This patch unifies the way recipes and VPValues are printed after the
transition to VPDef.
VPSlotTracker has been updated to iterate over all recipes and all
their defined values to number those. There is no need to number
values in Value2VPValue.
It also updates a few places that only used slot numbers for
VPInstruction. All recipes now can produce numbered VPValues.
The new test case here contains a first order recurrences and an
instruction that is replicated. The first order recurrence forces an
instruction to be sunk _into_, as opposed to after the replication
region. That causes several things to go wrong including registering
vector instructions multiple times and failing to create dominance
relations correctly.
Instead we should be sinking to after the replication region, which is
what this patch makes sure happens.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93629
While here, rename the inaccurate getRecurrenceBinOp()
because that was also used to get CmpInst opcodes.
The recurrence/reduction kind should always refer to the
expected opcode for a reduction. SLP appears to be the
only direct caller of createSimpleTargetReduction(), and
that calling code ideally should not be carrying around
both an opcode and a reduction kind.
This should allow us to generalize reduction matching to
use intrinsics instead of only binops.
This patch turns updates VPInstruction to manage the value it defines
using VPDef. The VPValue is used during VPlan construction and
codegeneration instead of the plain IR reference where possible.
Reviewed By: gilr
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90565
This patch makes VPRecipeBase a direct subclass of VPDef, moving the
SubclassID to VPDef.
Reviewed By: gilr
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90564
This patch turns updates VPInterleaveRecipe to manage the values it defines
using VPDef. The VPValue is used during VPlan construction and
codegeneration instead of the plain IR reference where possible.
Reviewed By: gilr
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90562
This patch updates VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe to use VPDef
to manage the value it produces instead of inheriting from VPValue.
Reviewed By: gilr
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90563
VPPredInstPHIRecipe is one of the recipes that was missed during the
initial conversion. This patch adjusts the recipe to also manage its
operand using VPUser.
Update VPReplicateRecipe to inherit from VPValue. This still does not
update scalarizeInstruction to set the result for the VPValue of
VPReplicateRecipe, because this first requires tracking scalar values in
VPTransformState.
Reviewed By: reames
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D91500
Similar to other patches, this makes VPWidenRecipe a VPValue. Because of
the way it interacts with the reduction code it also slightly alters the
way that VPValues are registered, removing the up front NeedDef and
using getOrAddVPValue to create them on-demand if needed instead.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D88447
This converts the VPReductionRecipe into a VPValue, like other
VPRecipe's in preparation for traversing def-use chains. It also makes
it a VPUser, now storing the used VPValues as operands.
It doesn't yet change how the VPReductionRecipes are created. It will
need to call replaceAllUsesWith from the original recipe they replace,
but that is not done yet as VPWidenRecipe need to be created first.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D88382
This patch introduces a new VPDef class, which can be used to
manage VPValues defined by recipes/VPInstructions.
The idea here is to mirror VPUser for values defined by a recipe. A
VPDef can produce either zero (e.g. a store recipe), one (most recipes)
or multiple (VPInterleaveRecipe) result VPValues.
To traverse the def-use chain from a VPDef to its users, one has to
traverse the users of all values defined by a VPDef.
VPValues now contain a pointer to their corresponding VPDef, if one
exists. To traverse the def-use chain upwards from a VPValue, we first
need to check if the VPValue is defined by a VPDef. If it does not have
a VPDef, this means we have a VPValue that is not directly defined
iniside the plan and we are done.
If we have a VPDef, it is defined inside the region by a recipe, which
is a VPUser, and the upwards def-use chain traversal continues by
traversing all its operands.
Note that we need to add an additional field to to VPVAlue to link them
to their defs. The space increase is going to be offset by being able to
remove the SubclassID field in future patches.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90558
This patch turns VPWidenGEPRecipe into a VPValue and uses it
during VPlan construction and codegeneration instead of the plain IR
reference where possible.
Reviewed By: dmgreen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84683
This patch turns VPWidenSelectRecipe into a VPValue and uses it
during VPlan construction and codegeneration instead of the plain IR
reference where possible.
Reviewed By: dmgreen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84682
This patch turns VPWidenCall into a VPValue and uses it
during VPlan construction and codegeneration instead of the plain IR
reference where possible.
