Allow arbitrary strides, and make sure we return the correct result when
the backedge-taken count is zero.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106197
The current implementation of computeBECount doesn't account for the
possibility that adding "Stride - 1" to Delta might overflow. For almost
all loops, it doesn't, but it's not actually proven anywhere.
To deal with this, use a variety of tricks to try to prove that the
addition doesn't overflow. If the proof is impossible, use an alternate
sequence which never overflows.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105216
D104806 broke some uses of getMinusSCEV() in DependenceAnalysis:
subtraction with different pointer bases returns a SCEVCouldNotCompute.
Make sure we avoid cases involving such subtractions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106099
This is split from D105216, it handles only a subset of the cases in that patch.
Specifically, the issue being fixed is that the code incorrectly assumed that (Start-Stide) < End implied that the backedge was taken at least once. This is not true when e.g. Start = 4, Stride = 2, and End = 3. Note that we often do produce the right backedge taken count despite the flawed reasoning.
The fix chosen here is to use an alternate form of uceil (ceiling of unsigned divide) lowering which is safe when max(RHS,Start) > Start - Stride. (Note that signedness of both max expression and comparison depend on the signedness of the comparison being analyzed, and that overflow in the Start - Stride expression is allowed.) Note that this is weaker than proving the backedge is taken because it allows start - stride < end < start. Some cases which can't be proven safe are sent down the generic path, and we do end up generating less optimal expressions in a few cases.
Credit for coming up with the approach goes entirely to Eli. I just split it off, tweaked the comments a bit, and did some additional testing.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105942
This is conceptually part of e75a2dfe. This file contains both tests whose results don't change (with the right attributes added), and tests which fundementally regress with the current proposal. Doing the update took some care, thus the seperate change.
Here's the e75a2dfe context repeated:
There's a potential change in dereferenceability attribute semantics in the nearish future. See llvm-dev thread "RFC: Decomposing deref(N) into deref(N) + nofree" and D99100 for context.
This change simply adds appropriate attributes to tests to keep transform logic exercised under both old and new/proposed semantics. Note that for many of these cases, O3 would infer exactly these attributes on the test IR.
This change handles the idiomatic pattern of a dereferenceable object being passed to a call which can not free that memory. There's a couple other tests which need more one-off attention, they'll be handled in another change.
There's a potential change in dereferenceability attribute semantics in the nearish future. See llvm-dev thread "RFC: Decomposing deref(N) into deref(N) + nofree" and D99100 for context.
This change simply adds appropriate attributes to tests to keep transform logic exercised under both old and new/proposed semantics. Note that for many of these cases, O3 would infer exactly these attributes on the test IR.
This change handles the idiomatic pattern of a dereferenceable object being passed to a call which can not free that memory. There's a couple other tests which need more one-off attention, they'll be handled in another change.
At the moment, <vscale x 1 x eltty> are not yet fully handled by the
code-generator, so to avoid vectorizing loops with that VF, we mark the
cost for these types as invalid.
The reason for not adding a new "TTI::getMinimumScalableVF" is because
the type is supposed to be a type that can be legalized. It partially is,
although the support for these types need some more work.
Reviewed By: paulwalker-arm, dmgreen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103882
We know that "CVTTPS2SI" returns 0x80000000 for out of range inputs (and for FP_TO_UINT, negative float values are undefined). We can use this to make unsigned conversions from vXf32 to vXi32 more efficient, particularly on targets without blend using the following logic:
small := CVTTPS2SI(x);
fp_to_ui(x) := small | (CVTTPS2SI(x - 2^31) & ARITHMETIC_RIGHT_SHIFT(small, 31))
Even on targets where "PBLENDVPS"/"PBLENDVB" exists, it is often a latency 2, low throughput instruction so this logic is applied there too (in particular for AVX2 also). It furthermore gets rid of one high latency floating point comparison in the previous lowering.
@TomHender checked the correctness of this for all possible floats between -1 and 2^32 (both ends excluded).
Original Patch by @TomHender (Tom Hender)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D89697
This is split from D105216, but the code is hoisted much earlier into
the path where we can actually get a zero stride flowing through. Some
fairly simple proofs handle the cases which show up in practice. The
only test changes are the cases where we really do need a non-zero
divider to produce the right result.
