# Zftrans - transcendental operations See: * * * Discussion: * [[rv_major_opcode_1010011]] for opcode listing. * [[zfpacc_proposal]] for accuracy settings proposal Extension subsets: * **Zftrans**: standard transcendentals (best suited to 3D) * **ZftransExt**: extra functions (useful, not generally needed for 3D, can be synthesised using Ztrans) * **Ztrigpi**: trig. xxx-pi sinpi cospi tanpi * **Ztrignpi**: trig non-xxx-pi sin cos tan * **Zarctrigpi**: arc-trig. a-xxx-pi: atan2pi asinpi acospi * **Zarctrignpi**: arc-trig. non-a-xxx-pi: atan2, asin, acos * **Zfhyp**: hyperbolic/inverse-hyperbolic. sinh, cosh, tanh, asinh, acosh, atanh (can be synthesised - see below) * **ZftransAdv**: much more complex to implement in hardware * **Zfrsqrt**: Reciprocal square-root. Minimum recommended requirements for 3D: Zftrans, Ztrigpi, Zarctrigpi, Zarctrignpi [[!toc levels=2]] # TODO: * Decision on accuracy, moved to [[zfpacc_proposal]] * Errors **MUST** be repeatable. * How about four Platform Specifications? 3DUNIX, UNIX, 3DEmbedded and Embedded? Accuracy requirements for dual (triple) purpose implementations must meet the higher standard. * Reciprocal Square-root is in its own separate extension (Zfrsqrt) as it is desirable on its own by other implementors. This to be evaluated. # Requirements This proposal is designed to meet a wide range of extremely diverse needs, allowing implementors from all of them to benefit from the tools and hardware cost reductions associated with common standards adoption. **There are *four* different, disparate platform's needs (two new)**: * 3D Embedded Platform * Embedded Platform * 3D UNIX Platform * UNIX Platform 3D Embedded will require significantly less accuracy and will need to make power budget and die area compromises that other platforms (including Embedded) will not need to make. 3D UNIX Platform has to be performance-price-competitive: subtly-reduced accuracy in FP32 is acceptable where, conversely, in the UNIX Platform, IEEE754 compliance is a hard requirement that would compromise power and efficiency on a 3D UNIX Platform. **The use-cases are**: * 3D GPUs * Numerical Computation * (Potentially) A.I. / Machine-learning (1) (1) although approximations suffice in this field, making it more likely to use a custom extension. High-end ML would inherently definitely be excluded. **The power and die-area requirements vary from**: * Ultra-low-power (smartwatches where GPU power budgets are in milliwatts) * Mobile-Embedded (good performance with high efficiency for battery life) * Desktop Computing * Server / HPC (2) (2) Supercomputing is left out of the requirements as it is traditionally covered by Supercomputer Vectorisation Standards (such as RVV). **The software requirements are**: * Full public integration into GNU math libraries (libm) * Full public integration into well-known Numerical Computation systems (numpy) * Full public integration into upstream GNU and LLVM Compiler toolchains * Full public integration into Khronos OpenCL SPIR-V compatible Compilers seeking public Certification and Endorsement from the Khronos Group under their Trademarked Certification Programme. **The "contra"-requirements are**: * The requirements are **not** for the purposes of developing a full custom proprietary GPU with proprietary firmware. * A full custom proprietary GPU ASIC Manufacturer *may* benefit from this proposal however the fact that they typically develop proprietary software that is not shared with the rest of the community likely to use this proposal means that they have completely different needs. This proposal is for *sharing* of effort in reducing development costs, and as such needs to be entirely public, transparent, and fully integrated into public upstream libre-licensed libraries and toolchains. *Overall this proposal is categorically and wholly unsuited to relegation of "custom" status*. # Proposed Opcodes vs Khronos OpenCL Opcodes This list shows the (direct) equivalence between proposed opcodes and their Khronos OpenCL equivalents. See Special FP16 opcodes are *not* being proposed, except by indirect / inherent use of the "fmt" field that is already present in the RISC-V Specification. "Native" opcodes are *not* being proposed: implementors will be expected to use the (equivalent) proposed