Reviewed By: dmgreen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84681
As per the comment in VPRecipeBase, clients should not rely on
getVPRecipeID, as it may change in the future. It should only be used in
classof implementations. Use isa instead in getFirstNonPhi.
This reverts the revert commit 710aceb645
and includes a fix for a memsan failure.
Original message:
This patch turns VPMemoryInstructionRecipe into a VPValue and uses it
during VPlan construction and codegeneration instead of the plain IR
reference where possible.
This patch turns VPMemoryInstructionRecipe into a VPValue and uses it
during VPlan construction and codegeneration instead of the plain IR
reference where possible.
Reviewed By: dmgreen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84680
I have introduced a new template PolySize class, where the template
parameter determines the type of quantity, i.e. for an element
count this is just an unsigned value. The ElementCount class is
now just a simple derivation of PolySize<unsigned>, whereas TypeSize
is more complicated because it still needs to contain the uint64_t
cast operator, since there are still many places in the code that
rely upon this implicit cast. As such the class also still needs
some of it's own operators.
I've tried to minimise the amount of code in the base PolySize
class, which led to a couple of changes:
1. In some places we were relying on '==' operator comparisons
between ElementCounts and the scalar value 1. I didn't put this
operator in the new PolySize class, and thought it was actually
clearer to use the isScalar() function instead.
2. I removed the isByteSized function and replaced it with calls
to isKnownMultipleOf(8).
I've also renamed NextPowerOf2 to be coefficientNextPowerOf2 so
that it's more consistent with coefficientDivideBy.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D88409
This expands upon the inloop reductions added in e9761688e41cb9e976,
allowing them to be inserted into tail folded loops. Reductions are
generates with the form:
x = select(mask, vecop, zero)
v = vecreduce.add(x)
c = add chain, v
Where zero here is chosen as the identity value for add reductions. The
backend is then expected to fold the select and the vecreduce into a
single predicated instruction.
Most of the code is fairly straight forward, except for the creation of
blockmasks which need to ensure they are created in dominance order. The
order they are added is altered to be after any phis, keeping the
requirements for the underlying IR.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84451
Update the code responsible for deleting VPBBs and recipes to properly
update users and release operands.
This is another preparation for D84680 & following patches towards
enabling modeling def-use chains in VPlan.
This adds a helper to convert a VPRecipeBase pointer to a VPUser, for
recipes that inherit from VPUser. Once VPRecipeBase directly inherits
from VPUser this helper can be removed.
This provides a convenient way to print VPValues and recipes in a
debugger. In particular it saves the user from instantiating
VPSlotTracker to print recipes or values.
This patch changes ElementCount so that the Min and Scalable
members are now private and can only be accessed via the get
functions getKnownMinValue() and isScalable(). In addition I've
added some other member functions for more commonly used operations.
Hopefully this makes the class more useful and will reduce the
need for calling getKnownMinValue().
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86065
This adapts LV to the new semantics of get.active.lane.mask as discussed in
D86147, which means that the LV now emits intrinsic get.active.lane.mask with
the loop tripcount instead of the backedge-taken count as its second argument.
The motivation for this is described in D86147.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86304
Changes:
* Change `ToVectorTy` to deal directly with `ElementCount` instances.
* `VF == 1` replaced with `VF.isScalar()`.
* `VF > 1` and `VF >=2` replaced with `VF.isVector()`.
* `VF <=1` is replaced with `VF.isZero() || VF.isScalar()`.
* Replaced the uses of `llvm::SmallSet<ElementCount, ...>` with
`llvm::SmallSetVector<ElementCount, ...>`. This avoids the need of an
ordering function for the `ElementCount` class.
* Bits and pieces around printing the `ElementCount` to string streams.
To guarantee that this change is a NFC, `VF.Min` and asserts are used
in the following places:
1. When it doesn't make sense to deal with the scalable property, for
example:
a. When computing unrolling factors.
b. When shuffle masks are built for fixed width vector types
In this cases, an
assert(!VF.Scalable && "<mgs>") has been added to make sure we don't
enter coepaths that don't make sense for scalable vectors.
2. When there is a conscious decision to use `FixedVectorType`. These
uses of `FixedVectorType` will likely be removed in favour of
`VectorType` once the vectorizer is generic enough to deal with both
fixed vector types and scalable vector types.
