughput is a theoretical quantity computed  as	the  maximum  number  of
     blocks  (i.e. iterations) that can be executed per simulated clock cycle in
     the absence of loop carried dependencies. Block  throughput  is  superiorly
     limited by the dispatch rate, and the availability of hardware resources.

     In the absence of loop-carried data dependencies, the observed IPC tends to
     a	theoretical  maximum which can be computed by dividing the number of in-
     structions of a single iteration by the Block RThroughput.

     Field 'uOps Per Cycle' is computed dividing the total number  of  simulated
     micro opcodes by the total number of cycles. A delta between Dispatch Width
     and  this	field  is an indicator of a performance issue. In the absence of
     loop-carried data dependencies, the observed 'uOps Per Cycle'  should  tend
     to  a  theoretical maximum throughput which can be computed by dividing the
     number of uOps of a single iteration by the Block RThroughput.

     Field uOps Per Cycle is bounded from above by the dispatch width.	That  is
     because  the  dispatch  width  limits the maximum size of a dispatch group.
     Both IPC and 'uOps Per Cycle' are limited by the amount of hardware  paral-
     lelism.  The  availability of hardware resources affects the resource pres-
     sure distribution, and it limits the number of instructions that can be ex-
     ecuted in parallel every cycle.  A delta between  Dispatch  Width	and  the
     theoretical maximum uOps per Cycle (computed by dividing the number of uOps
     of  a  single iteration by the Block RThroughput) is an indicator of a per-
     formance bottleneck caused by the lack of hardware resources.  In	general,
     the lower the Block RThroughput, the better.

     In  this example, uOps per iteration/Block RThroughput is 1.50. Since there
     are no loop-carried dependencies, the observed uOps Per Cycle  is	expected
     to approach 1.50 when the number of iterations tends to infinity. The delta
     between the Dispatch Width (2.00), and the theoretical maximum uOp through-
     put  (1.50)  is an indicator of a performance bottleneck caused by the lack
     of hardware resources, and the Resource pressure view can help to	identify
     the problematic resource usage.

     The second section of the report is the instruction info view. It shows the
     latency  and reciprocal throughput of every instruction in the sequence. It
     also reports extra information related to the number of micro opcodes,  and
     opcode properties (i.e., 'MayLoad', 'MayStore', and 'HasSideEffects').

     Field RThroughput is the reciprocal of the instruction throughput. Through-
     put  is  computed as the maximum number of instructions of a same type that
     can be executed per clock cycle in the absence of operand dependencies.  In
     this example, the reciprocal throughput of a vector float multiply is 1 cy-
     cles/instruction.	That is because the FP multiplier JFPM is only available
     from pipeline JFPU1.

     Instruction  encodings  are displayed within the instruction info view when
     flag -show-encoding is specified.

     Below is an example of -show-encoding output for the dot-product kernel:

	Instruction Info:
	[1]: #uOps
	[2]: Latency
	[3]: RThroughput
	[4]: MayLoad
	[5]: MayStore
	[6]: HasSideEffects (U)
	[7]: Encoding Size

	[1]    [2]    [3]    [4]    [5]    [6]	  [7]	 Encodings:		       Instructions:
	 1	2     1.00			   4	 c5 f0 59 d0		       vmulps %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm2
	 1	4     1.00			   4	 c5 eb 7c da		       vhaddps	      %xmm2, %xmm2, %xmm3
	 1	4     1.00			   4	 c5 e3 7c e3		       vhaddps	      %xmm3, %xmm3, %xmm4

     The Encoding Size column shows the size in bytes of instructions.	The  En-
     codings  column  shows  the actual instruction encodings (byte sequences in
     hex).

     The third section is the Resource pressure view.  This view reports the av-
     erage number of resource cycles consumed every  iteration	by  instructions
     for  every processor resource unit available on the target.  Information is
     structured in two tables. The first table reports the  number  of	resource
     cycles  spent  on	average every iteration. The second table correlates the
     resource cycles to the machine instruction in the	sequence.  For	example,
     every  iteration of the instruction vmulps always executes on resource unit
     [6] (JFPU1 - floating point pipeline #1), consuming an  average  of  1  re-
     source cycle per iteration.  Note that on AMD Jaguar, vector floating-point
     multiply  can  only  be  issued  to pipeline JFPU1, while horizontal float-
     ing-point additions can only be issued to pipeline JFPU0.

