Loop versioning changes the control-flow, which may impact SCEVs cached
by for other loops in LoopAccessInfoManager. Clear the manager after
making changes.
Fixes#57825.
Depends on D134609.
Reviewed By: aeubanks
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D134611
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
Alternative to D116817.
This introduces a new value-based folding interface for Or (FoldOr),
which takes 2 values and returns an existing Value or a constant if the
Or can be simplified. Otherwise nullptr is returned. This replaces the
more restrictive CreateOr which takes 2 constants.
This is the used to implement a folder that uses InstructionSimplify.
The logic to simplify `Or` instructions is moved there. Subsequent
patches are going to transition other CreateXXX to the more general
FoldXXX interface.
Reviewed By: nikic, lebedev.ri
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116935
9345ab3a45 updated generateOverflowCheck to skip creating checks that
always evaluate to false. This in turn means that we only need to
create TruncTripCount if it is actually used.
Sink the TruncTripCount creating into ComputeEndCheck, so it is only
created when there's an actual check.
9345ab3a45 updated generateOverflowCheck to skip creating checks that
always evaluate to false. This in turn means that we only need to
compute |Step| * Trip count if the result of the multiplication is
actually used.
Sink the multiplication into ComputeEndCheck, so it is only created
when there's an actual check.
9345ab3a45 updated generateOverflowCheck to skip creating checks that
always evaluate to false. This in turn means that we only need to check
for overflows if the result of the multiplication is actually used.
Sink the Or for the overflow check into ComputeEndCheck, so it is only
created when there's an actual check.
Unsigned compares of the form <u 0 are always false. Do not create such
a redundant check in generateOverflowCheck.
The patch introduces a new lambda to create the check, so we can
exit early conveniently and skip creating some instructions feeding the
check.
I am planning to sink a few additional instructions as follow-ups, but I
would prefer to do this separately, to keep the changes and diff
smaller.
Reviewed By: reames
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116811
Currently generateOverflowCheck always creates code for Step being
negative and positive, followed by a select at the end depending on
Step's sign.
This patch updates the code to only create either the checks for step
being positive or negative, if the sign is known.
Follow-up to D116696.
Reviewed By: reames
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116747
This patch updates SCEVExpander::expandUnionPredicate to not create
redundant 'or false, x' instructions. While those are trivially
foldable, they can be easily avoided and hinder code that checks the
size/cost of the generated checks before further folds.
I am planning on look into a few other similar improvements to code
generated by SCEVExpander.
I remember a while ago @lebedev.ri working on doing some trivial folds
like that in IRBuilder itself, but there where concerns that such
changes may subtly break existing code.
Reviewed By: reames, lebedev.ri
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116696
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
While we could emit such a tautological `select`,
it will stick around until the next instsimplify invocation,
which may happen after we count the cost of this redundant `select`.
Which is precisely what happens with loop vectorization legality checks,
and that artificially increases the cost of said checks,
which is bad.
There is prior art for this in `IRBuilderBase::CreateAnd()`/`IRBuilderBase::CreateOr()`.
Refs. https://reviews.llvm.org/D109368#3089809
This simplifies the return value of addRuntimeCheck from a pair of
instructions to a single `Value *`.
The existing users of addRuntimeChecks were ignoring the first element
of the pair, hence there is not reason to track FirstInst and return
it.
Additionally all users of addRuntimeChecks use the second returned
`Instruction *` just as `Value *`, so there is no need to return an
`Instruction *`. Therefore there is no need to create a redundant
dummy `and X, true` instruction any longer.
Effectively this change should not impact the generated code because the
redundant AND will be folded by later optimizations. But it is easy to
avoid creating it in the first place and it allows more accurately
estimating the cost of the runtime checks.
This is a followup to D104662 to generate slightly nicer code for
pointer overflow checks. Bypass expandAddToGEP and instead
explicitly generate i8 GEPs. This saves some bitcasts and negates
the value in a more obvious way. In particular, this prevents SCEV
from looking through the umul.with.overflow, same as in the integer
case.
The wrapping-pointer-ni.ll test deserves a comment: Previously,
this generated a typed GEP which used the umulo argument rather
than the multiplication result. This results in more compact IR in
that case, but effectively does the multiplication twice, the
second one is just hidden in the GEP. Reusing the umulo result
seems pretty reasonable to me.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109093
We'd special cased this logic to use pointer types for non-integral pointers, but there's no reason we can't do that for all pointer types. Doing it this was has a few advantages:
a) The code itself becomes more straight forward, and easier to test.
b) We avoid introducing ptrtoint into programs which didn't have them in the source.
c) The resulting codegen is easier to analyze and simplify (mostly due to lack of ptrtoint).
Note that there are some test diffs, but a) running them through instcombine helps a ton, and b) there's enough missing obvious transforms on both before and after IR that it's clear this isn't performance sensitive.
This is mostly motivated by cleaning up mentions of non-integrals to have a clearer idea of what we actually need to support.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104662
This fixes the lower and upper bound calculation of a
RuntimeCheckingPtrGroup when it has more than one loop
invariant pointers. Resolves PR50686.
Reviewed By: fhahn
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104148
Temporarily revert commit 8b1c4e310c.
After 8b1c4e310c the compile-time for `MultiSource/Benchmarks/MiBench/consumer-lame`
dramatically increases with -O3 & LTO, causing issues for builders with
that configuration.
I filed PR48553 with a smallish reproducer that shows a 10-100x compile
time increase.
