This patch tries to use an existing VPWidenCanonicalIVRecipe
instead of creating another step-vector for canonical
induction recipes in widenIntOrFpInduction.
This has the following benefits:
1. First step to avoid setting both vector and scalar values for the
same induction def.
2. Reducing complexity of widenIntOrFpInduction through making things
more explicit in VPlan
3. Only need to splat the vector IV for block in masks.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116123
This patch adds a new BranchOnCount VPInstruction opcode with 2
operands. It first compares its 2 operands (increment of canonical
induction and vector trip count), followed by a branch to either the
exit block or back to the vector header.
It must be the last recipe in the exit block of the topmost vector loop
region.
This extracts parts from D113224 and was discussed in D113223.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116479
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
At the moment, the primary induction variable for the vector loop is
created as part of the skeleton creation. This is tied to creating the
vector loop latch outside of VPlan. This prevents from modeling the
*whole* vector loop in VPlan, which in turn is required to model
preheader and exit blocks in VPlan as well.
This patch introduces a new recipe VPCanonicalIVPHIRecipe to represent the
primary IV in VPlan and CanonicalIVIncrement{NUW} opcodes for
VPInstruction to model the increment.
This allows us to partly retire createInductionVariable. At the moment,
a bit of patching up is done after executing all blocks in the plan.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D113223
The basic idea to this is that a) having a single canonical type makes CSE easier, and b) many of our transforms are inconsistent about which types we end up with based on visit order.
I'm restricting this to constants as for non-constants, we'd have to decide whether the simplicity was worth extra instructions. For constants, there are no extra instructions.
We chose the canonical type as i64 arbitrarily. We might consider changing this to something else in the future if we have cause.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115387
Given a MLA reduction from two different types (say i8 and i16), we were
previously failing to find the reduction pattern, often making us chose
the lower vector factor. This improves that by using the largest of the
two extension types, allowing us to use the larger VF as the type of the
reduction.
As per https://godbolt.org/z/KP549EEYM the backend handles this
valiantly, leading to better performance.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115432
MVE can treat v16i1, v8i1, v4i1 and v2i1 as different views onto the
same 16bit VPR.P0 register, with v2i1 holding two 8 bit values for the
two halves. This was never treated as a legal type in llvm in the past
as there are not many 64bit instructions and no 64bit compares. There
are a few instructions that could use it though, notably a VSELECT (as
it can handle any size using the underlying v16i8 VPSEL), AND/OR/XOR for
similar reasons, some gathers/scatter and long multiplies and VCTP64
instructions.
This patch goes through and makes v2i1 a legal type, handling all the
cases that fall out of that. It also makes VSELECT legal for v2i64 as a
side benefit. A lot of the codegen changes as a result - usually in way
that is a little better or a little worse, but still expensive. Costs
can change a little too in the process, again in a way that expensive
things remain expensive. A lot of the tests that changed are mainly to
ensure correctness - the code can hopefully be improved in the future
where it comes up in practice.
The intrinsics currently remain using the v4i1 they previously did to
emulate a v2i1. This will be changed in a followup patch but this one
was already large enough.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D114449
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
The expansion for these was updated in https://reviews.llvm.org/D47927 but the cost model was not adjusted.
I believe the cost model was also incorrect for the old expansion.
The expansion prior to D47927 used 3 icmps using LHS, RHS, and Result
to calculate theirs signs. Then 2 icmps to compare the signs. Followed
by an And. The previous cost model was using 3 icmps and 2 selects.
Digging back through git blame, those 2 selects in the cost model used to
be 2 icmps, but were changed in https://reviews.llvm.org/D90681
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110739
Reverted (manually due to merge conflicts) while regressions reported on PR51540 are investigated
As noticed on D106352, after we've folded "(select C, (gep Ptr, Idx), Ptr) -> (gep Ptr, (select C, Idx, 0))" if the inner Ptr was also a (now one use) gep we could then merge the geps, using the sum of the indices instead.
