Currently, UnrollLoop() is passed an AllowRuntime flag and decides
itself whether runtime unrolling should be used or not. This patch
pushes the decision into the caller and allows us to eliminate the
ULO.TripCount and ULO.TripMultiple parameters.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104487
Remove dependence on ULO.TripCount/ULO.TripMultiple from ORE and
debug code. For debug code, print information about all exits.
For optimization remarks, only include the unroll count and the
type of unroll (complete, partial or runtime), but omit detailed
information about exit folding, now that more than one exit may
be folded.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104482
Fold all exits based on known trip count/multiple information from
SCEV. Previously only the latch exit or the single exit were folded.
This doesn't yet eliminate ULO.TripCount and ULO.TripMultiple
entirely: They're still used to a) decide whether runtime unrolling
should be performed and b) for ORE remarks. However, the core
unrolling logic is independent of them now.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104203
Unrolling with more iterations than MaxTripCount is pointless, as
those iterations can never be executed. As such, we clamp ULO.Count
to MaxTripCount if it is known. This means we no longer need to
consider iterations after MaxTripCount for exit folding, and the
CompletelyUnroll flag becomes independent of ULO.TripCount.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103748
Loop peeling is currently performed as part of UnrollLoop().
Outside test scenarios, it is always performed with an unroll
count of 1. This means that unrolling doesn't actually do anything
apart from performing post-unroll simplification.
When testing, it's currently possible to specify both an explicit
peel count and an explicit unroll count. This doesn't perform any
sensible operation and may result in miscompiles, see
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45939.
This patch moves peeling from UnrollLoop() into tryToUnrollLoop(),
so that peeling does not also perform a susequent unroll. We only
run the post-unroll simplifications. Specifying both an explicit
peel count and unroll count is forbidden.
In the future, we may want to support both (non-PGO) peeling a
loop and unrolling it, but this needs to be done by first performing
the peel and then recalculating unrolling heuristics on a now
possibly analyzable loop.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103362
This builds on D103584. The change eliminates the coupling between unroll heuristic and implementation w.r.t. knowing when the passed in trip count is an exact trip count or a max trip count. In theory the new code is slightly less powerful (since it relies on exact computable trip counts), but in practice, it appears to cover all the same cases. It can also be extended if needed.
The test change shows what appears to be a bug in the existing code around the interaction of peeling and unrolling. The original loop only ran 8 iterations. The previous output had the loop peeled by 2, and then an exact unroll of 8. This meant the loop ran a total of 10 iterations which appears to have been a miscompile.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103620
This is a first step towards simplifying the transform interface to be less error prone. The basic idea is that querying SCEV is cheap (since it's cached) and we can just check for properties related to branch folding in the transform method instead of relying on the heuristic part to pass everything in correctly.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103584
This cleans up the unroll action into two phases. Phase 1 does the mechanical act of unrolling, and leaves all conditional branches in place. Phase 2 optimizes away some of the conditional branches and then simplifies the loop. The primary benefit of the reordering is that we can delete some special cases dom tree update logic.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103561
When fulling unrolling with a non-latch exit, the latch block is
folded to unreachable. Replace this folding with the existing
changeToUnreachable() helper, rather than performing it manually.
This also moves the fold to happen after the manual DT update
for exit blocks. I believe this is correct in that the conversion
of an unconditional backedge into unreachable should not affect
the DT at all.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103340
This does some non-functional cleanup of exit folding during
unrolling. The two main changes are:
* First rewrite latch->header edges, which is unrelated to exit
folding.
* Combine folding for latch and non-latch exits. After the
previous change, the only difference in their logic is that
for non-latch exits we currently only fold "known non-exit"
cases, but not "known exit" cases.
I think this helps a lot to clarify this code and prepare it for
future changes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103333
Turns out simplifyLoopIVs sometimes returns a non-dead instruction in it's DeadInsts out param. I had done a bit of NFC cleanup which was only NFC if simplifyLoopIVs obeyed it's documentation. I'm simplfy dropping that part of the change.
Commit message from try 3:
Recommitting after fixing a bug found post commit. Amusingly, try 1 had been correct, and by reverting to incorporate last minute review feedback, I introduce the bug. Oops. :)
Original commit message:
The problem was that recursively deleting an instruction can delete instructions beyond the current iterator (via a dead phi), thus invalidating iteration. Test case added in LoopUnroll/dce.ll to cover this case.
LoopUnroll does a limited DCE pass after unrolling, but if you have a chain of dead instructions, it only deletes the last one. Improve the code to recursively delete all trivially dead instructions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102511
This patch implements first part of Flow Sensitive SampleFDO (FSAFDO).
It has the following changes:
(1) disable current discriminator encoding scheme,
(2) new hierarchical discriminator for FSAFDO.
