From C11 and C++11 onwards, a forward-progress requirement has been
introduced for both languages. In the case of C, loops with non-constant
conditionals that do not have any observable side-effects (as defined by
6.8.5p6) can be assumed by the implementation to terminate, and in the
case of C++, this assumption extends to all functions. The clang
frontend will emit the `mustprogress` function attribute for C++
functions (D86233, D85393, D86841) and emit the loop metadata
`llvm.loop.mustprogress` for every loop in C11 or later that has a
non-constant conditional.
This patch modifies LoopDeletion so that only loops with
the `llvm.loop.mustprogress` metadata or loops contained in functions
that are required to make progress (`mustprogress` or `willreturn`) are
checked for observable side-effects. If these loops do not have an
observable side-effect, then we delete them.
Loops without observable side-effects that do not satisfy the above
conditions will not be deleted.
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86844
I don't know if there's some way this changes what the vectorizers
may produce for reductions, but I have added test coverage with
3567908 and 5ced712 to show that both passes already have bugs in
this area. Hopefully this does not make things worse before we can
really fix it.
There are functions that the linker is able to automatically
deduplicate, we do not outline from these functions by default. This
allows for outlining from those functions.
Tests:
llvm/test/Transforms/IROutliner/outlining-odr.ll
Reviewers: jroelofs, paquette
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87309
This is no-functional-change-intended (AFAIK, we can't
isolate this difference in a regression test).
That's because the callers should be setting the IRBuilder's
FMF field when creating the reduction and/or setting those
flags after creating. It doesn't make sense to override this
one flag alone.
This is part of a multi-step process to clean up the FMF
setting/propagation. See PR35538 for an example.
As mentioned in D93793, there are quite a few places where unary `IRBuilder::CreateShuffleVector(X, Mask)` can be used
instead of `IRBuilder::CreateShuffleVector(X, Undef, Mask)`.
Let's update them.
Actually, it would have been more natural if the patches were made in this order:
(1) let them use unary CreateShuffleVector first
(2) update IRBuilder::CreateShuffleVector to use poison as a placeholder value (D93793)
The order is swapped, but in terms of correctness it is still fine.
Reviewed By: spatel
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93923
This patch adds support for select form of and/or.
Currently there is an ongoing effort for moving towards using `select a, b, false` instead of `and i1 a, b` and
`select a, true, b` instead of `or i1 a, b` as well.
D93065 has links to relevant changes.
Alive2 proof: (undef input was disabled due to timeout :( )
- and: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/AgvFbQ
- or: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/KjLJyb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93935
Since some values can be swift errors, we need to make sure that we
correctly propagate the parameter attributes.
Tests found at:
llvm/test/Transforms/IROutliner/outlining-swift-error.ll
Reviewers: jroelofs, paquette
Recommit of: 71867ed5e6
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87742
The x86_amx is used for AMX intrisics. <256 x i32> is bitcast to x86_amx when
it is used by AMX intrinsics, and x86_amx is bitcast to <256 x i32> when it
is used by load/store instruction. So amx intrinsics only operate on type x86_amx.
It can help to separate amx intrinsics from llvm IR instructions (+-*/).
Thank Craig for the idea. This patch depend on https://reviews.llvm.org/D87981.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D91927
This prints OptRemarks at each location where a decision is made to not
outline, or to outline a specific section for the IROutliner pass.
Test:
llvm/test/Transforms/IROutliner/opt-remarks.ll
Reviewers: jroelofs, paquette
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87300
The switch duplicated the translation in getRecurrenceBinOp().
This code is still weird because it translates to the TTI
ReductionFlags for min/max, but then createSimpleTargetReduction()
converts that back to RecurrenceDescriptor::MinMaxRecurrenceKind.
I'm not sure if the SLP enum was created before the IVDescriptor
RecurrenceDescriptor / RecurrenceKind existed, but the code in
SLP is now redundant with that class, so it just makes things
more complicated to have both. We eventually call LoopUtils
createSimpleTargetReduction() to create reduction ops, so we
might as well standardize on those enum names.
There's still a question of whether we need to use TTI::ReductionFlags
vs. MinMaxRecurrenceKind, but that can be another clean-up step.
Another option would just be to flatten the enums in RecurrenceDescriptor
into a single enum. There isn't much benefit (smaller switches?) to
having a min/max subset.
