This reverts commit a8fe12065ec8137e55a6a8b35dd5355477c2ac16.
It causes a crash when building gzip. Will post the detailed reduced test case to D81267.
As reported in https://reviews.llvm.org/D83101#2133062
the new visitInsertElementInst()/visitExtractElementInst() functionality
is causing miscompiles (previously-crashing test added)
It is due to the fact how the infra of Scalarizer is dealing with DCE,
it was not updated or was it ready for such scalar value forwarding.
It always assumed that the moment we "scalarized" something,
it can go away, and did so with prejudice.
But that is no longer safe/okay to do.
Instead, let's prevent it from ever shooting itself into foot,
and let's just accumulate the instructions-to-be-deleted
in a vector, and collectively cleanup (those that are *actually* dead)
them all at the end.
All existing tests are not reporting any new garbage leftovers,
but maybe it's test coverage issue.
This adjusts the MVE fp16 cost model, similar to how we already do for
integer casts. It uses the base cost of 1 per cvt for most fp extend /
truncates, but adjusts it for loads and stores where we know that a
extending load has been used to get the load into the correct lane, and
only an MVE VCVTB is then needed.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81813
Summary:
I'm interested in taking the original C++ input,
for which we currently are stuck with an alloca
and producing roughly the lower IR,
with neither an alloca nor a vector ops:
https://godbolt.org/z/cRRWaJ
For that, as intermediate step, i'd to somehow perform scalarization.
As per @arsenmn suggestion, i'm trying to see if scalarizer can help me
avoid writing a bicycle.
I'm not sure if it's really intentional that variable insert is not handled currently.
If it really is, and is supposed to stay that way (?), i guess i could guard it..
See [[ https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46524 | PR46524 ]].
Reviewers: bjope, cameron.mcinally, arsenm, jdoerfert
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Subscribers: arphaman, uabelho, wdng, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82961
Summary:
It appears to be better IR-wise to aggressively scalarize it,
rather than relying on gathering it, and leaving it as-is.
Reviewers: jdoerfert, bjope, arsenm, cameron.mcinally
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Subscribers: arphaman, wdng, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83101
Summary: As it can be clearly seen from the diff, this results in nicer IR.
Reviewers: jdoerfert, arsenm, bjope, cameron.mcinally
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Subscribers: arphaman, wdng, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83102
This alters getMemoryOpCost to use the Base TargetTransformInfo version
that includes some additional checks for whether extending loads are
legal. This will generally have the effect of making <2 x ..> and some
<4 x ..> loads/stores more expensive, which in turn should help favour
larger vector factors.
Notably it alters the cost of a <4 x half>, which with the current
codegen will be expensive if it is not extended.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82456
This is the first and most basic ICV Tracking implementation. For this
first version, we only support deduplication within the same BB.
Reviewers: jdoerfert, JonChesterfield, hamax97, jhuber6, uenoku,
baziotis
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81788
Assume bundle can have more than one entry with the same name,
but at least AlignmentFromAssumptionsPass::extractAlignmentInfo() uses
getOperandBundle("align"), which internally assumes that it isn't the
case, and happily crashes otherwise.
Minimal reduced reproducer: run `opt -alignment-from-assumptions` on
target datalayout = "e-m:e-p270:32:32-p271:32:32-p272:64:64-i64:64-f80:128-n8:16:32:64-S128"
target triple = "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu"
%0 = type { i64, %1*, i8*, i64, %2, i32, %3*, i8* }
%1 = type opaque
%2 = type { i8, i8, i16 }
%3 = type { i32, i32, i32, i32 }
; Function Attrs: nounwind
define i32 @f(%0* noalias nocapture readonly %arg, %0* noalias %arg1) local_unnamed_addr #0 {
bb:
call void @llvm.assume(i1 true) [ "align"(%0* %arg, i64 8), "align"(%0* %arg1, i64 8) ]
ret i32 0
}
; Function Attrs: nounwind willreturn
declare void @llvm.assume(i1) #1
attributes #0 = { nounwind "reciprocal-estimates"="none" }
attributes #1 = { nounwind willreturn }
This is what we'd have with -mllvm -enable-knowledge-retention
This reverts commit c95ffadb2474a4d8c4f598d94d35a9f31d9606cb.
clang w/ old-pm currently would simply crash
when -mllvm -enable-knowledge-retention=true is specified.
Clearly, these two passes had no Old-PM test coverage,
which would have shown the problem - not requiring AssumptionCacheTracker,
but then trying to always get it.
Also, why try to get domtree only if it's cached,
but at the same time marking it as required?
As noted in PR46561:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46561
...it takes something beyond a minimal IR example to trigger
this bug because it relies on matching non-canonical IR.
