This change enables vectorization of multiple exit loops when the exit count is statically computable. That requirement - shared with the rest of LV - in turn requires each exit to be analyzeable and to dominate the latch.
The majority of work to support this was done in a set of previous patches. In particular,, 72314466 avoids having multiple edges from the middle block to the exits, and 4b33b2387 which added support for non-latch single exit and multiple exits with a single exiting block. As a result, this change is basically just removing a bailout and adjusting some tests now that the prerequisite work is done and has stuck in tree for a bit.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105817
We were passing the RecurrenceDescriptor by value to most of the reduction analysis methods, despite it being rather bulky with TrackingVH members (that can be costly to copy). In all these cases we're only using the RecurrenceDescriptor for rather basic purposes (access to types/kinds etc.).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104029
As noted in https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46666, the current behavior of assuming if-conversion safety if a loop is annotated parallel (`!llvm.loop.parallel_accesses`), is not expectable, the documentation for this behavior was since removed from the LangRef again, and can lead to invalid reads.
This was observed in POCL (https://github.com/pocl/pocl/issues/757) and would require similar workarounds in current work at hipSYCL.
The question remains why this was initially added and what the implications of removing this optimization would be.
Do we need an alternative mechanism to propagate the information about legality of if-conversion?
Or is the idea that conditional loads in `#pragma clang loop vectorize(assume_safety)` can be executed unmasked without additional checks flawed in general?
I think this implication is not part of what a user of that pragma (and corresponding metadata) would expect and thus dangerous.
Only two additional tests failed, which are adapted in this patch. Depending on the further direction force-ifcvt.ll should be removed or further adapted.
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103907
When loop hints are passed via metadata, the allowReordering function
in LoopVectorizationLegality will allow the order of floating point
operations to be changed:
bool allowReordering() const {
// When enabling loop hints are provided we allow the vectorizer to change
// the order of operations that is given by the scalar loop. This is not
// enabled by default because can be unsafe or inefficient.
The -enable-strict-reductions flag introduced in D98435 will currently only
vectorize reductions in-loop if hints are used, since canVectorizeFPMath()
will return false if reordering is not allowed.
This patch changes canVectorizeFPMath() to query whether it is safe to
vectorize the loop with ordered reductions if no hints are used. For
testing purposes, an additional flag (-hints-allow-reordering) has been
added to disable the reordering behaviour described above.
Reviewed By: sdesmalen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D101836
This patch adds a new option to the LoopVectorizer to control how
scalable vectors can be used.
Initially, this suggests three levels to control scalable
vectorization, although other more aggressive options can be added in
the future.
The possible options are:
- Disabled: Disables vectorization with scalable vectors.
- Enabled: Vectorize loops using scalable vectors or fixed-width
vectors, but favors fixed-width vectors when the cost
is a tie.
- Preferred: Like 'Enabled', but favoring scalable vectors when the
cost-model is inconclusive.
Reviewed By: paulwalker-arm, vkmr
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D101945
This patch causes the loop vectorizer to not interleave loops that have
nounroll loop hints (llvm.loop.unroll.disable and llvm.loop.unroll_count(1)).
Note that if a particular interleave count is being requested
(through llvm.loop.interleave_count), it will still be honoured, regardless
of the presence of nounroll hints.
Reviewed By: Meinersbur
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D101374
Re-apply 25fbe803d4, with a small update to emit the right remark
class.
Original message:
[LV] Move runtime pointer size check to LVP::plan().
This removes the need for the remaining doesNotMeet check and instead
directly checks if there are too many runtime checks for vectorization
in the planner.
A subsequent patch will adjust the logic used to decide whether to
vectorize with runtime to consider their cost more accurately.
Reviewed By: lebedev.ri
This removes the need for the remaining doesNotMeet check and instead
directly checks if there are too many runtime checks for vectorization
in the planner.
A subsequent patch will adjust the logic used to decide whether to
vectorize with runtime to consider their cost more accurately.
Reviewed By: lebedev.ri
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98634
We know if the loop contains FP instructions preventing vectorization
after we are done with legality checks. This patch updates the code the
check for un-vectorizable FP operations earlier, to avoid unnecessarily
running the cost model and picking a vectorization factor. It also makes
the code more direct and moves the check to a position where similar
checks are done.
I might be missing something, but I don't see any reason to handle this
check differently to other, similar checks.
Reviewed By: lebedev.ri
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98633
Similar to b3a33553ae, but this shows a TODO and a potential
miscompile is already present.
We are tracking an FP instruction that does *not* have FMF (reassoc)
properties, so calling that "Unsafe" seems opposite of the common
reading.
I also removed one getter method by rolling the null check into
the access. Further simplification may be possible.
The motivation is to clean up the interactions between FMF and
function-level attributes in these classes and their callers.
