getPrimitiveSizeInBits returns 0 for pointers, we need to query
the size via DataLayout instead.
Reviewed By: reames
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D135976
Follow up to D133580; adjust the cost model to prefer uniform store lowering for scalable stores which are unpredicated.
The impact here isn't in the uniform store lowering quality itself. InstCombine happily converts the scatter form into the single store form. The main impact is in letting the rest of the cost model make choices based on the knowledge that the vector will be scalarized on use.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D134460
This extends the previously added uniform store case to handle stores of loop varying values to a loop invariant address. Note that the placement of this code only allows unpredicated stores; this is important for correctness. (That is "IsPredicated" is always false at this point in the function.)
This patch does not include scalable types. The diff felt "large enough" as it were; I'll handle that in a separate patch. (It requires some changes to cost modeling.)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133580
This patch adds cost model for vector insert/extract element instructions. In RVV, we could use vector scalar move instruction to insert or extract the first element, and use vslide to move it. But for mask vector or i64 vector in i32 target, we need special instructions to make it.
Reviewed By: reames
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133007
This extends the safe-divisor widening scheme recently added for scalable vectors to handle fixed vectors as well.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D132591
VPReplicateRecipe::isUniform actually means uniform-per-parts, hence a
scalar instruction is generated per-part.
This is a potential alternative D132892. For now the current patch only
catches cases where the address is trivially invariant (defined outside
VPlan), while D132892 catches any address that is considered invariant
by SCEV AFAICT.
It should be possible to hoist fully invariant recipes feeding loads out
of the vector loop region as well, but in practice LICM should do that
already.
This version of the patch artificially limits this to loads to make it
easier to compare, but this restriction should be easily liftable.
Reviewed By: reames
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133019
This change enables the use of RISCV's variable length vector registers for fixed length vectors in the IR, and implicitly enables various IR transforms which generate fixed length vectors if legal (e.g. LoopVectorize). Specifically, this enables fixed length vectors which are known to be inbounds of the underlying variable hardware size.
For context, remember that the +V extension provides a minimum VLEN of 128. The embedded variants provide lower minimums. The analogy here is essentially vectorizing for SSE on a machine which may or may not include AVX2/AVX512. We won't get full utilization by default, but we will get some benefit. And of course, with an explicit mcpu we can vectorize to the exact target hardware.
The LV impact is mostly related to vectorizer robustness. In cases we haven't yet fully implemented scalable vectorization support, we can fall back to fixed length vectorization.
SLP has been disabled for now, even when fixed vectors are enabled. See a310637 and associated review. There are a few addiitional code quality issues which need worked through before turning SLP on would be reasonable.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D131508
When we have a dependency with a dependence distance which can only be hit on an iteration beyond the actual trip count of the loop, we can ignore that dependency when analyzing said loop. We already had this code, but had restricted it solely to unknown dependence distances. This change applies it to all dependence distances.
Without this code, we relied on the vectorizer reducing VF such that our infeasible dependence was respected. This usually worked out to about the same result, but not always. For fixed length vectorization, this could mean a smaller VF than optimal being chosen or additional runtime checks. For scalable vectorization - where the bounds on access implied by VF are broader - we could often not find a feasible VF at all.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D131924
This patch adds support for vectorizing conditionally executed div/rem operations via a variant of widening. The existing support for predicated divrem in the vectorizer requires scalarization which we can't do for scalable vectors.
The basic idea is that we can always divide (take remainder) by 1 without executing UB. As such, we can use the active lane mask to conditional select either the actual divisor for active lanes, or a constant one for inactive lanes. We already account for the cost of the active lane mask, so the only additional cost is a splat of one and the vector select. This is one of several possible approaches to this problem; see the review thread for discussion on some of the others. This one was chosen mostly because it was straight forward, and none of the others seemed oviously better.
I enabled the new code only for scalable vectors. We could also legally enable it for fixed vectors as well, but I haven't thought through the cost tradeoffs between widening and scalarization enough to know if that's profitable. This will be explored in future patches.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D130164
On known hardware, reductions, gather, and scatter operations have execution latencies which correlated with the vector length (VL) of the operation. Most other operations (e.g. simply arithmetic) don't correlated in this way, and instead essentially fixed cost as VL varies.
When I'd implemented initial scalable cost model support for reductions, gather, and scatter operations, I had used an upper bound on the statically unknown VL. The argument at the time was that this prevented falsely low costs, and biased the vectorizer away from generating bad (on some hardware) code. Unfortunately, practical experience shows we were a bit too effective at that goal, and the high costs defacto prevents vectorization using these constructs at all.