3. When dealing with building constants out of the value of VF, for
example when computing the vectorization `step`, or building vectors
of indices. These operation _make sense_ for scalable vectors too,
but changing the code in these places to be generic and make it work
for scalable vectors is to be submitted in a separate patch, as it is
a functional change.
4. When building the potential VFs in VPlan. Making the VPlan generic
enough to handle scalable vectorization factors is a functional change
that needs a separate patch. See for example `void
LoopVectorizationPlanner::buildVPlans(unsigned MinVF, unsigned
MaxVF)`.
5. The class `IntrinsicCostAttribute`: this class still uses `unsigned
VF` as updating the field to use `ElementCount` woudl require changes
that could result in changing the behavior of the compiler. Will be done
in a separate patch.
7. When dealing with user input for forcing the vectorization
factor. In this case, adding support for scalable vectorization is a
functional change that migh require changes at command line.
Note that in some places the idiom
```
unsigned VF = ...
auto VTy = FixedVectorType::get(ScalarTy, VF)
```
has been replaced with
```
ElementCount VF = ...
assert(!VF.Scalable && ...);
auto VTy = VectorType::get(ScalarTy, VF)
```
The assertion guarantees that the new code is (at least in debug mode)
functionally equivalent to the old version. Notice that this change had been
possible because none of the methods that are specific to `FixedVectorType`
were used after the instantiation of `VTy`.
Reviewed By: rengolin, ctetreau
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85794
Changes:
* Change `ToVectorTy` to deal directly with `ElementCount` instances.
* `VF == 1` replaced with `VF.isScalar()`.
* `VF > 1` and `VF >=2` replaced with `VF.isVector()`.
* `VF <=1` is replaced with `VF.isZero() || VF.isScalar()`.
* Add `<` operator to `ElementCount` to be able to use
`llvm::SmallSetVector<ElementCount, ...>`.
* Bits and pieces around printing the ElementCount to string streams.
* Added a static method to `ElementCount` to represent a scalar.
To guarantee that this change is a NFC, `VF.Min` and asserts are used
in the following places:
1. When it doesn't make sense to deal with the scalable property, for
example:
a. When computing unrolling factors.
b. When shuffle masks are built for fixed width vector types
In this cases, an
assert(!VF.Scalable && "<mgs>") has been added to make sure we don't
enter coepaths that don't make sense for scalable vectors.
2. When there is a conscious decision to use `FixedVectorType`. These
uses of `FixedVectorType` will likely be removed in favour of
`VectorType` once the vectorizer is generic enough to deal with both
fixed vector types and scalable vector types.
3. When dealing with building constants out of the value of VF, for
example when computing the vectorization `step`, or building vectors
of indices. These operation _make sense_ for scalable vectors too,
but changing the code in these places to be generic and make it work
for scalable vectors is to be submitted in a separate patch, as it is
a functional change.
4. When building the potential VFs in VPlan. Making the VPlan generic
enough to handle scalable vectorization factors is a functional change
that needs a separate patch. See for example `void
LoopVectorizationPlanner::buildVPlans(unsigned MinVF, unsigned
MaxVF)`.
5. The class `IntrinsicCostAttribute`: this class still uses `unsigned
VF` as updating the field to use `ElementCount` woudl require changes
that could result in changing the behavior of the compiler. Will be done
in a separate patch.
7. When dealing with user input for forcing the vectorization
factor. In this case, adding support for scalable vectorization is a
functional change that migh require changes at command line.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85794
Arm MVE has multiple instructions such as VMLAVA.s8, which (in this
case) can take two 128bit vectors, sign extend the inputs to i32,
multiplying them together and sum the result into a 32bit general
purpose register. So taking 16 i8's as inputs, they can multiply and
accumulate the result into a single i32 without any rounding/truncating
along the way. There are also reduction instructions for plain integer
add and min/max, and operations that sum into a pair of 32bit registers
together treated as a 64bit integer (even though MVE does not have a
plain 64bit addition instruction). So giving the vectorizer the ability
to use these instructions both enables us to vectorize at higher
bitwidths, and to vectorize things we previously could not.
