This patch marks the induction increment of the main induction variable
of the vector loop as NUW when not folding the tail.
If the tail is not folded, we know that End - Start >= Step (either
statically or through the minimum iteration checks). We also know that both
Start % Step == 0 and End % Step == 0. We exit the vector loop if %IV +
%Step == %End. Hence we must exit the loop before %IV + %Step unsigned
overflows and we can mark the induction increment as NUW.
This should make SCEV return more precise bounds for the created vector
loops, used by later optimizations, like late unrolling.
At the moment quite a few tests still need to be updated, but before
doing so I'd like to get initial feedback to make sure I am not missing
anything.
Note that this could probably be further improved by using information
from the original IV.
Attempt of modeling of the assumption in Alive2:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/H_DL_g
Part of a set of fixes required for PR50412.
Reviewed By: mkazantsev
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103255
A sequence of additions or multiplications that is known not to wrap, may wrap
if it's order is changed (i.e., reassociated). Therefore when vectorizing
integer sum or product reductions, their no-wrap flags need to be removed.
Fixes PR43828
Patch by Denis Antrushin
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69563
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).
This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.
llvm-svn: 358546
The type-shrinking logic in reduction detection, although narrow in scope, is
also rather ad-hoc, which has led to bugs (e.g., PR35734). This patch modifies
the approach to rely on the demanded bits and value tracking analyses, if
available. We currently perform type-shrinking separately for reductions and
other instructions in the loop. Long-term, we should probably think about
computing minimal bit widths in a more complete way for the loops we want to
vectorize.
PR35734
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42309
llvm-svn: 324195
When type shrinking reductions, we should insert the truncations and extends at
the end of the loop latch block. Previously, these instructions were inserted
at the end of the loop header block. The difference is only a problem for loops
with predicated instructions (e.g., conditional stores and instructions that
may divide by zero). For these instructions, we create new basic blocks inside
the vectorized loop, which cause the loop header and latch to no longer be the
same block. This should fix PR34687.
Reference: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34687
llvm-svn: 314542
Unlike scalar operations, we can perform vector operations on element types that
are smaller than the native integer types. We type-promote scalar operations if
they are smaller than a native type (e.g., i8 arithmetic is promoted to i32
arithmetic on Arm targets). This patch detects and removes type-promotions
within the reduction detection framework, enabling the vectorization of small
size reductions.
In the legality phase, we look through the ANDs and extensions that InstCombine
creates during promotion, keeping track of the smaller type. In the
profitability phase, we use the smaller type and ignore the ANDs and extensions
in the cost model. Finally, in the code generation phase, we truncate the result
of the reduction to allow InstCombine to rewrite the entire expression in the
smaller type.
This fixes PR21369.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12202
Patch by Matt Simpson <mssimpso@codeaurora.org>!
llvm-svn: 246149
Florian Hahn