Commit dd5991cc modified the aliasing checks here to allow transforming
a memcpy where the source and destination point into the same object.
However, the change accidentally made the code skip the alias check for
other operations in the loop.
Instead of completely skipping the alias check, just skip the check for
whether the memcpy aliases itself.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126486
Factor in the TBAA of adjacent stores instead of just the head store
when merging stores into a memset. We were seeing GVN remove a load that
had a TBAA that matched the 2nd store because GVN determined it didn't
match the TBAA of the memset. The memset had the TBAA of only the first
store.
i.e. Loading the field pi_ of shared_count after memset to create an
array of shared_ptr
template<class T>
class shared_ptr {
T *p;
shared_count refcount;
};
class shared_count {
sp_counted_base *pi_;
};
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122205
SCEVs ExprValueMap currently tracks not only which IR Values
correspond to a given SCEV expression, but additionally stores that
it may be expanded in the form X+Offset. In theory, this allows
reusing existing IR Values in more cases.
In practice, this doesn't seem to be particularly useful (the test
changes are rather underwhelming) and adds a good bit of complexity.
Per https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/53905, we have an
invalidation issue with these offseted expressions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D120311
When upgrading a loop of load/store to a memcpy, the existing pass does not keep existing aliasing information. This patch allows existing aliasing information to be kept.
Reviewed By: jeroen.dobbelaere
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108221
Similar to the migration of or-folding to FoldOr, there are a few cases
where the fold in IRBuilder::CreateAnd triggered directly. Those have
been updated.
Reviewed By: nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117431
Agreed policy is that RISC-V extensions that have not yet been ratified
should be marked as experimental, and enabling them requires the use of
the -menable-experimental-extensions flag when using clang alongside the
version number. These extensions have now been ratified, so this is no
longer necessary, and the target feature names can be renamed to no
longer be prefixed with "experimental-".
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117131
Expression guraded in loop entry can be folded prior to comparison. This patch
proceeds D107353 and makes LIR able to deal with nested for-loop.
Reviewed By: qianzhen, bmahjour
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108112
Upon further investigation and discussion,
this is actually the opposite direction from what we should be taking,
and this direction wouldn't solve the motivational problem anyway.
Additionally, some more (polly) tests have escaped being updated.
So, let's just take a step back here.
This reverts commit f3190dedee.
This reverts commit 749581d21f.
This reverts commit f3df87d57e.
This reverts commit ab1dbcecd6.
There's precedent for that in `CreateOr()`/`CreateAnd()`.
The motivation here is to avoid bloating the run-time check's IR
in `SCEVExpander::generateOverflowCheck()`.
Refs. https://reviews.llvm.org/D109368#3089809
This patch supplements missing test case for D107353.
- Fix wrong descriptions in 64-bit mode test case
- Added testcase under 32-bit mode
Reviewed By: bmahjour
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108507
We were using the type of the loop back edge count to represent the
store size. This failed for small loop counts (e.g. in the added test,
the loop count was an i2).
Use the index type instead.
Fixes PR52104.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111401
At this point it looks like a B extension will never exist. Instead
Zba, Zbb, Zbc, and Zbs are individual extensions being ratified
together as a package. Unknown at this time when or if the other
Zb* extensions will be ratified.
This patch removes references to the B extension. I've updated and
split tests accordingly.
This has been split from D110669 to make review a little easier.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111338
This fixes a violation of the wrap flag rules introduced in c4048d8f. This is an alternate fix to D106852.
The basic problem being fixed is that we infer a set of flags which is valid at some inner scope S1 (usually by correctly propagating them from IR), and then (incorrectly) extend them to a SCEV in scope S2 where S1 != S2. This is not in general safe per the wrap flags semantics recently defined.
In this patch, I include a simple inference step to handle the case where we can prove that S2 is the preheader of the loop S1, and that entry into S2 implies execution of S1. See the code for a more detailed explanation.
One worry I have with this patch is that I might be over-fitting what shows up in tests - and thus hiding negative impact we'd see in the real world. My best defense is that the rule used here very closely follows the one used to propagate the flags from IR to the inner add to start with, and thus if one is reasonable, so probably is the other. Curious what others think about that piece.
The test diffs are roughly as expected. Mostly analysis only, with two transform changes. Oddly, the result looks better in the loop-idiom test, and I don't understand the PPC output enough to have tell. Nothing terrible looking though. (For context, without the scope inference peephole, the test delta includes a couple of vectorization tests. Again, not super concerning, but slightly more so.)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109845
This change fixes issue found by Markus: https://reviews.llvm.org/rG11338e998df1
Before this patch following code was transformed to memmove:
for (int i = 15; i >= 1; i--) {
p[i] = p[i-1];
sum += p[i-1];
}
However load from p[i-1] is used not only by store to p[i] but also by sum computation.