opcode covering the same function. "Fast" opcodes are *not* being proposed, because the Khronos Specification fast\_length, fast\_normalise and fast\_distance OpenCL opcodes require vectors (or can be done as scalar operations using other RISC-V instructions). The OpenCL FP32 opcodes are **direct** equivalents to the proposed opcodes. Deviation from conformance with the Khronos Specification - including the Khronos Specification accuracy requirements - is not an option. [[!table data=""" Proposed opcode | OpenCL FP32 | OpenCL FP16 | OpenCL native | OpenCL fast | FSIN | sin | half\_sin | native\_sin | NONE | FCOS | cos | half\_cos | native\_cos | NONE | FTAN | tan | half\_tan | native\_tan | NONE | NONE (1) | sincos | NONE | NONE | NONE | FASIN | asin | NONE | NONE | NONE | FACOS | acos | NONE | NONE | NONE | FATAN | atan | NONE | NONE | NONE | FSINPI | sinpi | NONE | NONE | NONE | FCOSPI | cospi | NONE | NONE | NONE | FTANPI | tanpi | NONE | NONE | NONE | FASINPI | asinpi | NONE | NONE | NONE | FACOSPI | acospi | NONE | NONE | NONE | FATANPI | atanpi | NONE | NONE | NONE | FSINH | sinh | NONE | NONE | NONE | FCOSH | cosh | NONE | NONE | NONE | FTANH | tanh | NONE | NONE | NONE | FASINH | asinh | NONE | NONE | NONE | FACOSH | acosh | NONE | NONE | NONE | FATANH | atanh | NONE | NONE | NONE | FRSQRT | rsqrt | half\_rsqrt | native\_rsqrt | NONE | FCBRT | cbrt | NONE | NONE | NONE | FEXP2 | exp2 | half\_exp2 | native\_exp2 | NONE | FLOG2 | log2 | half\_log2 | native\_log2 | NONE | FEXPM1 | expm1 | NONE | NONE | NONE | FLOG1P | log1p | NONE | NONE | NONE | FEXP | exp | half\_exp | native\_exp | NONE | FLOG | log | half\_log | native\_log | NONE | FEXP10 | exp10 | half\_exp10 | native\_exp10 | NONE | FLOG10 | log10 | half\_log10 | native\_log10 | NONE | FATAN2 | atan2 | NONE | NONE | NONE | FATAN2PI | atan2pi | NONE | NONE | NONE | FPOW | pow | NONE | NONE | NONE | FROOT | rootn | NONE | NONE | NONE | FHYPOT | hypot | NONE | NONE | NONE | FRECIP | NONE | half\_recip | native\_recip | NONE | """]] Note (1) FSINCOS is macro-op fused (see below). # List of 2-arg opcodes [[!table data=""" opcode | Description | pseudo-code | Extension | FATAN2 | atan2 arc tangent | rd = atan2(rs2, rs1) | Zarctrignpi | FATAN2PI | atan2 arc tangent / pi | rd = atan2(rs2, rs1) / pi | Zarctrigpi | FPOW | x power of y | rd = pow(rs1, rs2) | ZftransAdv | FROOT | x power 1/y | rd = pow(rs1, 1/rs2) | ZftransAdv | FHYPOT | hypotenuse | rd = sqrt(rs1^2 + rs2^2) | Zftrans | """]] # List of 1-arg transcendental opcodes [[!table data=""" opcode | Description | pseudo-code | Extension | FRSQRT | Reciprocal Square-root | rd = sqrt(rs1) | Zfrsqrt | FCBRT | Cube Root | rd = pow(rs1, 3) | Zftrans | FRECIP | Reciprocal | rd = 1.0 / rs1 | Zftrans | FEXP2 | power-of-2 | rd = pow(2, rs1) | Zftrans | FLOG2 | log2 | rd = log2(rs1) | Zftrans | FEXPM1 | exponential minus 1 | rd = pow(e, rs1) - 1.0 | Zftrans | FLOG1P | log plus 1 | rd = log(e, 1 + rs1) | Zftrans | FEXP | exponential | rd = pow(e, rs1) | ZftransExt | FLOG | natural log (base e) | rd = log(e, rs1) | ZftransExt | FEXP10 | power-of-10 | rd = pow(10, rs1) | ZftransExt | FLOG10 | log base 10 | rd = log10(rs1) | ZftransExt | """]] # List of 1-arg trigonometric opcodes [[!table data=""" opcode | Description | pseudo-code | Extension | FSIN | sin (radians) | rd = sin(rs1) | Ztrignpi | FCOS | cos (radians) | rd = cos(rs1) | Ztrignpi | FTAN | tan (radians) | rd = tan(rs1) | Ztrignpi | FASIN | arcsin (radians) | rd = asin(rs1) | Zarctrignpi | FACOS | arccos (radians) | rd = acos(rs1) | Zarctrignpi | FATAN | arctan (radians) | rd = atan(rs1) | Zarctrignpi | FSINPI | sin times pi | rd = sin(pi * rs1) | Ztrigpi | FCOSPI | cos times pi | rd = cos(pi * rs1) | Ztrigpi | FTANPI | tan times pi | rd = tan(pi * rs1) | Ztrigpi | FASINPI | arcsin / pi | rd = asin(rs1) / pi | Zarctrigpi | FACOSPI | arccos / pi | rd = acos(rs1) / pi | Zarctrigpi | FATANPI | arctan / pi | rd = atan(rs1) / pi | Zarctrigpi | FSINH | hyperbolic sin (radians) | rd = sinh(rs1) | Zfhyp | FCOSH | hyperbolic cos (radians) | rd = cosh(rs1) | Zfhyp | FTANH | hyperbolic tan (radians) | rd = tanh(rs1) | Zfhyp | FASINH | inverse hyperbolic sin | rd = asinh(rs1) | Zfhyp | FACOSH | inverse hyperbolic cos | rd = acosh(rs1) | Zfhyp | FATANH | inverse