     The resource pressure view helps with  identifying  bottlenecks  caused  by
     high  usage of specific hardware resources.  Situations with resource pres-
     sure mainly concentrated on a few resources should, in general, be avoided.
     Ideally, pressure should be  uniformly  distributed  between  multiple  re-
     sources.

   Timeline View
     The  timeline  view  produces a detailed report of each instruction's state
     transitions through an instruction pipeline.  This view is enabled  by  the
     command line option -timeline.  As instructions transition through the var-
     ious  stages of the pipeline, their states are depicted in the view report.
     These states are represented by the following characters:

     * D : Instruction dispatched.

     * e : Instruction executing.

     * E : Instruction executed.

     * R : Instruction retired.

     * = : Instruction already dispatched, waiting to be executed.

     * - : Instruction executed, waiting to be retired.

     Below is the timeline view for a subset of the dot-product example  located
     in  test/tools/llvm-mca/X86/BtVer2/dot-product.s  and processed by llvm-mca
     using the following command:

	$ llvm-mca -mtriple=x86_64-unknown-unknown -mcpu=btver2 -iterations=3 -timeline dot-product.s

	Timeline view:
			    012345
	Index	  0123456789

	[0,0]	  DeeER.    .	 .   vmulps   %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm2
	[0,1]	  D==eeeER  .	 .   vhaddps  %xmm2, %xmm2, %xmm3
	[0,2]	  .D====eeeER	 .   vhaddps  %xmm3, %xmm3, %xmm4
	[1,0]	  .DeeE-----R	 .   vmulps   %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm2
	[1,1]	  . D=eeeE---R	 .   vhaddps  %xmm2, %xmm2, %xmm3
	[1,2]	  . D====eeeER	 .   vhaddps  %xmm3, %xmm3, %xmm4
	[2,0]	  .  DeeE-----R  .   vmulps   %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm2
	[2,1]	  .  D====eeeER  .   vhaddps  %xmm2, %xmm2, %xmm3
	[2,2]	  .   D======eeeER   vhaddps  %xmm3, %xmm3, %xmm4

	Average Wait times (based on the timeline view):
	[0]: Executions
	[1]: Average time spent waiting in a scheduler's queue
	[2]: Average time spent waiting in a scheduler's queue while ready
	[3]: Average time elapsed from WB until retire stage

	      [0]    [1]    [2]    [3]
	0.     3     1.0    1.0    3.3	     vmulps   %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm2
	1.     3     3.3    0.7    1.0	     vhaddps  %xmm2, %xmm2, %xmm3
	2.     3     5.7    0.0    0.0	     vhaddps  %xmm3, %xmm3, %xmm4
	       3     3.3    0.5    1.4	     <total>

     The timeline view is interesting because it shows instruction state changes
     during execution.	It also gives an idea of how the tool processes instruc-
     tions executed on the target, and how their  timing  information  might  be
     calculated.

     The  timeline  view is structured in two tables.  The first table shows in-
     structions changing state over time (measured in cycles); the second  table
     (named  Average  Wait times) reports useful timing statistics, which should
     help diagnose performance bottlenecks caused by long data dependencies  and
     sub-optimal usage of hardware resources.

     An  instruction  in  the  timeline view is identified by a pair of indices,
     where the first index identifies an iteration, and the second index is  the
     instruction  index  (i.e.,  where	it appears in the code sequence).  Since
     this example was generated using 3 iterations: -iterations=3, the iteration
     indices range from 0-2 inclusively.

     Excluding the first and last column, the remaining columns are  in  cycles.
     Cycles are numbered sequentially starting from 0.

     From the example output above, we know the following:

     * Instruction [1,0] was dispatched at cycle 1.

     * Instruction [1,0] started executing at cycle 2.

     * Instruction [1,0] reached the write back stage at cycle 4.

     * Instruction [1,0] was retired at cycle 10.

     Instruction [1,0] (i.e., vmulps from iteration #1) does not have to wait in
     the  scheduler's  queue  for  the operands to become available. By the time
     vmulps is dispatched, operands are already available, and pipeline JFPU1 is
     ready to serve another instruction.  So the instruction can be  immediately
     issued on the JFPU1 pipeline. That is demonstrated by the fact that the in-
     struction only spent 1cy in the scheduler's queue.