Therefore we cannot emit memmove in loop header.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D107964
The current LIR does not deal with runtime-determined memset-size. This patch
utilizes SCEV and check if the PointerStrideSCEV and the MemsetSizeSCEV are equal.
Before comparison the pass would try to fold the expression that is already
protected by the loop guard.
Testcase file `memset-runtime.ll`, `memset-runtime-debug.ll` added.
This patch deals with proper loop-idiom. Proceeding patch wants to deal with SCEV-s
that are inequal after folding with the loop guards.
Reviewed By: lebedev.ri, Whitney
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D107353
The purpose of patch is to learn Loop idiom recognition pass how to recognize simple memmove patterns
in similar way like GCC: https://godbolt.org/z/fh95e83od
LoopIdiomRecognize already has machinery for memset and memcpy recognition, patch tries to extend exisiting capabilities with minimal effort.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104464
A backedge-taken count doesn't refer to memory; returning a pointer type
is nonsense. So make sure we always return an integer.
The obvious way to do this would be to just convert the operands of the
icmp to integers, but that doesn't quite work out at the moment:
isLoopEntryGuardedByCond currently gets confused by ptrtoint operations.
So we perform the ptrtoint conversion late for lt/gt operations.
The test changes are mostly innocuous. The most interesting changes are
more complex SCEV expressions of the form "(-1 * (ptrtoint i8* %ptr to
i64)) + %ptr)". This is expected: we can't fold this to zero because we
need to preserve the pointer base.
The call to isLoopEntryGuardedByCond in howFarToZero is less precise
because of ptrtoint operations; this shows up in the function
pr46786_c26_char in ptrtoint.ll. Fixing it here would require more
complex refactoring. It should eventually be fixed by future
improvements to isImpliedCond.
See https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46786 for context.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103656
Nowadays LLVM does not assume that all loops are finite,
so if we want to produce a finite loop from a potentially-infinite one,
we must ensure that the original loop is known to be a finite one.
For this transform, it only matters for arithmetic right-shifts.
For them, either the function or the loop must be known to
be `mustprogress`, or the original value being shifted must be known
to be non-negative (because iff the sign bit was set,
it will never become zero, but will become `-1` in the "end").
It would be really good for alive2 to actually complain about this,
but it currently does not: https://github.com/AliveToolkit/alive2/issues/726
This adds support for the "count active bits" pattern, i.e.:
```
int countBits(unsigned val) {
int cnt = 0;
for( ; (val << cnt) != 0; ++cnt)
;
return cnt;
}
```
but a somewhat more general one:
```
int countBits(unsigned val, int start, int off) {
int cnt;
for (cnt = start; val << (cnt + off); cnt++)
;
return cnt;
}
```
alive2 is happy with all the tests there.
Note that, again, much like with the right-shift cases,
we don't require the `val != 0` guard.
This is the last pattern that was supported by
`detectShiftUntilZeroIdiom()`, which now becomes obsolete.
This adds support for the "count active bits" pattern, i.e.:
```
int countActiveBits(signed val) {
int cnt = 0;
for( ; (val >> cnt) != 0; ++cnt)
;
return cnt;
}
```
but a somewhat more general one:
```
int countActiveBits(signed val, int start, int off) {
int cnt;
for (cnt = start; val >> (cnt + off); cnt++)
;
return cnt;
}
```
This directly matches the existing 'logical right-shift until zero' idiom.
alive2 is happy with all the tests there.
Note that, again, much like with the original unsigned case,
we don't require the `val != 0` guard.
The old `detectShiftUntilZeroIdiom()` already supports this pattern,
the idea here is that the `val` must be positive (have at least one
leading zero), because otherwise the loop is non-terminating,
but since it is not `while(1)`, that would have been UB.
I think i've added exhaustive test coverage, and i have verified that alive2 is happy with all the tests,
so in principle i'm fine with landing this without review, but just in case..
This adds support for the "count active bits" pattern, i.e.:
```
int countActiveBits(unsigned val) {
int cnt = 0;
for( ; (val >> cnt) != 0; ++cnt)
;
return cnt;
}
```
but a somewhat more general one, since that is what i need:
```
int countActiveBits(unsigned val, int start, int off) {
int cnt;
for (cnt = start; val >> (cnt + off); cnt++)
;
return cnt;
}
```
I've followed in footstep of 'left-shift until bittest' idiom (D91038),
in the sense that iff the `ctlz` intrinsic is cheap, we'll transform,
regardless of all other factors.