In order to do that we need a way to represent that the reduction
operation, specified with a llvm.experimental.vector.reduce when
vectorizing for Arm, occurs inside the loop not after it like most
reductions. This patch attempts to do that, teaching the vectorizer
about in-loop reductions. It does this through a vplan recipe
representing the reductions that the original chain of reduction
operations is replaced by. Cost modelling is currently just done through
a prefersInloopReduction TTI hook (which follows in a later patch).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75069
This reverts commit e9761688e4. It breaks the build:
```
~/src/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Analysis/IVDescriptors.cpp:868:10: error: no viable conversion from returned value of type 'SmallVector<[...], 8>' to function return type 'SmallVector<[...], 4>'
return ReductionOperations;
```
Arm MVE has multiple instructions such as VMLAVA.s8, which (in this
case) can take two 128bit vectors, sign extend the inputs to i32,
multiplying them together and sum the result into a 32bit general
purpose register. So taking 16 i8's as inputs, they can multiply and
accumulate the result into a single i32 without any rounding/truncating
along the way. There are also reduction instructions for plain integer
add and min/max, and operations that sum into a pair of 32bit registers
together treated as a 64bit integer (even though MVE does not have a
plain 64bit addition instruction). So giving the vectorizer the ability
to use these instructions both enables us to vectorize at higher
bitwidths, and to vectorize things we previously could not.
In order to do that we need a way to represent that the reduction
operation, specified with a llvm.experimental.vector.reduce when
vectorizing for Arm, occurs inside the loop not after it like most
reductions. This patch attempts to do that, teaching the vectorizer
about in-loop reductions. It does this through a vplan recipe
representing the reductions that the original chain of reduction
operations is replaced by. Cost modelling is currently just done through
a prefersInloopReduction TTI hook (which follows in a later patch).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75069
"error: 'get' is deprecated: The base class version of get with the scalable
argument defaulted to false is deprecated."
Changed VectorType::get() -> FixedVectorType::get().
This emits new IR intrinsic @llvm.get.active.mask for tail-folded vectorised
loops if the intrinsic is supported by the backend, which is checked by
querying TargetTransform hook emitGetActiveLaneMask.
This intrinsic creates a mask representing active and inactive vector lanes,
which is used by the masked load/store instructions that are created for
tail-folded loops. The semantics of @llvm.get.active.mask are described here in
LangRef:
https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#llvm-get-active-lane-mask-intrinsics
This intrinsic is also used to provide a hint to the backend. That is, the
second argument of the intrinsic represents the back-edge taken count of the
loop. For MVE, for example, we use that to set up tail-predication, which is a
new form of predication in MVE for vector loops that implicitely predicates the
last vector loop iteration by implicitely setting active/inactive lanes, i.e.
the tail loop is predicated. In order to set up a tail-predicated vector loop,
we need to know the number of data elements processed by the vector loop, which
corresponds the the tripcount of the scalar loop, which we can now reconstruct
using @llvm.get.active.mask.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79100
Summary:
When handling loops whose VF is 1, fold-tail vectorization sets the
backedge taken count of the original loop with a vector of a single
element. This causes type-mismatch during instruction generartion.
The purpose of this patch is toto address the case of VF==1.
Reviewer: Ayal (Ayal Zaks), bmahjour (Bardia Mahjour), fhahn (Florian Hahn), gilr (Gil Rapaport), rengolin (Renato Golin)
Reviewed By: Ayal (Ayal Zaks), bmahjour (Bardia Mahjour), fhahn (Florian Hahn)
Subscribers: Ayal (Ayal Zaks), rkruppe (Hanna Kruppe), bmahjour (Bardia Mahjour), rogfer01 (Roger Ferrer Ibanez), vkmr (Vineet Kumar), bollu (Siddharth Bhat), hiraditya (Aditya Kumar), llvm-commits (Mailing List llvm-commits)
Tag: LLVM
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79976
The patch standardizes printing of VPRecipes a bit, by hoisting out the
common emission of \\l\"+\n. It simplifies the code and is also a first
step towards untangling printing from DOT format output, with the goal
of making the DOT output optional and to provide a more concise debug
output if DOT output is disabled.
Reviewers: gilr, Ayal, rengolin
Reviewed By: gilr
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78883
When folding tail, branch taken count is computed during initial VPlan execution
and recorded to be used by the compare computing the loop's mask. This recording
should directly set the State, instead of reusing Value2VPValue mapping which
serves original Values present prior to vectorization.
The branch taken count may be a constant Value, which may be used elsewhere in
the loop; trying to employ Value2VPValue for both leads to the issue reported in
https://reviews.llvm.org/D76992#inline-721028
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78847
Florian Hahn