I've limited this to basic 2-op geps - a more general case further down InstCombinerImpl.visitGetElementPtrInst doesn't have the one-use limitation but only creates the add if it can be created via SimplifyAddInst.
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/f8pLfD (Thanks Roman!)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106450
This makes a couple of changes to the costing of MLA reduction patterns,
to more accurately cost various patterns that can come up from
vectorization.
- The Arm implementation of getExtendedAddReductionCost is altered to
only provide costs for legal or smaller types. Larger than legal types
need to be split, which currently does not work very well, especially
for predicated reductions where the predicate may be legal but needs to
be split. Currently we limit it to legal or smaller input types.
- The getReductionPatternCost has learnt that reduce(ext(mul(ext, ext))
is a pattern that can come up, and can be treated the same as
reduce(mul(ext, ext)) providing the extension types match.
- And it has been adjusted to not count the ext in reduce(mul(ext, ext))
as part of a reduce(mul) pattern.
Together these changes help to more accurately cost the mla reductions
in cases such as where the extend types don't match or the extend
opcodes are different, picking better vector factors that don't result
in expanded reductions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106166
Add folds to instcombine to support the removal of select instruction when the masked_load is guaranteed to zero the same lanes, i.e. select(mask, mload(,,mask,0), 0) -> mload(,,mask,0).
Patch originally authored by @paulwalker-arm
Reviewed By: david-arm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106376
As noticed on D106352, after we've folded "(select C, (gep Ptr, Idx), Ptr) -> (gep Ptr, (select C, Idx, 0))" if the inner Ptr was also a (now one use) gep we could then merge the geps, using the sum of the indices instead.
I've limited this to basic 2-op geps - a more general case further down InstCombinerImpl.visitGetElementPtrInst doesn't have the one-use limitation but only creates the add if it can be created via SimplifyAddInst.
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/f8pLfD (Thanks Roman!)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106450
Resubmit after the following changes:
* Fix a latent bug related to unrolling with required epilogue (see e49d65f). I believe this is the cause of the prior PPC buildbot failure.
* Disable non-latch exits for epilogue vectorization to be safe (9ffa90d)
* Split out assert movement (600624a) to reduce churn if this gets reverted again.
Previous commit message (try 3)
Resubmit after fixing test/Transforms/LoopVectorize/ARM/mve-gather-scatter-tailpred.ll
Previous commit message...
This is a resubmit of 3e5ce4 (which was reverted by 7fe41ac). The original commit caused a PPC build bot failure we never really got to the bottom of. I can't reproduce the issue, and the bot owner was non-responsive. In the meantime, we stumbled across an issue which seems possibly related, and worked around a latent bug in 80e8025. My best guess is that the original patch exposed that latent issue at higher frequency, but it really is just a guess.
Original commit message follows...
If we know that the scalar epilogue is required to run, modify the CFG to end the middle block with an unconditional branch to scalar preheader. This is instead of a conditional branch to either the preheader or the exit block.
The motivation to do this is to support multiple exit blocks. Specifically, the current structure forces us to identify immediate dominators and *which* exit block to branch from in the middle terminator. For the multiple exit case - where we know require scalar will hold - these questions are ill formed.
This is the last change needed to support multiple exit loops, but since the diffs are already large enough, I'm going to land this, and then enable separately. You can think of this as being NFCIish prep work, but the changes are a bit too involved for me to feel comfortable tagging the review that way.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94892
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
This reverts commit 6d3e3ae8a9.
Still seeing PPC build bot failures, and one arm self host bot failing. I'm officially stumped, and need help from a bot owner to reduce.
Resubmit after fixing test/Transforms/LoopVectorize/ARM/mve-gather-scatter-tailpred.ll
Previous commit message...
This is a resubmit of 3e5ce4 (which was reverted by 7fe41ac). The original commit caused a PPC build bot failure we never really got to the bottom of. I can't reproduce the issue, and the bot owner was non-responsive. In the meantime, we stumbled across an issue which seems possibly related, and worked around a latent bug in 80e8025. My best guess is that the original patch exposed that latent issue at higher frequency, but it really is just a guess.