This can have a shocking effect on certain benchmarks:
```
raw.pixls.us-unique/Olympus/XZ-1$ /repositories/googlebenchmark/tools/compare.py -a benchmarks ~/rawspeed/build-{old,new}/src/utilities/rsbench/rsbench --benchmark_counters_tabular=true --benchmark_min_time=0.00000001 --benchmark_repetitions=128 p1319978.orf
RUNNING: /home/lebedevri/rawspeed/build-old/src/utilities/rsbench/rsbench --benchmark_counters_tabular=true --benchmark_min_time=0.00000001 --benchmark_repetitions=128 p1319978.orf --benchmark_display_aggregates_only=true --benchmark_out=/tmp/tmp49_28zcm
2021-05-09T01:06:05+03:00
Running /home/lebedevri/rawspeed/build-old/src/utilities/rsbench/rsbench
Run on (32 X 3600.24 MHz CPU s)
CPU Caches:
L1 Data 32 KiB (x16)
L1 Instruction 32 KiB (x16)
L2 Unified 512 KiB (x16)
L3 Unified 32768 KiB (x2)
Load Average: 5.26, 6.29, 3.49
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark Time CPU Iterations CPUTime,s CPUTime/WallTime Pixels Pixels/CPUTime Pixels/WallTime Raws/CPUTime Raws/WallTime WallTime,s
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
p1319978.orf/threads:32/process_time/real_time_mean 145 ms 145 ms 128 0.145319 0.999981 10.1568M 69.8949M 69.8936M 6.88159 6.88146 0.145322
p1319978.orf/threads:32/process_time/real_time_median 145 ms 145 ms 128 0.145317 0.999986 10.1568M 69.8941M 69.8931M 6.88151 6.88141 0.145319
p1319978.orf/threads:32/process_time/real_time_stddev 0.766 ms 0.766 ms 128 766.586u 15.1302u 0 354.167k 354.098k 0.0348699 0.0348631 766.469u
RUNNING: /home/lebedevri/rawspeed/build-new/src/utilities/rsbench/rsbench --benchmark_counters_tabular=true --benchmark_min_time=0.00000001 --benchmark_repetitions=128 p1319978.orf --benchmark_display_aggregates_only=true --benchmark_out=/tmp/tmpwb9sw2x0
2021-05-09T01:06:24+03:00
Running /home/lebedevri/rawspeed/build-new/src/utilities/rsbench/rsbench
Run on (32 X 3599.95 MHz CPU s)
CPU Caches:
L1 Data 32 KiB (x16)
L1 Instruction 32 KiB (x16)
L2 Unified 512 KiB (x16)
L3 Unified 32768 KiB (x2)
Load Average: 4.05, 5.95, 3.43
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark Time CPU Iterations CPUTime,s CPUTime/WallTime Pixels Pixels/CPUTime Pixels/WallTime Raws/CPUTime Raws/WallTime WallTime,s
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
p1319978.orf/threads:32/process_time/real_time_mean 99.8 ms 99.8 ms 128 0.0997758 0.999972 10.1568M 101.797M 101.794M 10.0225 10.0222 0.0997786
p1319978.orf/threads:32/process_time/real_time_median 99.7 ms 99.7 ms 128 0.0997165 0.999985 10.1568M 101.857M 101.854M 10.0284 10.0281 0.0997195
p1319978.orf/threads:32/process_time/real_time_stddev 0.224 ms 0.224 ms 128 224.166u 34.345u 0 226.81k 227.231k 0.0223309 0.0223723 224.586u
Comparing /home/lebedevri/rawspeed/build-old/src/utilities/rsbench/rsbench to /home/lebedevri/rawspeed/build-new/src/utilities/rsbench/rsbench
Benchmark Time CPU Time Old Time New CPU Old CPU New
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
p1319978.orf/threads:32/process_time/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 128 vs 128
p1319978.orf/threads:32/process_time/real_time_mean -0.3134 -0.3134 145 100 145 100
p1319978.orf/threads:32/process_time/real_time_median -0.3138 -0.3138 145 100 145 100
p1319978.orf/threads:32/process_time/real_time_stddev -0.7073 -0.7078 1 0 1 0
```
Reviewed By: craig.topper, zhuhan0
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102116
After D98856 these tests will by default break (fatal_error) if any of
the wrong interfaces are used, so there's no longer a need to have a
RUN line that checks for a warning message emitted by the compiler.
This will tell loop idiom recognize that it can make popcount loops countable
using the ctpop intrinsic. I didn't bother checking for illegal types.
Type legalization knows how to split a ctpop into multiple ctops added together.
Assuming we only receive reasonable integer bit widths, a few cpop instructions
added together is probably better than the loop.
Reviewed By: frasercrmck
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99203
Eli Friedman