Summary:
For better vectorization result we should take into consideration the
cost of the user insertelement instructions when we try to
vectorize sequences that build the whole vector. I.e. if we have the
following scalar code:
```
<Scalar code>
insertelement <ScalarCode>, ...
```
we should consider the cost of the last `insertelement ` instructions as
the cost of the scalar code.
Reviewers: RKSimon, spatel, hfinkel, mkuper
Subscribers: javed.absar, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42657
llvm-svn: 324893
Patch tries to improve two-pass vectorization analysis, existing in SLP vectorizer. What it does:
1. Defines key nodes, that are the vectorization roots. Previously vectorization started if StoreInst or ReturnInst is found. For now, the vectorization started for all Instructions with no users and void types (Terminators, StoreInst) + CallInsts.
2. CmpInsts, InsertElementInsts and InsertValueInsts are stored in the
array. This array is processed only after the vectorization of the
first-after-these instructions key node is finished. Vectorization goes
in reverse order to try to vectorize as much code as possible.
Reviewers: mzolotukhin, Ayal, mkuper, gilr, hfinkel, RKSimon
Subscribers: ashahid, anemet, RKSimon, mssimpso, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29826
llvm-svn: 310260
Summary:
Patch tries to improve two-pass vectorization analysis, existing in SLP vectorizer. What it does:
1. Defines key nodes, that are the vectorization roots. Previously vectorization started if StoreInst or ReturnInst is found. For now, the vectorization started for all Instructions with no users and void types (Terminators, StoreInst) + CallInsts.
2. CmpInsts, InsertElementInsts and InsertValueInsts are stored in the array. This array is processed only after the vectorization of the first-after-these instructions key node is finished. Vectorization goes in reverse order to try to vectorize as much code as possible.
Reviewers: mzolotukhin, Ayal, mkuper, gilr, hfinkel, RKSimon
Subscribers: ashahid, anemet, RKSimon, mssimpso, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29826
llvm-svn: 310255
This caused PR33053.
Original commit message:
> The new experimental reduction intrinsics can now be used, so I'm enabling this
> for AArch64. We will need this for SVE anyway, so it makes sense to do this for
> NEON reductions as well.
>
> The existing code to match shufflevector patterns are replaced with a direct
> lowering of the reductions to AArch64-specific nodes. Tests updated with the
> new, simpler, representation.
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32247
llvm-svn: 303115
The new experimental reduction intrinsics can now be used, so I'm enabling this
for AArch64. We will need this for SVE anyway, so it makes sense to do this for
NEON reductions as well.
The existing code to match shufflevector patterns are replaced with a direct
lowering of the reductions to AArch64-specific nodes. Tests updated with the
new, simpler, representation.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32247
llvm-svn: 302678
Summary:
If horizontal reduction tree starts from the binary operation that is
used in PHI node, but this PHI is not used in horizontal reduction, we
may end up with extra addition of this PHI node after vectorization.
Here is an example:
```
%phi = phi i32 [ %tmp, %end], ...
...
%tmp = add i32 %tmp1, %tmp2
end:
```
after vectorization we always have something like:
```
%phi = phi i32 [ %tmp, %end], ...
...
%red = extractelement <8 x 32> %vec.red, 0
%tmp = add i32 %red, %phi
end:
```
even if `%phi` is not used in reduction tree. Patch considers these PHI
nodes as extra arguments and considers them in the final result iff they
really used in reduction.
Reviewers: mkuper, hfinkel, mzolotukhin
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30409
llvm-svn: 296606
The test case included with r279125 exposed an existing signed integer
overflow. Since getTreeCost can return INT_MAX, we can't sum this cost together
with other costs, such as getReductionCost.
This patch removes the possibility of assigning a cost of INT_MAX. Since we
were previously using INT_MAX as an indicator for "should not vectorize", we
now explicitly check this condition with "isTreeTinyAndNotFullyVectorizable"
before computing a cost.
This patch adds a run-line to the test case used for r279125 that ensures we
don't vectorize. Previously, this line would vectorize the test case by chance
due to undefined behavior in the cost calculation.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23723
llvm-svn: 279562
The test case included in r279125 exposed existing undefined behavior in the
SLP vectorizer that it did not introduce. This patch reapplies the original
patch, but modifies the test case to avoid hitting the undefined behavior. This
allows us to close PR28330 while keeping the UBSan bot happy. The undefined
behavior the original test uncovered will be addressed in a follow-on patch.
Reference: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=28330
llvm-svn: 279370
We abort building vectorizable trees in some cases (e.g., if the maximum
recursion depth is reached, if the region size is too large, etc.). If this
happens for a reduction, we can be left with a root entry that needs to be
gathered. For these cases, we need make sure we actually set VectorizedValue to
the resulting vector.
This patch ensures we properly set VectorizedValue, and it also ensures the
insertelement sequence generated for the gathers is inserted at the correct
location.
Reference: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=28330
Differential Revison: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23410
llvm-svn: 279125
Alexey Bataev