     There  is	a  gap	of  5 cycles between the write-back stage and the retire
     event.  That is because instructions must retire in program order, so [1,0]
     has to wait for [0,2] to be retired first (i.e., it has to wait until cycle
     10).

     In the example, all instructions are in a RAW (Read After Write) dependency
     chain.  Register %xmm2 written by vmulps is immediately used by  the  first
     vhaddps,  and  register  %xmm3  written by the first vhaddps is used by the
     second vhaddps.  Long data dependencies negatively impact the ILP (Instruc-
     tion Level Parallelism).

     In the dot-product example, there are anti-dependencies introduced  by  in-
     structions  from  different iterations.  However, those dependencies can be
     removed at register renaming stage (at  the  cost	of  allocating	register
     aliases, and therefore consuming physical registers).

     Table  Average Wait times helps diagnose performance issues that are caused
     by the presence of long latency instructions and potentially long data  de-
     pendencies which may limit the ILP. Last row, <total>, shows a global aver-
     age over all instructions measured. Note that llvm-mca, by default, assumes
     at least 1cy between the dispatch event and the issue event.

     When  the	performance  is limited by data dependencies and/or long latency
     instructions, the number of cycles spent while in the ready  state  is  ex-
     pected to be very small when compared with the total number of cycles spent
     in  the  scheduler's  queue.   The difference between the two counters is a
     good indicator of how large of an impact data dependencies had on the  exe-
     cution of the instructions.  When performance is mostly limited by the lack
     of  hardware  resources, the delta between the two counters is small.  How-
     ever, the number of cycles spent in the queue tends  to  be  larger  (i.e.,
     more  than  1-3cy),  especially when compared to other low latency instruc-
     tions.

   Bottleneck Analysis
     The -bottleneck-analysis command line option enables the analysis	of  per-
     formance bottlenecks.

     This  analysis is potentially expensive. It attempts to correlate increases
     in backend pressure (caused by pipeline resource pressure and  data  depen-
     dencies) to dynamic dispatch stalls.

     Below  is	an  example of -bottleneck-analysis output generated by llvm-mca
     for 500 iterations of the dot-product example on btver2.

	Cycles with backend pressure increase [ 48.07% ]
	Throughput Bottlenecks:
	  Resource Pressure	  [ 47.77% ]
	  - JFPA  [ 47.77% ]
	  - JFPU0  [ 47.77% ]
	  Data Dependencies:	  [ 0.30% ]
	  - Register Dependencies [ 0.30% ]
	  - Memory Dependencies   [ 0.00% ]

	Critical sequence based on the simulation:

		      Instruction			  Dependency Information
	 +----< 2.    vhaddps %xmm3, %xmm3, %xmm4
	 |
	 |    < loop carried >
	 |
	 |	0.    vmulps  %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm2
	 +----> 1.    vhaddps %xmm2, %xmm2, %xmm3	  ## RESOURCE interference:  JFPA [ probability: 74% ]
	 +----> 2.    vhaddps %xmm3, %xmm3, %xmm4	  ## REGISTER dependency:  %xmm3
	 |
	 |    < loop carried >
	 |
	 +----> 1.    vhaddps %xmm2, %xmm2, %xmm3	  ## RESOURCE interference:  JFPA [ probability: 74% ]

     According to the analysis, throughput is limited by resource  pressure  and
     not by data dependencies.	The analysis observed increases in backend pres-
     sure during 48.07% of the simulated run. Almost all those pressure increase
     events were caused by contention on processor resources JFPA/JFPU0.

     The  critical  sequence  is the most expensive sequence of instructions ac-
     cording to the simulation. It is annotated  to  provide  extra  information
     about critical register dependencies and resource interferences between in-
     structions.

     Instructions  from  the critical sequence are expected to significantly im-
     pact performance.	By  construction,  the	accuracy  of  this  analysis  is
     strongly  dependent on the simulation and (as always) by the quality of the
     processor model in llvm.

     Bottleneck analysis is currently  not  supported  for  processors	with  an
     in-order backend.

   Extra Statistics to Further Diagnose Performance Issues
     The -all-stats command line option enables extra statistics and performance
     counters  for  the  dispatch  logic, the reorder buffer, the retire control
     unit, and the register file.

     Below is an example of -all-stats output generated by  llvm-mca for 300 it-
     erations of the dot-product example discussed in the previous sections.