Original commit message follows...
If we know that the scalar epilogue is required to run, modify the CFG to end the middle block with an unconditional branch to scalar preheader. This is instead of a conditional branch to either the preheader or the exit block.
The motivation to do this is to support multiple exit blocks. Specifically, the current structure forces us to identify immediate dominators and *which* exit block to branch from in the middle terminator. For the multiple exit case - where we know require scalar will hold - these questions are ill formed.
This is the last change needed to support multiple exit loops, but since the diffs are already large enough, I'm going to land this, and then enable separately. You can think of this as being NFCIish prep work, but the changes are a bit too involved for me to feel comfortable tagging the review that way.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94892
The loop vectorizer will currently assume a large trip count when
calculating which of several vectorization factors are more profitable.
That is often not a terrible assumption to make as small trip count
loops will usually have been fully unrolled. There are cases however
where we will try to vectorize them, and especially when folding the
tail by masking can incorrectly choose to vectorize loops that are not
beneficial, due to the folded tail rounding the iteration count up for
the vectorized loop.
The motivating example here has a trip count of 5, so either performs 5
scalar iterations or 2 vector iterations (with VF=4). At a high enough
trip count the vectorization becomes profitable, but the rounding up to
2 vector iterations vs only 5 scalar makes it unprofitable.
This adds an alternative cost calculation when we know the max trip
count and are folding tail by masking, rounding the iteration count up
to the correct number for the vector width. We still do not account for
anything like setup cost or the mixture of vector and scalar loops, but
this is at least an improvement in a few cases that we have had
reported.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D101726
D99674 stopped the folding of certain select operations into and/or, due
to incorrect folding in the presence of poison. D97360 added some costs
to attempt to account for the change, but only worked at the getUserCost
level, not the getCmpSelInstrCost that the vectorizer will use directly.
This adds similar logic into the vectorizer to handle these logical
and/or selects, treating them like and/or directly.
This fixes 60% performance regressions from code like the attached test
case.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99884
The scalarization overhead was set deliberately high for MVE, whilst the
codegen was new. It helps protect us against the negative ramifications
of mixing scalar and vector instructions. This decreases that,
especially for floating point where the cost of extracting/inserting
lane elements can be low. For integer the cost is still fairly high due
to the cross-register-bank copy, but is no longer n^2 in the length of
the vector.
In general, this will decrease the cost of scalarizing floats and long
integer vectors. i64 increase in cost, having a high cost before and
after this patch. For floats this allows up to start doing things like
vectorizing fdiv instructions, even if they are scalarized.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98245
This test shows a case where we can potentially scalarize the store in a
predicated loop, creating a lot of instructions that would be much
slower than scalar.
A v8i32 compare will produce a v8i1 predicate, but during codegen the
v8i32 will be split into two v4i32, potentially requiring two v4i1
predicates to be merged into a single v8i1. Because this merging of two
v4i1's into a v8i1 is very expensive, we need to make the cost of the
compare equally high.
This patch adds the cost of that to ARMTTIImpl::getCmpSelInstrCost.
Because we don't know whether the user of the predicate can be split,
and the cost model is mostly pre-instruction, we may be pessimistic but
that should only be for larger and legal types. This also adds min/max
detection to the costmodel where it can be detected, to keep those in
line with the cost of simple min/max instructions. Otherwise for the
most part, costs that were already expensive have become more expensive.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D96692
The vector reduction intrinsics started life as experimental ops, so backend support
was lacking. As part of promoting them to 1st-class intrinsics, however, codegen
support was added/improved:
D58015
D90247
So I think it is safe to now remove this complication from IR.
Note that we still have an IR-level codegen expansion pass for these as discussed
in D95690. Removing that is another step in simplifying the logic. Also note that
x86 was already unconditionally forming reductions in IR, so there should be no
difference for x86.
I spot checked a couple of the tests here by running them through opt+llc and did
not see any asm diffs.