hyperbolic tan | rd = atanh(rs1) | Zfhyp | """]] # Synthesis, Pseudo-code ops and macro-ops The pseudo-ops are best left up to the compiler rather than being actual pseudo-ops, by allocating one scalar FP register for use as a constant (loop invariant) set to "1.0" at the beginning of a function or other suitable code block. * FSINCOS - fused macro-op between FSIN and FCOS (issued in that order). * FSINCOSPI - fused macro-op between FSINPI and FCOSPI (issued in that order). FATANPI example pseudo-code: lui t0, 0x3F800 // upper bits of f32 1.0 fmv.x.s ft0, t0 fatan2pi.s rd, rs1, ft0 Hyperbolic function example (obviates need for Zfhyp except for high-performance or correctly-rounding): ASINH( x ) = ln( x + SQRT(x**2+1)) # Reciprocal Used to be an alias. Some imolementors may wish to implement divide as y times recip(x) # To evaluate: should LOG be replaced with LOG1P (and EXP with EXPM1)? RISC principle says "exclude LOG because it's covered by LOGP1 plus an ADD". Research needed to ensure that implementors are not compromised by such a decision > > correctly-rounded LOG will return different results than LOGP1 and ADD. > > Likewise for EXP and EXPM1 > ok, they stay in as real opcodes, then. # ATAN / ATAN2 commentary Discussion starts here: from Mitch Alsup: would like to point out that the general implementations of ATAN2 do a bunch of special case checks and then simply call ATAN. double ATAN2( double y, double x ) { // IEEE 754-2008 quality ATAN2 // deal with NANs if( ISNAN( x ) ) return x; if( ISNAN( y ) ) return y; // deal with infinities if( x == +∞ && |y|== +∞ ) return copysign( π/4, y ); if( x == +∞ ) return copysign( 0.0, y ); if( x == -∞ && |y|== +∞ ) return copysign( 3π/4, y ); if( x == -∞ ) return copysign( π, y ); if( |y|== +∞ ) return copysign( π/2, y ); // deal with signed zeros if( x == 0.0 && y != 0.0 ) return copysign( π/2, y ); if( x >=+0.0 && y == 0.0 ) return copysign( 0.0, y ); if( x <=-0.0 && y == 0.0 ) return copysign( π, y ); // calculate ATAN2 textbook style if( x > 0.0 ) return ATAN( |y / x| ); if( x < 0.0 ) return π - ATAN( |y / x| ); } Yet the proposed encoding makes ATAN2 the primitive and has ATAN invent a constant and then call/use ATAN2. When one considers an implementation of ATAN, one must consider several ranges of evaluation:: x [ -∞, -1.0]:: ATAN( x ) = -π/2 + ATAN( 1/x ); x (-1.0, +1.0]:: ATAN( x ) = + ATAN( x ); x [ 1.0, +∞]:: ATAN( x ) = +π/2 - ATAN( 1/x ); I should point out that the add/sub of π/2 can not lose significance since the result of ATAN(1/x) is bounded 0..π/2 The bottom line is that I think you are choosing to make too many of these into OpCodes, making the hardware function/calculation unit (and sequencer) more complicated that necessary. -------------------------------------------------------- I might suggest that if there were a way for a calculation to be performed and the result of that calculation chained to a subsequent calculation such that the precision of the result-becomes-operand is wider than what will fit in a register, then you can dramatically reduce the count of instructions in this category while retaining acceptable accuracy: z = x / y can be calculated as:: z = x * (1/y) Where 1/y has about 26-to-32 bits of fraction. No, it's not IEEE 754-2008 accurate, but GPUs want speed and 1/y is fully pipelined (F32) while x/y cannot be (at reasonable area). It is also not "that inaccurate" displaying 0.625-to-0.52 ULP. Given that one has the ability to carry (and process) more fraction bits, one can then do high precision multiplies of π or other transcendental radixes. And GPUs have been doing this almost since the dawn of 3D. // calculate ATAN2 high performance style // Note: at this point x != y // if( x > 0.0 ) { if( y < 0.0 && |y| < |x| ) return - π/2 - ATAN( x / y ); if( y < 0.0 && |y| > |x| ) return + ATAN( y / x ); if( y > 0.0 && |y| < |x| ) return + ATAN( y / x ); if( y > 0.0 && |y| > |x| ) return + π/2 - ATAN( x / y ); } if( x < 0.0 ) { if( y < 0.0 && |y| < |x| ) return + π/2 + ATAN( x / y ); if( y < 0.0 && |y| > |x| ) return + π - ATAN( y / x ); if( y > 0.0 && |y| < |x| ) return + π - ATAN( y / x ); if( y > 0.0 && |y| > |x| ) return +3π/2 + ATAN( x / y ); } This way the adds and subtracts from the constant are not in a precision precarious position.