This patch reverses course, and ties the returned cost not to the maximum possible VL, but the VL which would correspond to VScaleForTuning. This parameter is the same one the vectorizer uses when normalizing loop costs, so the term effectively cancels out. The result is that the vectorizer now sees these constructs as comparable in cost to their fixed length variants.
This does introduce the possibility of the cost for these operations being a significant under estimate on platforms where actual VLEN is far from that implied by VScaleForTuning. On such platforms, we might make poor heuristic choices. Probably not in LV itself (due to the cancellation mentioned above), but possibly during e.g. lowering. I'm not currently aware of any concrete examples of this, but this patch does open a concern which did not previously exist.
Previously, we had the problem of overestimating costs causing the same problem on machines much closer to default values for vscale for tuning. With this patch, we still have that problem potentially if vscale for tuning is set high (manually), and then the code is run on a narrow VLEN machine.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D131519
This change reorganizes the code and comments to make the expected semantics of these routines more clear. However, this is *not* an NFC change. The functional change is having isScalarWithPredication return false if the instruction does not need predicated. Specifically, for the case of a uniform memory operation we were previously considering it *not* to be a predicated instruction, but *were* considering it to be scalable with predication.
As can be seen with the test changes, this causes uniform memory ops which should have been lowered as uniform-per-parts values to instead be lowering via naive scalarization or if scalarization is infeasible (i.e. scalable vectors) aborted entirely. I also don't trust the code to bail out correctly 100% of the time, so it's possible we had a crash or miscompile from trying to scalarize something which isn't scalaralizable. I haven't found a concrete example here, but I am suspicious.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D131093
This extends the handling of uniform memory operations to handle the case where a store is storing a loop invariant value. Unlike the general case of a store to an invariant address where we must use the last active lane, in this case we can use any lane since all lanes must produce the same result.
For context, the basic structure of the existing code and how the change fits in:
* First, we select a widening strategy. (The result is irrelevant for this patch.)
* Then we determine if a computation is uniform within all lanes of VF. (Note this is the uniform-per-part definition, not LAI's uniform across all unrolled iterations definition.)
* If it is, we overrule the widening strategy, and unconditionally scalarize.
* VPReplicationRecipe - which is what actually does the scalarization - knows how to handle unform-per-part values including for scalable vectors. However, we do need to know that the expression is safe to execute without predication - e.g. the uniform mem op was unconditional in the original loop. (This part was split off and already landed.)
An obvious question is why not simply implement the generic case? The answer is that I'm going to, but doing so without a canonicalization towards uniform causes regressions due to bad interaction with scalarization/uniformity of values feeding the uniform mem-op. This patch is needed to avoid those regressions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D130364
This change enables vectorization (using scalable vectorization only, fixed vectors are not yet enabled) for RISCV when vector instructions are available for the target configuration.
At this point, the resulting configuration should be both stable (e.g. no crashes), and profitable (i.e. few cases where scalar loops beat vector ones), but is not going to be particularly well tuned (i.e. we emit the best possible vector loop). The goal of this change is to align testing across organizations and ensure the default configuration matches what downstreams are using as closely as possible.
This exposes a large amount of code which hasn't otherwise been on by default, and thus may not have been fully exercised. Given that, having issues fall out is not unexpected. If you find issues, please make sure to include as much information as you can when reverting this change.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129013
The problem here is target independent, but particularly painful on RISCV. If we chose to vectorize such that vscale x 2 x i32 is our widest type and fits in a register, a naive expansion of i64 comparisons results in comparisons and index types at <scalabe x 2 x i64>. This requires both an LMUL of 2, and a VSETVLI toggle in the loop. Note that we could have used <vscale x 2 x i32> for the compairons legally given the range of the trip count.
All of our other tests are functionality tests constrained to some
specific configuration. This one is intended to float with the
default configuration so that changes in that default are visible
in reviews. Note that our current default does not enable
vectorization at all; thus the current output is unvectorized.
An srem or sdiv has two cases which can cause undefined behavior, not just one. The existing code did not account for this, and as a result, we miscompiled when we encountered e.g. a srem i64 %v, -1 in a conditional block.
Instead of hand rolling the logic, just use the utility function which exists exactly for this purpose.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D130106
The motivation here is to a) bring us closer into alignment with AArch64 under the assumption that codepath is better tested, and b) simplify pattern matching in an upcoming change.