The new test shows that there is an existing bug somewhere in
the callers. We assumed that the original code was fully 'fast'
and so we produced IR with 'fast' even though it was just 'reassoc'.
We are tracking an FP instruction that does *not* have FMF (reassoc)
properties, so calling that "Unsafe" seems opposite of the common
reading.
I also removed one getter method by rolling the null check into
the access. Further simplification seems possible.
The motivation is to clean up the interactions between FMF and
function-level attributes in these classes and their callers.
This patch changes the VecDesc struct to use ElementCount
instead of an unsigned VF value, in preparation for
future work that adds support for vectorized versions of
math functions using scalable vectors. Since all I'm doing
in this patch is switching the type I believe it's a
non-functional change. I changed getWidestVF to now return
both the widest fixed-width and scalable VF values, but
currently the widest scalable value will be zero.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D96011
I am trying to untangle the fast-math-flags propagation logic
in the vectorizers (see a6f022127 for SLP).
The loop vectorizer has a mix of checking FP function attributes,
IR-level FMF, and just wrong assumptions.
I am trying to avoid regressions while fixing this, and I think
the IR-level logic is good enough for that, but it's hard to say
for sure. This would be the 1st step in the clean-up.
The existing test that I changed to include 'fast' actually shows
a miscompile: the function only had the equivalent of nnan, but we
created new instructions that had fast (all FMF set). This is
similar to the example in https://llvm.org/PR35538
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D95452
Add an intrinsic type class to represent the
llvm.experimental.noalias.scope.decl intrinsic, to make code
working with it a bit nicer by hiding the metadata extraction
from view.
Just like llvm.assume, there are a lot of cases where we can just ignore llvm.experimental.noalias.scope.decl.
Reviewed By: nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93042
This relates to the ongoing effort to support vectorization of multiple exit loops (see D93317).
The previous code assumed that LCSSA phis were always single entry before the vectorizer ran. This was correct, but only because the vectorizer allowed only a single exiting edge. There's nothing in the definition of LCSSA which requires single entry phis.
A common case where this comes up is with a loop with multiple exiting blocks which all reach a common exit block. (e.g. see the test updates)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93725
If DoExtraAnalysis is true (e.g. because remarks are enabled), we
continue with the analysis rather than exiting. Update code to
conditionally check if the ExitBB has phis or not a single predecessor.
Otherwise a nullptr is dereferenced with DoExtraAnalysis.
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
In this patch I have added support for a new loop hint called
vectorize.scalable.enable that says whether we should enable scalable
vectorization or not. If a user wants to instruct the compiler to
vectorize a loop with scalable vectors they can now do this as
follows:
br i1 %exitcond, label %for.end, label %for.body, !llvm.loop !2
...
!2 = !{!2, !3, !4}
!3 = !{!"llvm.loop.vectorize.width", i32 8}
!4 = !{!"llvm.loop.vectorize.scalable.enable", i1 true}
Setting the hint to false simply reverts the behaviour back to the
default, using fixed width vectors.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D88962
The warning would fire when calling isDereferenceableAndAlignedInLoop
with a scalable load. Calling isDereferenceableAndAlignedInLoop with a
scalable load would result in the use of the now deprecated implicit
cast of TypeSize to uint64_t through the overloaded operator.
This patch fixes this issue by:
- no longer considering vector loads as candidates in
canVectorizeWithIfConvert. This doesn't make sense in the context of
identifying scalar loads to vectorize.
- making use of getFixedSize inside isDereferenceableAndAlignedInLoop --
this removes the dependency on the deprecated interface, and will
trigger an assertion error if the function is ever called with a
scalable type.
Reviewed By: sdesmalen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D89798
This implements 2 different vectorisation fallback strategies if tail-folding
fails: 1) don't vectorise at all, or 2) vectorise using a scalar epilogue. This
can be controlled with option -prefer-predicate-over-epilogue, that has been
changed to take a numeric value corresponding to the tail-folding preference
and preferred fallback.
Patch by: Pierre van Houtryve, Sjoerd Meijer.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79783
Move ScalarEvolution::forgetLoopDispositions implementation to ScalarEvolution.cpp to remove the dependency.
Add implicit header dependency to source files where necessary.
Now that load/store alignment is required, we no longer need most
of them. Also switch the getLoadStoreAlignment() helper to return
Align instead of MaybeAlign.
First-order recurrences require special treatment when they are live-out;
such treatment is provided by fixFirstOrderRecurrence(), so they should be
included in AllowedExit set.
(Should probably have been included originally in D16197.)
Fixes PR45526: AllowedExit set is used by prepareToFoldTailByMasking() to
check whether the treatment for live-outs also holds when folding the tail,
which is not (yet) the case for first-order recurrences.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78210
Introduce a new VPWidenCanonicalIVRecipe to generate a canonical vector
induction for use in fold-tail-with-masking, if a primary induction is absent.