Recommitting with isLoopInvariant() check.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105921
This is split from D105216, but the code is hoisted much earlier into the path where we can actually get a zero stride flowing through. Some fairly simple proofs handle the cases which show up in practice. The only test changes are the cases where we really do need a non-zero divider to produce the right result.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105921
Update (mainly) vXf32/vXf64 -> vXi8/vXi16 fptosi/fptoui costs based on the worst case costs from the script in D103695.
Move to using legalized types wherever possible, which allows us to prune the cost tables.
Update truncation costs based on the worst case costs from the script in D103695.
Move to using legalized types wherever possible, which allows us to prune the cost tables.
Reapply with fixes for clang tests.
-----
This is a simple enum attribute. Test changes are because enum
attributes are sorted before type attributes, so mustprogress is
now in a different position.
This reverts commit 84ed3a794b4ffe7bd673f1e5a17d507aa3113d12.
A number of clang tests are also affected by this change. Revert
until I can update them.
This reverts commit 5b350183cdabd83573bc760ddf513f3e1d991bcb (and
also "[NFC][ScalarEvolution] Cleanup howManyLessThans.",
009436e9c1fee1290d62bc0faafe0c0295542f56, to make it apply).
See https://reviews.llvm.org/D105216 for discussion on various
miscompilations caused by that commit.
This patch removes the IsPairwiseForm flag from the Reduction Cost TTI
hooks, along with some accompanying code for pattern matching reductions
from trees starting at extract elements. IsPairWise is now assumed to be
false, which was the predominant way that the value was used from both
the Loop and SLP vectorizers. Since the adjustments such as D93860, the
SLP vectorizer has not relied upon this distinction between paiwise and
non-pairwise reductions.
This also removes some code that was detecting reductions trees starting
from extract elements inside the costmodel. This case was
double-counting costs though, adding the individual costs on the
individual instruction _and_ the total cost of the reduction. Removing
it changes the costs in llvm/test/Analysis/CostModel/X86/reduction.ll to
not double count. The cost of reduction intrinsics is still tested
through the various tests in
llvm/test/Analysis/CostModel/X86/reduce-xyz.ll.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105484
It is confusing to have two ways of specifying the same pass
('simple-loop-unswitch' and 'unswitch'). This patch replaces
'unswitch' by 'simple-loop-unswitch' to get a unique identifier.
Using 'simple-loop-unswitch' instead of 'unswitch' also has the
advantage of matching how the pass is named in DEBUG_TYPE etc. So
this makes it a bit more consistent how we refer to the pass in
options such as -passes, -print-after and -debug-only.
Reviewed By: aeubanks
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105628
There was an alias between 'simplifycfg' and 'simplify-cfg' in the
PassRegistry. That was the original reason for this patch, which
effectively removes the alias.
This patch also replaces all occurrances of 'simplify-cfg'
by 'simplifycfg'. Reason for choosing that form for the name is
that it matches the DEBUG_TYPE for the pass, and the legacy PM name
and also how it is spelled out in other passes such as
'loop-simplifycfg', and in other options such as
'simplifycfg-merge-cond-stores'.
I for some reason the name should be changed to 'simplify-cfg' in
the future, then I think such a renaming should be more widely done
and not only impacting the PassRegistry.
Reviewed By: aeubanks
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105627
There are two issues with the current implementation of computeBECount:
1. It doesn't account for the possibility that adding "Stride - 1" to
Delta might overflow. For almost all loops, it doesn't, but it's not
actually proven anywhere.
2. It doesn't account for the possibility that Stride is zero. If Delta
is zero, the backedge is never taken; the value of Stride isn't
relevant. To handle this, we have to make sure that the expression
returned by computeBECount evaluates to zero.
To deal with this, add two new checks:
1. Use a variety of tricks to try to prove that the addition doesn't
overflow. If the proof is impossible, use an alternate sequence which
never overflows.
2. Use umax(Stride, 1) to handle the possibility that Stride is zero.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105216
The Legalizer expands the operations of urem/srem into a div+mul+sub or divrem
when those are legal/custom. This patch changes the cost-model to reflect that
cost.
Since there is no 'divrem' Instruction in LLVM IR, the cost of divrem
is assumed to be the same as div+mul+sub since the three operations will
need to be executed at runtime regardless.