	Dynamic Dispatch Stall Cycles:
	RAT	- Register unavailable: 		     0
	RCU	- Retire tokens unavailable:		     0
	SCHEDQ	- Scheduler full:			     272  (44.6%)
	LQ	- Load queue full:			     0
	SQ	- Store queue full:			     0
	GROUP	- Static restrictions on the dispatch group: 0

	Dispatch Logic - number of cycles where we saw N micro opcodes dispatched:
	[# dispatched], [# cycles]
	 0,		 24  (3.9%)
	 1,		 272  (44.6%)
	 2,		 314  (51.5%)

	Schedulers - number of cycles where we saw N micro opcodes issued:
	[# issued], [# cycles]
	 0,	     7	(1.1%)
	 1,	     306  (50.2%)
	 2,	     297  (48.7%)

	Scheduler's queue usage:
	[1] Resource name.
	[2] Average number of used buffer entries.
	[3] Maximum number of used buffer entries.
	[4] Total number of buffer entries.

	 [1]		[2]	   [3]	      [4]
	JALU01		 0	    0	       20
	JFPU01		 17	    18	       18
	JLSAGU		 0	    0	       12

	Retire Control Unit - number of cycles where we saw N instructions retired:
	[# retired], [# cycles]
	 0,	      109  (17.9%)
	 1,	      102  (16.7%)
	 2,	      399  (65.4%)

	Total ROB Entries:		  64
	Max Used ROB Entries:		  35  ( 54.7% )
	Average Used ROB Entries per cy:  32  ( 50.0% )

	Register File statistics:
	Total number of mappings created:    900
	Max number of mappings used:	     35

	*  Register File #1 -- JFpuPRF:
	   Number of physical registers:     72
	   Total number of mappings created: 900
	   Max number of mappings used:      35

	*  Register File #2 -- JIntegerPRF:
	   Number of physical registers:     64
	   Total number of mappings created: 0
	   Max number of mappings used:      0

     If we look at the Dynamic Dispatch Stall Cycles table, we see  the  counter
     for  SCHEDQ reports 272 cycles.  This counter is incremented every time the
     dispatch logic is unable to dispatch a full group because	the  scheduler's
     queue is full.

     Looking at the Dispatch Logic table, we see that the pipeline was only able
     to  dispatch  two	micro opcodes 51.5% of the time.  The dispatch group was
     limited to one micro opcode 44.6% of the cycles, which corresponds  to  272
     cycles.   The dispatch statistics are displayed by either using the command
     option -all-stats or -dispatch-stats.

     The next table, Schedulers, presents a histogram displaying a count, repre-
     senting the number of micro opcodes issued on some  number  of  cycles.  In
     this  case,  of  the  610	simulated cycles, single opcodes were issued 306
     times (50.2%) and there were 7 cycles where no opcodes were issued.

     The Scheduler's queue usage table shows that the average and maximum number
     of buffer entries (i.e., scheduler queue entries)	used  at  runtime.   Re-
     source  JFPU01  reached its maximum (18 of 18 queue entries). Note that AMD
     Jaguar implements three schedulers:

     * JALU01 - A scheduler for ALU instructions.

     * JFPU01 - A scheduler floating point operations.

     * JLSAGU - A scheduler for address generation.

     The dot-product is a kernel of three floating point instructions (a  vector
     multiply  followed  by  two  horizontal  adds).  That explains why only the
     floating point scheduler appears to be used.

     A full scheduler queue is either caused by data dependency chains or  by  a
     sub-optimal  usage of hardware resources.	Sometimes, resource pressure can
     be mitigated by rewriting the kernel using different instructions that con-
     sume different scheduler resources.  Schedulers with a small queue are less
     resilient to bottlenecks caused by the presence of long data  dependencies.
     The  scheduler  statistics  are  displayed  by  using  the  command  option
     -all-stats or -scheduler-stats.

     The next table, Retire Control Unit,  presents  a	histogram  displaying  a
     count,  representing  the	number of instructions retired on some number of
     cycles.  In this case, of the 610 simulated cycles, two  instructions  were
     retired  during  the same cycle 399 times (65.4%) and there were 109 cycles
     where no instructions were retired.  The retire statistics are displayed by
     using the command option -all-stats or -retire-stats.

