For inner one of nested loops, it is more likely to be a hot loop,
and the runtime check can be promoted out from patch 0001, so the
overhead is less, we can try a doubled threshold to unroll more loops.
llvm-svn: 231632
base which it adds a single analysis pass to, to instead return the type
erased TargetTransformInfo object constructed for that TargetMachine.
This removes all of the pass variants for TTI. There is now a single TTI
*pass* in the Analysis layer. All of the Analysis <-> Target
communication is through the TTI's type erased interface itself. While
the diff is large here, it is nothing more that code motion to make
types available in a header file for use in a different source file
within each target.
I've tried to keep all the doxygen comments and file boilerplate in line
with this move, but let me know if I missed anything.
With this in place, the next step to making TTI work with the new pass
manager is to introduce a really simple new-style analysis that produces
a TTI object via a callback into this routine on the target machine.
Once we have that, we'll have the building blocks necessary to accept
a function argument as well.
llvm-svn: 227685
type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an
extremely complex analysis group.
The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased
implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build
one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR.
I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes,
including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most
specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These
aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning
some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form.
There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular
design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is
complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque,
confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it.
Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places
because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of
this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation.
The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and
analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here.
The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for
the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased
per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even
cache it.
Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the
interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future
work below.
The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going
to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity
in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively
with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed
them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't
seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and
virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as
discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere,
a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if
this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;]
Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the
huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was
the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts
of this. The follow up work should include at least:
1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return
a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics
and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface
of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return
a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline.
2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function.
This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is
sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager.
3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the
target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part
of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2.
4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is
easier to understand and less verbose to type erase.
5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is
easier to understand and less verbose to forward.
6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is
just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing
the TTI in each target.
Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on
this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting
it sorted out very quickly.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293
llvm-svn: 227669
This patch improves the target-specific cost model to better handle signed
division by a power of two. The immediate result is that this enables the SLP
vectorizer to do a better job.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D5469
PR20714
llvm-svn: 218607
The increase of the interleave factor to 4 has side-effects
like performance losses eg. due to reminder loops being executed
more frequently and may increase code size. It requires more
analysis and careful heuristic tuning. Expect double digit gains
in small benchmarks like lowercase.c and losses in puzzle.c.
llvm-svn: 217540
"Unroll" is not the appropriate name for this variable. Clang already uses
the term "interleave" in pragmas and metadata for this.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5066
llvm-svn: 217528
This patch adds support to recognize division by uniform power of 2 and modifies the cost table to vectorize division by uniform power of 2 whenever possible.
Updates Cost model for Loop and SLP Vectorizer.The cost table is currently only updated for X86 backend.
Thanks to Hal, Andrea, Sanjay for the review. (http://reviews.llvm.org/D4971)
llvm-svn: 216371
Some types, such as 128-bit vector types on AArch64, don't have any callee-saved registers. So if a value needs to stay live over a callsite, it must be spilled and refilled. This cost is now taken into account.
llvm-svn: 214859
There's probably no acatual change in behaviour here, just updating
the LowerFP_TO_INT function to be more similar to the reverse
implementation and updating costs to current CodeGen.
llvm-svn: 210985
This commit starts with a "git mv ARM64 AArch64" and continues out
from there, renaming the C++ classes, intrinsics, and other
target-local objects for consistency.
"ARM64" test directories are also moved, and tests that began their
life in ARM64 use an arm64 triple, those from AArch64 use an aarch64
triple. Both should be equivalent though.
This finishes the AArch64 merge, and everyone should feel free to
continue committing as normal now.
llvm-svn: 209577
I'm doing this in two phases for a better "git blame" record. This
commit removes the previous AArch64 backend and redirects all
functionality to ARM64. It also deduplicates test-lines and removes
orphaned AArch64 tests.
The next step will be "git mv ARM64 AArch64" and rewire most of the
tests.
Hopefully LLVM is still functional, though it would be even better if
no-one ever had to care because the rename happens straight
afterwards.
llvm-svn: 209576
the stack of the analysis group because they are all immutable passes.
This is made clear by Craig's recent work to use override
systematically -- we weren't overriding anything for 'finalizePass'
because there is no such thing.
This is kind of a lame restriction on the API -- we can no longer push
and pop things, we just set up the stack and run. However, I'm not
invested in building some better solution on top of the existing
(terrifying) immutable pass and legacy pass manager.
llvm-svn: 203437