For this patch, option "-enable-fs-discriminator=true" turns on the new
functionality. Option "-enable-fs-discriminator=false" (the default)
keeps the current SampleFDO behavior. When the fs-discriminator is
enabled, we insert a flag variable, namely, llvm_fs_discriminator, to
the object. This symbol will checked by create_llvm_prof tool, and used
to generate a profile with FS-AFDO discriminators enabled. If this
happens, for an extbinary format profile, create_llvm_prof tool
will add a flag to profile summary section.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102246
Recommitting after fixing a bug found post commit. Amusingly, try 1 had been correct, and by reverting to incorporate last minute review feedback, I introduce the bug. Oops. :)
The problem was that recursively deleting an instruction can delete instructions beyond the current iterator (via a dead phi), thus invalidating iteration. Test case added in LoopUnroll/dce.ll to cover this case.
LoopUnroll does a limited DCE pass after unrolling, but if you have a chain of dead instructions, it only deletes the last one. Improve the code to recursively delete all trivially dead instructions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102511
Recommitting after addressing a missed review comment, and updating an aarch64 test I'd missed.
LoopUnroll does a limited DCE pass after unrolling, but if you have a chain of dead instructions, it only deletes the last one. Improve the code to recursively delete all trivially dead instructions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102511
LoopUnroll does a limited DCE pass after unrolling, but if you have a chain of dead instructions, it only deletes the last one. Improve the code to recursively delete all trivially dead instructions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102511
Add the subclass, update a few places which check for the intrinsic to use idiomatic dyn_cast, and update the public interface of AssumptionCache to use the new class. A follow up change will do the same for the newer assumption query/bundle mechanisms.
In the cloning infrastructure, only track an MDNode mapping,
without explicitly storing the Metadata mapping, same as is done
during inlining. This makes things slightly simpler.
This is a fix for https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39282. Compared to D90104, this version is based on part of the full restrict patched (D68484) and uses the `@llvm.experimental.noalias.scope.decl` intrinsic to track the location where !noalias and !alias.scope scopes have been introduced. This allows us to only duplicate the scopes that are really needed.
Notes:
- it also includes changes and tests from D90104
Reviewed By: nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92887
Loop peeling as a last step triggers loop simplification and this
can change the loop structure. As a result all cashed values like
latch branch becomes invalid.
Patch re-structure the code to take into account the possible
changes caused by peeling.
Reviewers: dmgreen, Meinersbur, etiotto, fhahn, efriedma, bmahjour
Reviewed By: Meinersbur, fhahn
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93686
Summary: This patch separates the Loop Peeling Utilities from Loop Unrolling.
The reason for this change is that Loop Peeling is no longer only being used by
loop unrolling; Patch D82927 introduces loop peeling with fusion, such that
loops can be modified to have to same trip count, making them legal to be
peeled.
Reviewed By: Meinersbur
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83056
Summary:
Avoid exposing details about how children are stored. This will enable
subsequent type-erasure changes.
New methods are introduced to cover common access patterns.
Change-Id: Idb5f4b1b9c84e4cc71ddb39bb52a388682f5674f
Reviewers: arsenm, RKSimon, mehdi_amini, courbet
Subscribers: qcolombet, sdardis, wdng, hiraditya, jrtc27, zzheng, atanasyan, asbirlea, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83083
is not necessary one of them.
Summary: Currently LoopUnrollPass already allow loops with multiple
exiting blocks, but it is only allowed when the loop latch is one of the
exiting blocks.
When the loop latch is not an exiting block, then only single exiting
block is supported.
When possible, the single loop latch or the single exiting block
terminator is optimized to an unconditional branch in the unrolled loop.
This patch allows loops with multiple exiting blocks even if the loop
latch is not one of them. However, the optimization of exiting block
terminator to unconditional branch is not done when there exists more
than one exiting block.
Reviewer: dmgreen, Meinersbur, etiotto, fhahn, efriedma, bmahjour
Reviewed By: efriedma
Subscribers: hiraditya, zzheng, llvm-commits
Tag: LLVM
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81053
I think the current code dealing with connecting the unrolled iterations
is a bit more complicated than necessary currently. To connect the
unrolled iterations, we have to update the unrolled latch blocks to
branch to the header of the next unrolled iteration.
We need to do this regardless whether the latch is exiting or not.
Additionally, we try to turn the conditional branch in the exiting block
to an unconditional one. This is an optimization only; alternatively we
could leave the conditional branches in place and rely on other passes
to simplify the conditions.
Logically, this is a separate step from connecting the latches to the
headers, but it is convenient to fold them into the same loop, if the
latch is also exiting. For headers (or other non-latch exiting blocks,
this is done separately).
Hopefully the patch with additional comments makes things a bit clearer.