This adds a cost model that takes into account the total number of
machine instructions to be removed from each region, the number of
instructions added by adding a new function with a set of instructions,
and the instructions added by handling arguments.
Tests not adding flags:
llvm/test/Transforms/IROutliner/outlining-cost-model.ll
Reviewers: jroelofs, paquette
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87299
As Mikael Holmén is noting in the post-commit review for the first fix
https://reviews.llvm.org/rGd4ccef38d0bb#967466
not hoisting constantexprs is not enough,
because if the xor originally was a constantexpr (i.e. X is a constantexpr).
`SimplifyAssociativeOrCommutative()` in `visitXor()` will immediately
undo this transform, thus again causing an infinite combine loop.
This transform has resulted in a surprising number of constantexpr failures.
Many of the sets of output stores will be the same. When a block is
created, we check if there is an output block with the same set of store
instructions. If there is, we map the output block of the region back
to the block, so that the extra argument controlling the switch
statement can be set to the appropriate block value.
Tests:
- llvm/test/Transforms/IROutliner/outlining-same-output-blocks.ll
Reviewers: jroelofs, paquette
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87298
Certain regions can have values introduced inside the region that are
used outside of the region. These may not be the same for each similar
region, so we must create one over arching set of arguments for the
consolidated function.
We do this by iterating over the outputs for each extracted function,
and creating as many different arguments to encapsulate the different
outputs sets. For each output set, we create a different block with the
necessary stores from the value to the output register. There is then
one switch statement, controlled by an argument to the function, to
differentiate which block to use.
Changed Tests for consistency:
llvm/test/Transforms/IROutliner/extraction.ll
llvm/test/Transforms/IROutliner/illegal-assumes.ll
llvm/test/Transforms/IROutliner/illegal-memcpy.ll
llvm/test/Transforms/IROutliner/illegal-memmove.ll
llvm/test/Transforms/IROutliner/illegal-vaarg.ll
Tests to test new functionality:
llvm/test/Transforms/IROutliner/outlining-different-output-blocks.ll
llvm/test/Transforms/IROutliner/outlining-remapped-outputs.ll
llvm/test/Transforms/IROutliner/outlining-same-output-blocks.ll
Reviewers: jroelofs, paquette
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87296
This disables the poison-unsafe select -> and/or transform behind
a flag (we continue to perform the fold by default). This is intended
to simplify evaluation and testing while we teach various passes
to directly recognize the select pattern.
This only disables the main select -> and/or transform. A number of
related ones are instead changed to canonicalize to the a ? b : false
and a ? true : b forms which represent and/or respectively. This
requires a bit of care to avoid infinite loops, as we do not want
!a ? b : false to be converted into a ? false : b.
The basic idea here is the same as D93065, but keeps the change
behind a flag for now.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93840
We might be dealing with an unreachable code,
so the bonus instruction we clone might be self-referencing.
There is a sanity check that all uses of bonus instructions
that are not in the original block with said bonus instructions
are PHI nodes, and that is obviously not the case
for self-referencing instructions..
So if we find such an use, just rewrite it.
Thanks to Mikael Holmén for the reproducer!
Fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48450#c8
This reverts commit 4ffcd4fe9a thus restoring e4df6a40da.
The only change from the original patch is to add "llvm::" before the call to empty(iterator_range). This is a speculative fix for the ambiguity reported on some builders.
This patch is a major step towards supporting multiple exit loops in the vectorizer. This patch on it's own extends the loop forms allowed in two ways:
single exit loops which are not bottom tested
multiple exit loops w/ a single exit block reached from all exits and no phis in the exit block (because of LCSSA this implies no values defined in the loop used later)
The restrictions on multiple exit loop structures will be removed in follow up patches; disallowing cases for now makes the code changes smaller and more obvious. As before, we can only handle loops with entirely analyzable exits. Removing that restriction is much harder, and is not part of currently planned efforts.
The basic idea here is that we can force the last iteration to run in the scalar epilogue loop (if we have one). From the definition of SCEV's backedge taken count, we know that no earlier iteration can exit the vector body. As such, we can leave the decision on which exit to be taken to the scalar code and generate a bottom tested vector loop which runs all but the last iteration.
The existing code already had the notion of requiring one iteration in the scalar epilogue, this patch is mainly about generalizing that support slightly, making sure we don't try to use this mechanism when tail folding, and updating the code to reflect the difference between a single exit block and a unique exit block (very mechanical).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93317
As it is being reported (in post-commit review) in
https://reviews.llvm.org/D93857
this fold (as i expected, but failed to come up with test coverage
despite trying) has issues with constant expressions.