The canonical scalar IV having start = 0 and step = VF*UF, created during code
-gen to control the vector loop, is widened into a canonical vector IV having
start = {<Part*VF, Part*VF+1, ..., Part*VF+VF-1> for 0 <= Part < UF} and
step = <VF*UF, VF*UF, ..., VF*UF>.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77635
getReductionVars, getInductionVars and getFirstOrderRecurrences were all
being returned from LoopVectorizationLegality as pointers to lists. This
just changes them to be references, cleaning up the interface slightly.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75448
Summary:
This commits is a rework of the patch in
https://reviews.llvm.org/D67572.
The rework was requested to prevent out-of-tree performance regression
when vectorizing out-of-tree IR intrinsics. The vectorization of such
intrinsics is enquired via the static function `isTLIScalarize`. For
detail see the discussion in https://reviews.llvm.org/D67572.
Reviewers: uabelho, fhahn, sdesmalen
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D72734
The assume intrinsic is intentionally marked as may reading/writing
memory, to avoid passes moving them around. When flattening the CFG
for predicated blocks, we have to drop the assume calls, as they
are control-flow dependent.
There are some cases where we can do better (when control flow is
preserved), but that is follow-up work.
Fixes PR43620.
Reviewers: hsaito, rengolin, dcaballe, Ayal
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68814
This reverts commit 0be81968a2.
The VFDatabase needs some rework to be able to handle vectorization
and subsequent scalarization of intrinsics in out-of-tree versions of
the compiler. For more details, see the discussion in
https://reviews.llvm.org/D67572.
This patch introduced the VFDatabase, the framework proposed in
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-June/133484.html. [*]
In this patch the VFDatabase is used to bridge the TargetLibraryInfo
(TLI) calls that were previously used to query for the availability of
vector counterparts of scalar functions.
The VFISAKind field `ISA` of VFShape have been moved into into VFInfo,
under the assumption that different vector ISAs may provide the same
vector signature. At the moment, the vectorizer accepts any of the
available ISAs as long as the signature provided by the VFDatabase
matches the one expected in the vectorization process. For example,
when targeting AVX or AVX2, which both have 256-bit registers, the IR
signature of the two vector functions associated to the two ISAs is
the same. The `getVectorizedFunction` method at the moment returns the
first available match. We will need to add more heuristics to the
search system to decide which of the available version (TLI, AVX,
AVX2, ...) the system should prefer, when multiple versions with the
same VFShape are present.
Some of the code in this patch is based on the work done by Sumedh
Arani in https://reviews.llvm.org/D66025.
[*] Notice that in the proposal the VFDatabase was called SVFS. The
name VFDatabase is more in line with LLVM recommendations for
naming classes and variables.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67572
This version contains 2 fixes for reported issues:
1. Make sure we do not try to sink terminator instructions.
2. Make sure we bail out, if we try to sink an instruction that needs to
stay in place for another recurrence.
Original message:
If the recurrence PHI node has a single user, we can sink any
instruction without side effects, given that all users are dominated by
the instruction computing the incoming value of the next iteration
('Previous'). We can sink instructions that may cause traps, because
that only causes the trap to occur later, but not on any new paths.
With the relaxed check, we also have to make sure that we do not have a
direct cycle (meaning PHI user == 'Previous), which indicates a
reduction relation, which potentially gets missed by
ReductionDescriptor.
As follow-ups, we can also sink stores, iff they do not alias with
other instructions we move them across and we could also support sinking
chains of instructions and multiple users of the PHI.
Fixes PR43398.
Reviewers: hsaito, dcaballe, Ayal, rengolin
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69228
The vectoriser queries TTI->preferPredicateOverEpilogue to determine if
tail-folding is preferred for a loop, but it was not respecting loop hint
'predicate' that can disable this, which has now been added. This showed that
we were incorrectly initialising loop hint 'vectorize.predicate.enable' with 0
(i.e. FK_Disabled) but this should have been FK_Undefined, which has been
fixed.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70125
When optimising for size and SCEV runtime checks need to be emitted to check
overflow behaviour, the loop vectorizer can run in this assert:
LoopVectorize.cpp:2699: void llvm::InnerLoopVectorizer::emitSCEVChecks(
llvm::Loop *, llvm::BasicBlock *): Assertion `!BB->getParent()->hasOptSize()
&& "Cannot SCEV check stride or overflow when opt
We should not generate predicates while optimising for size because
code will be generated for predicates such as these SCEV overflow runtime
checks.
This should fix PR43371.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68082
llvm-svn: 374166
Expose a utility function so that all places which want to suppress speculation (when otherwise legal) due to ordering and/or sanitizer interaction can do so.
llvm-svn: 371556
Philip Reames