There are no tests that show the need for matching this
pattern, so I'm just deleting it to fix the miscompile.
Summary:
The actual transform i was going after was:
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/Tp9H
```
Name: zz
Pre: isPowerOf2(C0) && isPowerOf2(C1) && C1 == C0
%t0 = and i8 %x, C0
%r = icmp eq i8 %t0, C1
=>
%t = icmp eq i8 %t0, 0
%r = xor i1 %t, -1
Name: zz
Pre: isPowerOf2(C0)
%t0 = and i8 %x, C0
%r = icmp ne i8 %t0, 0
=>
%t = icmp eq i8 %t0, 0
%r = xor i1 %t, -1
```
but as it can be seen from the current tests, we already canonicalize most of it,
and we are only missing handling multi-use non-canonical icmp predicates.
If we have both `!=0` and `==0`, even though we can CSE them,
we end up being stuck with them. We should canonicalize to the `==0`.
I believe this is one of the cleanup steps i'll need after `-scalarizer`
if i end up proceeding with my WIP alloca promotion helper pass.
Reviewers: spatel, jdoerfert, nikic
Reviewed By: nikic
Subscribers: zzheng, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83139
The use of 'tmp' can trigger warnings from the update_test_checks.py
script. That's evidence of a flaw in the script's logic, but we
can always do better than naming variables 'tmp' in LLVM too.
The phi test file should be updated with auto-generated regex CHECK
lines, so it isn't affected by cosmetic diffs, but I don't have
time to do that right now.
This is picking up a loose thread from D69006: We can simplify
(zext x) ule (sext x) and (zext x) sge (sext x) to true, with
various permutations. Oddly, SCEV knows about this identity,
but nothing on the IR level does.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83081
This emits a remark when LoopDeletion deletes a dead loop, using the
source location of the loop's header. There are currently two reasons
for removing the loop: invariant loop or loop that never executes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83113
Narrowing an input expression of a truncate to a type larger than the
result of the truncate won't allow removing the truncate, but it may
enable further optimizations, e.g. allowing for larger vectorization
factors.
For now this is intentionally limited to integer types only, to avoid
producing new vector ops that might not be suitable for the target.
If we know that the only user is a trunc, we can also be allow more
cases, e.g. also shortening expressions with some additional shifts.
I would appreciate feedback on the best place to do such a narrowing.
This fixes PR43580.
Reviewers: spatel, RKSimon, lebedev.ri, xbolva00
Reviewed By: lebedev.ri
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82973
The base case only works because we are relying on a
poison-unsafe select transform; if that is fixed, we
would regress on patterns like this.
The extra use tests show that the select transform can't
be applied consistently. So it may be a regression to have
an extra instruction on 1 test, but that result was not
created safely and does not happen reliably.
If we assume(x > y), then we should be able to fold the basic
implications of that, like x >= y. This already happens if either
one of the operands is constant (LVI) or if the conditions are
exactly the same (GVN), but not if we have an implication with
non-constant operands. Support this by querying AssumptionCache.
Fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40149.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82717
The entries in VectorizableTree are not necessarily ordered by their
position in basic blocks. Collect them and order them by dominance so
later instructions are guaranteed to be visited first. For instructions
in different basic blocks, we only scan to the beginning of the block,
so their order does not matter, as long as all instructions in a basic
block are grouped together. Using dominance ensures a deterministic order.
The modified test case contains an example where we compute a wrong
spill cost (2) without this patch, even though there is no call between
any instruction in the bundle.
This seems to have limited practical impact, .e.g on X86 with a recent
Intel Xeon CPU with -O3 -march=native -flto on MultiSource,SPEC2000,SPEC2006
there are no binary changes.
Reviewers: craig.topper, RKSimon, xbolva00, ABataev, spatel
Reviewed By: ABataev
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82444
Currently canEvaluateTruncated can only attempt to truncate shifts if they are scalar/uniform constant amounts that are in range.
This patch replaces the constant extraction code with KnownBits handling, using the KnownBits::getMaxValue to check that the amounts are inrange.
This enables support for nonuniform constant cases, and also variable shift amounts that have been masked somehow. Annoyingly, this still won't work for vectors with (demanded) undefs as KnownBits returns nothing in those cases, but its a definite improvement on what we currently have.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83127
The legacy pass manager implicitly adds BasicAA, but the new PM does
not. This causes pr33196.ll to fail under NPM.
There are almost certainly lots of other failures like this, wanted to
get some input on if adding -basic-aa to tests makes sense at scale.
Reviewed By: fhahn
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82915
The legacy pass was called "loop-reduce".
This lowers the number of check-llvm failures under NPM by 83.
Reviewed By: ychen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82925