The immediate impact is a significant IR reduction but a fairly minimal change in the generated assembly. Due to a difference in expansion behavior we get a saturating add vs an unsaturating one for the old code, but that's about it. This difference comes down to different handling of overflow, which doesn't seem to be possible here anyways, so the assembly codegen is arguably a minor regression. I don't expect that to matter in practice.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129221
This change is a bit subtle. If we have a type like <vscale x 1 x i64>, the vectorizer will currently reject vectorization. The reason is that a type like <1 x i64> is likely to get simply rescalarized, and the vectorizer doesn't want to be in the game of simple unrolling.
(I've given the example in terms of 1 x types which use a single register, but the same issue exists for any N x types which use N registers. e.g. RISCV LMULs.)
This change distinguishes scalable types from fixed types under the reasoning that converting to a scalable type isn't unrolling. Because the actual vscale isn't known until runtime, using a vscale type is potentially very profitable.
This makes an important, but unchecked, assumption. Specifically, the scalable type is assumed to only be legal per the cost model if there's actually a scalable register class which is distinct from the scalar domain. This is, to my knowledge, true for all targets which return non-invalid costs for scalable vector ops today, but in theory, we could have a target decide to lower scalable to fixed length vector or even scalar registers. If that ever happens, we'd need to revisit this code.
In practice, this patch unblocks scalable vectorization for ELEN types on RISCV.
Let me sketch one alternate implementation I considered. We could have restricted this to when we know a minimum value for vscale. Specifically, for the default +v extension for RISCV, we actually know that vscale >= 2 for ELEN types. However, doing it this way means we can't generate scalable vectors when using the various embedded vector extensions which have a minimum vscale of 1.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D128542
LoopVectorizer uses getVScaleForTuning for deciding how to discount the cost of a potential vector factor by the amount of work performed. Without the callback implemented, the vectorizer was defaulting to an estimated vscale of 1. This results in fixed vectorization looking falsely profitable (since it used the command line VLEN).
The test change is pretty limited since a) we don't have much coverage of the vectorizer with scalable vectors at all, and b) what little coverage we have mostly uses i64 element types. There's a separate issue with <vscale x 1 x i64> which prevents us from getting to this stage of costing, and thus only the one test explicitly written to avoid that is visible in the diff. However, this is actually a very wide impact change as it changes the practical vectorization result when both fixed and scalable is enabled to scalable.
As an aside, I think the vectorizer is at little too strongly biased towards scalable when both are legal, but we can explore that separately. For now, let's just get the cost model working the way it was intended.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D128547
We currently have a costing bug around the etype == ELEN case, so add otherwise duplicate tests to show test diffs as I work on other parts of costing.
If we have an unaligned uniform store, then when costing a scalable VF we can't emit code to scalarize it. (Well, we could, but we haven't implemented that case.) This change replaces an assert with a cost-model bailout such that we reject vectorization with the scalable VF instead of crashing.
This just adds some very basic vectorizer testing with both fixed and scalable vectorization enabled. For context, I just yesterday fixed a crash in costing of the splat_ptr example - see bbf3fd.
This brings us into alignment with AArch64, and in the process fixes a compiler crash bug in uniform store handling in the vectorizer.
Before the recent invalid cost bailout work, this would have also avoided crashes on invalid costs in some cases. I honestly think the vectorizer should gracefully bailout on uniform stores it can't use a scatter for, but it doesn't, so lets take the path of least resistance here. It's also possible that there are other vectorizer bugs AArch64 isn't seeing because of this hook; we don't want to be finding them either.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127514
The default RegisterClass is not enough to model RISCV Register.
We define risc-v's own register class to model FP Register.
This helps to better estimate the register pressure in the loop-vectorize.
Reviewed By: kito-cheng
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126854
```
void vector_reverse_i64(int *A, int *B, int n) {
#pragma clang loop vectorize_width(4, scalable)
for (int i = n-1; i >= 0; i--)
A[i] = B[i] + 1;
}
```
When option: scalable-vectorization is on (or set #pragma clang loop vectorize_width(elements, scalable)), Reverse Iterators can't loop vectorization as <vscale x elements x elementType>
Reviewed By: craig.topper
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D125866
When the loop vectoriser encounters a known low trip count it tries
to create a single predicated loop in order to get the benefit of
vectorisation and eliminate the scalar tail. However, until now the
vectoriser prevented the use of scalable vectors in this case due
to concerns in the past about stability. I believe that tail-folded
loops using scalable vectors are now sufficiently well tested that
we can enable this. For the same reason I've also enabled it when
optimising for code size too.
Tests added here:
Transforms/LoopVectorize/AArch64/sve-low-trip-count.ll
Transforms/LoopVectorize/AArch64/sve-tail-folding-optsize.ll
Transforms/LoopVectorize/RISCV/low-trip-count.ll
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D121595
Craig Topper