If we do find functional differences for other targets, it should be possible
to (at least temporarily) restore the shuffle IR with the ExpandReductions IR
pass.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D96552
This adds cost modelling for the inloop vectorization added in
745bf6cf44. Up until now they have been modelled as the original
underlying instruction, usually an add. This happens to works OK for MVE
with instructions that are reducing into the same type as they are
working on. But MVE's instructions can perform the equivalent of an
extended MLA as a single instruction:
%sa = sext <16 x i8> A to <16 x i32>
%sb = sext <16 x i8> B to <16 x i32>
%m = mul <16 x i32> %sa, %sb
%r = vecreduce.add(%m)
->
R = VMLADAV A, B
There are other instructions for performing add reductions of
v4i32/v8i16/v16i8 into i32 (VADDV), for doing the same with v4i32->i64
(VADDLV) and for performing a v4i32/v8i16 MLA into an i64 (VMLALDAV).
The i64 are particularly interesting as there are no native i64 add/mul
instructions, leading to the i64 add and mul naturally getting very
high costs.
Also worth mentioning, under NEON there is the concept of a sdot/udot
instruction which performs a partial reduction from a v16i8 to a v4i32.
They extend and mul/sum the first four elements from the inputs into the
first element of the output, repeating for each of the four output
lanes. They could possibly be represented in the same way as above in
llvm, so long as a vecreduce.add could perform a partial reduction. The
vectorizer would then produce a combination of in and outer loop
reductions to efficiently use the sdot and udot instructions. Although
this patch does not do that yet, it does suggest that separating the
input reduction type from the produced result type is a useful concept
to model. It also shows that a MLA reduction as a single instruction is
fairly common.
This patch attempt to improve the costmodelling of in-loop reductions
by:
- Adding some pattern matching in the loop vectorizer cost model to
match extended reduction patterns that are optionally extended and/or
MLA patterns. This marks the cost of the reduction instruction correctly
and the sext/zext/mul leading up to it as free, which is otherwise
difficult to tell and may get a very high cost. (In the long run this
can hopefully be replaced by vplan producing a single node and costing
it correctly, but that is not yet something that vplan can do).
- getExtendedAddReductionCost is added to query the cost of these
extended reduction patterns.
- Expanded the ARM costs to account for these expanded sizes, which is a
fairly simple change in itself.
- Some minor alterations to allow inloop reduction larger than the highest
vector width and i64 MVE reductions.
- An extra InLoopReductionImmediateChains map was added to the vectorizer
for it to efficiently detect which instructions are reductions in the
cost model.
- The tests have some updates to show what I believe is optimal
vectorization and where we are now.
Put together this can greatly improve performance for reduction loop
under MVE.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93476
It turns out the vectorizer calls the getIntrinsicInstrCost functions
with a scalar return type and vector VF. This updates the costmodel to
handle that, still producing the correct vector costs.
A vectorizer test is added to show it vectorizing at the correct factor
again.
This patch makes SLP and LV emit operations with initial vectors set to poison constant instead of undef.
This is a part of efforts for using poison vector instead of undef to represent "doesn't care" vector.
The goal is to make nice shufflevector optimizations valid that is currently incorrect due to the tricky interaction between undef and poison (see https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44185 ).
Reviewed By: fhahn
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94061
Creating in-loop reductions relies on IR references to map
IR values to VPValues after interleave group creation.
Make sure we re-add the updated member to the plan, so the look-ups
still work as expected
This fixes a crash reported after D90562.
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 updates IRBuilder to create insertelement/shufflevector using poison as a placeholder.
Reviewed By: nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93793
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.
... so just ensure that we pass DomTreeUpdater it into it.
Fixes DomTree preservation for a large number of tests,
all of which are marked as such so that they do not regress.
When it comes to the scalar cost of any predicated block, the loop
vectorizer by default regards this predication as a sign that it is
looking at an if-conversion and divides the scalar cost of the block by
2, assuming it would only be executed half the time. This however makes
no sense if the predication has been introduced to tail predicate the
loop.
Original patch by Anna Welker
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86452
Florian Hahn