This was reverted because of a miscompilation. At closer inspection, the
problem was actually visible in a changed llvm regression test too. This
one-line follow up fix/recommit will splat the IV, which is what we are trying
to avoid if unnecessary in general, if tail-folding is requested even if all
users are scalar instructions after vectorisation. Because with tail-folding,
the splat IV will be used by the predicate of the masked loads/stores
instructions. The previous version omitted this, which caused the
miscompilation. The original commit message was:
If tail-folding of the scalar remainder loop is applied, the primary induction
variable is splat to a vector and used by the masked load/store vector
instructions, thus the IV does not remain scalar. Because we now mark
that the IV does not remain scalar for these cases, we don't emit the vector IV
if it is not used. Thus, the vectoriser produces less dead code.
Thanks to Ayal Zaks for the direction how to fix this.
If tail-folding of the scalar remainder loop is applied, the primary induction
variable is splat to a vector and used by the masked load/store vector
instructions, thus the IV does not remain scalar. Because we now mark
that the IV does not remain scalar for these cases, we don't emit the vector IV
if it is not used. Thus, the vectoriser produces less dead code.
Thanks to Ayal Zaks for the direction how to fix this.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78911
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).
This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.
llvm-svn: 358546
Summary:
When vectorizing fcmps we can trip on incorrect cast assertion when setting the
FastMathFlags after generating the vectorized FCmp.
This can happen if the FCmp can be folded to true or false directly. The fix
here is to set the FastMathFlag using the FastMathFlagBuilder *before* creating
the FCmp Instruction. This is what's done by other optimizations such as
InstCombine.
Added a test case which trips on cast assertion without this patch.
Reviewers: Ayal, mssimpso, mkuper, gilr
Reviewed by: Ayal, mssimpso
Subscribers: llvm-commits, mzolotukhin
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36244
llvm-svn: 310389
Sjoerd Meijer