     The last table presented is Register File statistics.  Each physical regis-
     ter file (PRF) used by the pipeline is presented in  this	table.	 In  the
     case  of  AMD  Jaguar, there are two register files, one for floating-point
     registers (JFpuPRF) and one for integer registers (JIntegerPRF).  The table
     shows that of the 900 instructions processed, there were 900 mappings  cre-
     ated.   Since  this dot-product example utilized only floating point regis-
     ters, the JFPuPRF was responsible for creating the 900 mappings.	However,
     we see that the pipeline only used a maximum of 35 of 72 available register
     slots  at	any  given time. We can conclude that the floating point PRF was
     the only register file used for the example, and that it was never resource
     constrained.  The register file statistics are displayed by using the  com-
     mand option -all-stats or -register-file-stats.

     In this example, we can conclude that the IPC is mostly limited by data de-
     pendencies, and not by resource pressure.

   Instruction Flow
     This section describes the instruction flow through the default pipeline of
     llvm-mca, as well as the functional units involved in the process.

     The  default  pipeline  implements the following sequence of stages used to
     process instructions.

     * Dispatch (Instruction is dispatched to the schedulers).

     * Issue (Instruction is issued to the processor pipelines).

     * Write Back (Instruction is executed, and results are written back).

     * Retire (Instruction is retired; writes are architecturally committed).

     The in-order pipeline implements the following sequence of  stages:  *  In-
     OrderIssue  (Instruction  is  issued to the processor pipelines).	* Retire
     (Instruction is retired; writes are architecturally committed).

     llvm-mca assumes that instructions have all been decoded and placed into  a
     queue before the simulation start. Therefore, the instruction fetch and de-
     code  stages  are	not modeled. Performance bottlenecks in the frontend are
     not diagnosed. Also, llvm-mca does not model branch prediction.

   Instruction Dispatch
     During the dispatch stage, instructions are picked in program order from  a
     queue of already decoded instructions, and dispatched in groups to the sim-
     ulated hardware schedulers.

     The  size	of a dispatch group depends on the availability of the simulated
     hardware resources.  The processor dispatch width defaults to the value  of
     the IssueWidth in LLVM's scheduling model.

     An instruction can be dispatched if:

     * The  size  of  the  dispatch  group  is smaller than processor's dispatch
       width.

     * There are enough entries in the reorder buffer.

     * There are enough physical registers to do register renaming.

     * The schedulers are not full.

     Scheduling models can optionally specify which register files are available
     on the processor. llvm-mca uses that  information	to  initialize	register
     file  descriptors.   Users  can limit the number of physical registers that
     are globally available for register renaming by using  the  command  option
     -register-file-size.   A  value of zero for this option means unbounded. By
     knowing how many registers are available for renaming, the tool can predict
     dispatch stalls caused by the lack of physical registers.

     The number of reorder buffer entries consumed by an instruction depends  on
     the  number  of  micro-opcodes specified for that instruction by the target
     scheduling model.	The reorder  buffer  is  responsible  for  tracking  the
     progress of instructions that are "in-flight", and retiring them in program
     order.   The  number of entries in the reorder buffer defaults to the value
     specified by field MicroOpBufferSize in the target scheduling model.

     Instructions that are dispatched to the schedulers consume scheduler buffer
     entries. llvm-mca queries the scheduling model  to  determine  the  set  of
     buffered  resources  consumed  by	an  instruction.  Buffered resources are
     treated like scheduler resources.

   Instruction Issue
     Each processor scheduler implements a buffer of instructions.  An	instruc-
     tion  has	to  wait in the scheduler's buffer until input register operands
     become available.	Only at that point, does the instruction becomes  eligi-
     ble  for  execution and may be issued (potentially out-of-order) for execu-
     tion.  Instruction latencies are computed by llvm-mca with the help of  the
     scheduling model.

     llvm-mca's scheduler is designed to simulate multiple processor schedulers.
     The  scheduler  is  responsible for tracking data dependencies, and dynami-
     cally selecting which processor resources are consumed by instructions.  It
     delegates the management of processor resource units and resource groups to
     a resource manager.  The resource manager is responsible for selecting  re-
     source  units  that  are  consumed by instructions.  For example, if an in-
     struction consumes 1cy of a resource group, the  resource	manager  selects
     one of the available units from the group; by default, the resource manager
     uses  a  round-robin selector to guarantee that resource usage is uniformly
     distributed between all units of a group.

     llvm-mca's scheduler internally groups instructions into three sets:

     * WaitSet: a set of instructions whose operands are not ready.