Patch co-authored by David Sherwood (@david-arm)
Reviewed By: RKSimon, paulwalker-arm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103799
Update costs based on the worst case costs from the script in D103695.
Move to using legalized types wherever possible, which allows us to prune the cost tables.
Update (mainly) vXi8/vXi16 -> vXf32/vXf64 sitofp/uitofp costs based on the worst case costs from the script in D103695.
Move to using legalized types wherever possible, which allows us to prune the cost tables.
As part of making ScalarEvolution's handling of pointers consistent, we
want to forbid multiplying a pointer by -1 (or any other value). This
means we can't blindly subtract pointers.
There are a few ways we could deal with this:
1. We could completely forbid subtracting pointers in getMinusSCEV()
2. We could forbid subracting pointers with different pointer bases
(this patch).
3. We could try to ptrtoint pointer operands.
The option in this patch is more friendly to non-integral pointers: code
that works with normal pointers will also work with non-integral
pointers. And it seems like there are very few places that actually
benefit from the third option.
As a minimal patch, the ScalarEvolution implementation of getMinusSCEV
still ends up subtracting pointers if they have the same base. This
should eliminate the shared pointer base, but eventually we'll need to
rewrite it to avoid negating the pointer base. I plan to do this as a
separate step to allow measuring the compile-time impact.
This doesn't cause obvious functional changes in most cases; the one
case that is significantly affected is ICmpZero handling in LSR (which
is the source of almost all the test changes). The resulting changes
seem okay to me, but suggestions welcome. As an alternative, I tried
explicitly ptrtoint'ing the operands, but the result doesn't seem
obviously better.
I deleted the test lsr-undef-in-binop.ll becuase I couldn't figure out
how to repair it to test what it was actually trying to test.
Recommitting with fix to MemoryDepChecker::isDependent.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104806
As part of making ScalarEvolution's handling of pointers consistent, we
want to forbid multiplying a pointer by -1 (or any other value). This
means we can't blindly subtract pointers.
There are a few ways we could deal with this:
1. We could completely forbid subtracting pointers in getMinusSCEV()
2. We could forbid subracting pointers with different pointer bases
(this patch).
3. We could try to ptrtoint pointer operands.
The option in this patch is more friendly to non-integral pointers: code
that works with normal pointers will also work with non-integral
pointers. And it seems like there are very few places that actually
benefit from the third option.
As a minimal patch, the ScalarEvolution implementation of getMinusSCEV
still ends up subtracting pointers if they have the same base. This
should eliminate the shared pointer base, but eventually we'll need to
rewrite it to avoid negating the pointer base. I plan to do this as a
separate step to allow measuring the compile-time impact.
This doesn't cause obvious functional changes in most cases; the one
case that is significantly affected is ICmpZero handling in LSR (which
is the source of almost all the test changes). The resulting changes
seem okay to me, but suggestions welcome. As an alternative, I tried
explicitly ptrtoint'ing the operands, but the result doesn't seem
obviously better.
I deleted the test lsr-undef-in-binop.ll becuase I couldn't figure out
how to repair it to test what it was actually trying to test.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104806
Provide a generic fallback that performs the fptosi to i32 types, then truncates to sub-i32 scalars.
These numbers can be tweaked for specific sse levels, but we should get the default handling in place first.
Provide a generic fallback that extends sub-i32 scalars before using the existing sitofp instructions.
These numbers can be tweaked for specific sse levels, but we should get the default handling in place first.
We get the extension for free for non-vector loads.
This patch adds a new ShuffleKind SK_Splice and then handle the cost in
getShuffleCost, as in experimental.vector.reverse.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104630
Loads of <4 x i8> vectors were modeled as extremely expensive. And while we
don't have a load instruction that supports this, it isn't that expensive to
create a vector of i8 elements. The codegen for this was fixed/optimised in
D105110. This now tweaks the cost model and enables SLP vectorisation of my
motivating case loadi8.ll.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103629
Update v4i64 -> v4f32/v4f64 uitofp costs based on the worst case costs from the script in D103695.
Fixes a few regressions before we start adding AVX costs for legalized types.
Building on rG2a1ef8784ad9a, adjust the SSE cost tables to use the legalized types based on the worst case costs from the script in D103695.
To account for different numbers of src/dst legalized type registers we must scale the cost by maximum of the src/dst, not just use src