Since we only care about true constants, which constantexprs are not,
don't perform such hoisting for constant expressions.
The function FoldSingleEntryPHINodes() is changed to return if
it has changed IR or not. This return value is used by RS4GC to
set the MadeChange flag respectively.
Reviewed By: reames
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93810
Currently undef is used as a don’t-care vector when constructing a vector using a series of insertelement.
However, this is problematic because undef isn’t undefined enough.
Especially, a sequence of insertelement can be optimized to shufflevector, but using undef as its placeholder makes shufflevector a poison-blocking instruction because undef cannot be optimized to poison.
This makes a few straightforward optimizations incorrect, such as:
```
; https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44185
define <4 x float> @insert_not_undef_shuffle_translate_commute(float %x, <4 x float> %y, <4 x float> %q) {
%xv = insertelement <4 x float> %q, float %x, i32 2
%r = shufflevector <4 x float> %y, <4 x float> %xv, <4 x i32> { 0, 6, 2, undef }
ret <4 x float> %r ; %r[3] is undef
}
=>
define <4 x float> @insert_not_undef_shuffle_translate_commute(float %x, <4 x float> %y, <4 x float> %q) {
%r = insertelement <4 x float> %y, float %x, i32 1
ret <4 x float> %r ; %r[3] = %y[3], incorrect if %y[3] = poison
}
Transformation doesn't verify!
ERROR: Target is more poisonous than source
```
I’d like to suggest
1. Using poison as insertelement’s placeholder value (IRBuilder::CreateVectorSplat should be patched too)
2. Updating shufflevector’s semantics to return poison element if mask is undef
Note that poison is currently lowered into UNDEF in SelDag, so codegen part is okay.
m_Undef() matches PoisonValue as well, so existing optimizations will still fire.
The only concern is hidden miscompilations that will go incorrect when poison constant is given.
A conservative way is copying all tests having `insertelement undef` & replacing it with `insertelement poison` & run Alive2 on it, but it will create many tests and people won’t like it. :(
Instead, I’ll simply locally maintain the tests and run Alive2.
If there is any bug found, I’ll report it.
Relevant links: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43958 , http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-November/137242.html
Reviewed By: nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93586
This patch updates GVN to correctly return the modified status, if PRE
is performed on indices. It fixes a crash when building the test-suite
with EXPENSIVE_CHECKS and LTO.
EarlyCSE's handleBranchCondition says:
```
// If the condition is AND operation, we can propagate its operands into the
// true branch. If it is OR operation, we can propagate them into the false
// branch.
```
This holds for the corresponding select patterns as well.
This is a part of an ongoing work for disabling buggy select->and/or transformations.
See llvm.org/pr48353 and D93065 for more context
Proof:
and: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/MQWodU
or: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/9GLbB_
Reviewed By: nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93842
This patch makes GVN recognize `select c1, c2, false` as well as `select c1, true, c2`
branch condition and propagate equality from these.
See llvm.org/pr48353, D93065
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93841
Previously the branch from the middle block to the scalar preheader & exit
was being set-up at the end of skeleton creation in completeLoopSkeleton.
Inserting SCEV or runtime checks may result in LCSSA phis being created,
if they are required. Adjusting branches afterwards may break those
PHIs.
To avoid this, we can instead create the branch from the middle block
to the exit after we created the middle block, so we have the final CFG
before potentially adjusting/creating PHIs.
This fixes a crash for the included test case. For the non-crashing
case, this is almost a NFC with respect to the generated code. The
only change is the order of the predecessors of the involved branch
targets.
Note an assertion was moved from LoopVersioning() to
LoopVersioning::versionLoop. Adjusting the branches means loop-simplify
form may be broken before constructing LoopVersioning. But LV only uses
LoopVersioning to annotate the loop instructions with !noalias metadata,
which does not require loop-simplify form.
This is a fix for an existing issue uncovered by D93317.
I am hoping to extend the reduction matching code, and it is
hard to distinguish "ReductionData" from "ReducedValueData".
So extend the tree/root metaphor to include leaves.
Another problem is that the name "OperationData" does not
provide insight into its purpose. I'm not sure if we can alter
that underlying data structure to make the code clearer.
Atmn Patel