     * ReadySet: a set of instructions ready to execute.

     * IssuedSet: a set of instructions executing.

     Depending on the operands availability, instructions that are dispatched to
     the scheduler are either placed into the WaitSet or into the ReadySet.

     Every cycle, the scheduler checks if instructions can  be	moved  from  the
     WaitSet  to  the ReadySet, and if instructions from the ReadySet can be is-
     sued to the underlying pipelines. The algorithm prioritizes older	instruc-
     tions over younger instructions.

   Write-Back and Retire Stage
     Issued  instructions  are moved from the ReadySet to the IssuedSet.  There,
     instructions wait until they reach the write-back stage.	At  that  point,
     they get removed from the queue and the retire control unit is notified.

     When  instructions are executed, the retire control unit flags the instruc-
     tion as "ready to retire."

     Instructions are retired in program order.  The register file  is	notified
     of  the retirement so that it can free the physical registers that were al-
     located for the instruction during the register renaming stage.

   Load/Store Unit and Memory Consistency Model
     To simulate an out-of-order execution of memory operations,  llvm-mca  uti-
     lizes a simulated load/store unit (LSUnit) to simulate the speculative exe-
     cution of loads and stores.

     Each  load (or store) consumes an entry in the load (or store) queue. Users
     can specify flags -lqueue and -squeue to limit the number of entries in the
     load and store queues respectively. The queues are unbounded by default.

     The LSUnit implements a relaxed consistency  model  for  memory  loads  and
     stores.  The rules are:

     1. A younger load is allowed to pass an older load only if there are no in-
	tervening stores or barriers between the two loads.

     2. A  younger load is allowed to pass an older store provided that the load
	does not alias with the store.

     3. A younger store is not allowed to pass an older store.

     4. A younger store is not allowed to pass an older load.

     By default, the LSUnit optimistically  assumes  that  loads  do  not  alias
     (-noalias=true) store operations.	Under this assumption, younger loads are
     always  allowed to pass older stores.  Essentially, the LSUnit does not at-
     tempt to run any alias analysis to predict when loads  and  stores  do  not
     alias with each other.

     Note  that,  in the case of write-combining memory, rule 3 could be relaxed
     to allow reordering of non-aliasing store operations.  That being said,  at
     the  moment, there is no way to further relax the memory model (-noalias is
     the only option).	Essentially, there is no option to specify  a  different
     memory  type  (e.g.,  write-back, write-combining, write-through; etc.) and
     consequently to weaken, or strengthen, the memory model.

     Other limitations are:

     * The LSUnit does not know when store-to-load forwarding may occur.

     * The LSUnit does not know anything about cache hierarchy and memory types.

     * The LSUnit does not know how to identify serializing operations and  mem-
       ory fences.

     The  LSUnit  does	not attempt to predict if a load or store hits or misses
     the L1 cache.  It only knows if an instruction "MayLoad" and/or "MayStore."
     For loads, the scheduling model provides an  "optimistic"	load-to-use  la-
     tency  (which  usually  matches the load-to-use latency for when there is a
     hit in the L1D).

     llvm-mca does not (on its own) know about serializing  operations	or  mem-
     ory-barrier  like	instructions.	The LSUnit used to conservatively use an
     instruction's "MayLoad", "MayStore", and unmodeled side  effects  flags  to
     determine	whether  an  instruction  should be treated as a memory-barrier.
     This was inaccurate in general and was changed so that now each instruction
     has an IsAStoreBarrier and IsALoadBarrier flag. These flags  are  mca  spe-
     cific and default to false for every instruction. If any instruction should
     have  either  of these flags set, it should be done within the target's In-
     strPostProcess  class.   For  an  example,  look	at   the   X86InstrPost-
     Process::postProcessInstruction	   method      within	   llvm/lib/Tar-
     get/X86/MCA/X86CustomBehaviour.cpp.

     A load/store barrier  consumes  one  entry  of  the  load/store  queue.   A
     load/store  barrier enforces ordering of loads/stores.  A younger load can-
     not pass a load barrier.  Also, a younger store cannot pass  a  store  bar-
     rier.   A	younger load has to wait for the memory/load barrier to execute.
     A load/store barrier is "executed" when it becomes the oldest entry in  the
     load/store  queue(s).  That  also	means, by construction, all of the older
     loads/stores have been executed.