If we have two unknown sizes and one GEP operand and one non-GEP
operand, then we currently simply return MayAlias. The comment says
we can't do anything useful ... but we can! We can still check that
the underlying objects are different (and do so for the GEP-GEP case).
To reduce the compile-time impact, this a) checks this early, before
doing the relatively expensive GEP decomposition that will not be
used and b) doesn't do the check if the other operand is a phi or
select. In that case, the phi/select will already recurse, so this
would just do two slightly different recursive walks that arrive at
the same roots.
Compile-time is still a bit of a mixed bag: https://llvm-compile-time-tracker.com/compare.php?from=624af932a808b363a888139beca49f57313d9a3b&to=845356e14adbe651a553ed11318ddb5e79a24bcd&stat=instructions
On average this is a small improvement, but sqlite with ThinLTO has
a 0.5% regression (lencod has a 1% improvement).
The BasicAA test case checks this by using two memsets with unknown
size. However, the more interesting case where this is useful is
the LoopVectorize test case, as analysis of accesses in loops tends
to always us unknown sizes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92401
The exit blocks of the versioned and non-versioned loops are not dedicated and thus the two loops are not in simplify form.
Insert dummy exit blocks after loop versioning with `formDedicatedExits()` to preserve the simplify form for subsequence passes.
Reviewed By: aeubanks
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D89569
Summary: To match NewPM name. Also the new name is clearer and more consistent.
Subscribers: jvesely, nhaehnle, hiraditya, asbirlea, kerbowa, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84542
The "null-pointer-is-valid" attribute needs to be checked by many
pointer-related combines. To make the check more efficient, convert
it from a string into an enum attribute.
In the future, this attribute may be replaced with data layout
properties.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78862
This changes the standalone pass only. Arguably the utility class
itself should assert there are no convergent calls. However, a target
pass with additional context may still be able to version a loop if
all of the dynamic conditions are sufficiently uniform.
llvm-svn: 363165
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).
This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.
llvm-svn: 358546
Summary:
Support for this option is needed for building Linux kernel.
This is a very frequently requested feature by kernel developers.
More details : https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/4/601
GCC option description for -fdelete-null-pointer-checks:
This Assume that programs cannot safely dereference null pointers,
and that no code or data element resides at address zero.
-fno-delete-null-pointer-checks is the inverse of this implying that
null pointer dereferencing is not undefined.
This feature is implemented in LLVM IR in this CL as the function attribute
"null-pointer-is-valid"="true" in IR (Under review at D47894).
The CL updates several passes that assumed null pointer dereferencing is
undefined to not optimize when the "null-pointer-is-valid"="true"
attribute is present.
Reviewers: t.p.northover, efriedma, jyknight, chandlerc, rnk, srhines, void, george.burgess.iv
Reviewed By: efriedma, george.burgess.iv
Subscribers: eraman, haicheng, george.burgess.iv, drinkcat, theraven, reames, sanjoy, xbolva00, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47895
llvm-svn: 336613
Summary:
Comment on Transforms/LoopVersioning/incorrect-phi.ll: With the change
SCEV is able to prove that the loop doesn't wrap-self (due to zext i16
to i64), disabling the entire loop versioning pass. Removed the zext and
just use i64.
Reviewers: sanjoy
Subscribers: jlebar, hiraditya, javed.absar, bixia, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48409
llvm-svn: 336140
Summary:
In LoopVersioning::addPHINodes we need to iterate over all
users for a value "Inst", and if the user is outside of the
VersionedLoop we should replace the use of "Inst" by using
the value "PN" instead.
Replacing the use of "Inst" for a user of "Inst" also means
that Inst->users() is modified. So it is not safe to do the
replace while iterating over Inst->users() as we used to do.
This patch splits the task into two steps. First we iterate
over Inst->users() to find all users that should be updated.
Those users are saved into a local data structure on the stack.
And then, in the second step, we do the actual updates. This
time iterating over the local data structure.
Reviewers: mzolotukhin, anemet
Reviewed By: mzolotukhin
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47134
llvm-svn: 332958
This is a latent bug that's been hanging around for a while. For a loop-invariant
pointer, expandBounds would return the range {Ptr, Ptr}, but this was interpreted
as a half-open range, not a closed range. So we ended up planting incorrect
bounds checks. Even worse, they were tautological, so we ended up incorrectly
executing the optimized loop.
llvm-svn: 299526
In r267672, where the loop distribution pragma was introduced, I tried
it hard to keep the old behavior for opt: when opt is invoked
with -loop-distribute, it should distribute the loop (it's off by
default when ran via the optimization pipeline).
As MichaelZ has discovered this has the unintended consequence of
breaking a very common developer work-flow to reproduce compilations
using opt: First you print the pass pipeline of clang
with -debug-pass=Arguments and then invoking opt with the returned
arguments.
clang -debug-pass will include -loop-distribute but the pass is invoked
with default=off so nothing happens unless the loop carries the pragma.
While through opt (default=on) we will try to distribute all loops.
This changes opt's default to off as well to match clang. The tests are
modified to explicitly enable the transformation.
llvm-svn: 290235
Summary:
If LAA expands a bound that is loop invariant, but not hoisted out
of the loop body, it used to use that value anyway, causing a
non-domination error, because the memcheck block is of course not
dominated by the scalar loop body. Detect this situation and expand
the SCEV expression instead.
Fixes PR31251
Reviewers: anemet
Subscribers: mzolotukhin, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27397
llvm-svn: 288705
Arthur Eubanks