Reviewers: efriedma, dmgreen, hfinkel, Whitney
Reviewed By: efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80544
Summary:
Future patches will make use of TTI to perform cost-model-driven `SCEVExpander::isHighCostExpansionHelper()`
This is a fully NFC patch to make things reviewable.
Reviewers: reames, mkazantsev, wmi, sanjoy
Reviewed By: mkazantsev
Subscribers: hiraditya, zzheng, javed.absar, dmgreen, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D73704
Summary:
LoopUnroll can reuse the RemapInstruction() in ValueMapper, or
remapInstructionsInBlocks() in CloneFunction, depending on the needs.
There is no need to have its own version in LoopUnroll.
By calling RemapInstruction() without TypeMapper or Materializer and
with Flags (RF_NoModuleLevelChanges | RF_IgnoreMissingLocals), it does
the same as remapInstruction(). remapInstructionsInBlocks() calls
RemapInstruction() exactly as described.
Looking at the history, I cannot find any obvious reason to have its own
version.
Reviewer: dmgreen, jdoerfert, Meinersbur, kbarton, bmahjour, etiotto,
foad, aprantl
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Subscribers: hiraditya, zzheng, llvm-commits, prithayan, anhtuyen
Tag: LLVM
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D73277
Calling `operator*` on a WeakVH with a null value yields a null
reference, which is UB. Avoid this by implicitly converting the WeakVH
to a `Value *` rather than dereferencing and then taking the address
for the type conversion.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D73280
We do not access the DT in the loop, so we do not have to apply updates
eagerly. We can apply them lazyly and flush them after we are done
merging blocks.
As follow-up work, we might be able to use the DTU above as well,
instead of manually updating the DT.
This brings the example from PR43134 from ~100s to ~4s for a relase +
assertions build on my machine.
Reviewers: efriedma, kuhar, asbirlea, brzycki
Reviewed By: kuhar, brzycki
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66911
llvm-svn: 370292
Summary:
When reconstructing the CFG of the loop after unrolling,
LoopUnroll could in some cases remove the phi operands of
loop-carried values instead of preserving them, resulting
in undef phi values after loop unrolling.
When doing this reconstruction, avoid removing incoming
phi values for phis in the successor blocks if the successor
is the block we are jumping to anyway.
Patch-by: ebevhan
Reviewers: fhahn, efriedma
Reviewed By: fhahn
Subscribers: bjope, lebedev.ri, zzheng, dmgreen, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66334
llvm-svn: 369886
This CL enables peeling of the loop with multiple exits where
one exit should be from latch and others are basic blocks with
call to deopt.
The peeling is enabled under the flag which is false by default.
Reviewers: reames, mkuper, iajbar, fhahn
Reviewed By: reames
Subscribers: xbolva00, hiraditya, zzheng, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63923
llvm-svn: 366048
This patch modifies the loop peeling transformation so that
it does not expect that there is only one loop exit from latch.
It modifies only transformation. Update of branch weights remains
only for exit from latch.
The motivation is that in follow-up patch I plan to enable loop peeling for
loops with multiple exits but only if other exits then from latch one goes to
block with call to deopt.
For now this patch is NFC.
Reviewers: reames, mkuper, iajbar, fhahn
Reviewed By: reames, fhahn
Subscribers: zzheng, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63921
llvm-svn: 365441
This patch generalizes the UnrollLoop utility to support loops that exit
from the header instead of the latch. Usually, LoopRotate would take care
of must of those cases, but in some cases (e.g. -Oz), LoopRotate does
not kick in.
Codesize impact looks relatively neutral on ARM64 with -Oz + LTO.
Program master patch diff
External/S.../CFP2006/447.dealII/447.dealII 629060.00 627676.00 -0.2%
External/SPEC/CINT2000/176.gcc/176.gcc 1245916.00 1244932.00 -0.1%
MultiSourc...Prolangs-C/simulator/simulator 86100.00 86156.00 0.1%
MultiSourc...arks/Rodinia/backprop/backprop 66212.00 66252.00 0.1%
MultiSourc...chmarks/Prolangs-C++/life/life 67276.00 67312.00 0.1%
MultiSourc...s/Prolangs-C/compiler/compiler 69824.00 69788.00 -0.1%
MultiSourc...Prolangs-C/assembler/assembler 86672.00 86696.00 0.0%
Reviewers: efriedma, vsk, paquette
Reviewed By: paquette
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61962
llvm-svn: 364398
Summary:
Following the cleanup in D48202, method foldBlockIntoPredecessor has the
same behavior. Replace its uses with MergeBlockIntoPredecessor.
Remove foldBlockIntoPredecessor.
Reviewers: chandlerc, dmgreen
Subscribers: jlebar, javed.absar, zzheng, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62751
llvm-svn: 362538
Johannes Doerfert