     In conclusion, the full set of load/store consistency rules are:

     1. A store may not pass a previous store.

     2. A store may not pass a previous load (regardless of -noalias).

     3. A store has to wait until an older store barrier is fully executed.

     4. A load may pass a previous load.

     5. A load may not pass a previous store unless -noalias is set.

     6. A load has to wait until an older load barrier is fully executed.

   In-order Issue and Execute
     In-order processors are modelled as a single  InOrderIssueStage  stage.  It
     bypasses  Dispatch,  Scheduler and Load/Store unit. Instructions are issued
     as soon as their operand registers are available and resource  requirements
     are  met. Multiple instructions can be issued in one cycle according to the
     value of the IssueWidth parameter in LLVM's scheduling model.

     Once issued, an instruction is moved to IssuedInst set until it is ready to
     retire. llvm-mca ensures that writes are committed  in-order.  However,  an
     instruction  is allowed to commit writes and retire out-of-order if Retire-
     OOO property is true for at least one of its writes.

   Custom Behaviour
     Due to certain instructions not  being  expressed	perfectly  within  their
     scheduling  model,  llvm-mca  isn't always able to simulate them perfectly.
     Modifying the scheduling model isn't always a viable option  though  (maybe
     because  the  instruction is modeled incorrectly on purpose or the instruc-
     tion's behaviour is quite complex). The CustomBehaviour class can	be  used
     in these cases to enforce proper instruction modeling (often by customizing
     data dependencies and detecting hazards that llvm-mca has no way of knowing
     about).

     llvm-mca  comes  with one generic and multiple target specific CustomBehav-
     iour classes. The generic class will be used if  the  -disable-cb	flag  is
     used  or  if a target specific CustomBehaviour class doesn't exist for that
     target. (The generic class does nothing.)	Currently,  the  CustomBehaviour
     class  is	only a part of the in-order pipeline, but there are plans to add
     it to the out-of-order pipeline in the future.

     CustomBehaviour's main method is checkCustomHazard() which uses the current
     instruction and a list of	all  instructions  still  executing  within  the
     pipeline  to determine if the current instruction should be dispatched.  As
     output, the method returns an integer representing  the  number  of  cycles
     that  the	current instruction must stall for (this can be an underestimate
     if you don't know the exact number and a value of 0 represents no stall).

     If you'd like to add a CustomBehaviour class for a target that doesn't  al-
     ready  have  one,	refer to an existing implementation to see how to set it
     up. The classes are implemented within the target specific backend (for ex-
     ample /llvm/lib/Target/AMDGPU/MCA/) so that they can  access  backend  sym-
     bols.

   Custom Views
     llvm-mca  comes  with  several  Views such as the Timeline View and Summary
     View. These Views are generic and can work with most (if not all)	targets.
     If you wish to add a new View to llvm-mca and it does not require any back-
     end functionality that is not already exposed through MC layer classes (MC-
     SubtargetInfo,    MCInstrInfo,    etc.),	 please    add	  it	to   the
     /tools/llvm-mca/View/ directory. However, if your new View is  target  spe-
     cific  AND requires unexposed backend symbols or functionality, you can de-
     fine it in the /lib/Target/<TargetName>/MCA/ directory.

     To enable this target specific View, you will have  to  use  this	target's
     CustomBehaviour  class to override the CustomBehaviour::getViews() methods.
     There are 3 variations of these methods based on where you want  your  View
     to  appear in the output: getStartViews(), getPostInstrInfoViews(), and ge-
     tEndViews(). These methods returns a vector of Views so you  will	want  to
     return  a vector containing all of the target specific Views for the target
     in question.

     Because these target specific (and backend  dependent)  Views  require  the
     CustomBehaviour::getViews()  variants,  these  Views will not be enabled if
     the -disable-cb flag is used.

     Enabling these custom Views does not affect the non-custom (generic) Views.
     Continue to use the usual command line arguments to enable / disable  those
     Views.

AUTHOR
     Maintained by the LLVM Team (https://llvm.org/).

COPYRIGHT
     2003-2026, LLVM Project

14				   2026-08-27			     LLVM-MCA(1)

home | help