This change adds an assertion to prevent tricky bug related to recursive
approach of building vectorization tree. For loop below takes number of
operands directly from tree entry rather than from scalars.
If the entry at this moment turns out incomplete (i.e. not all operands set)
then not all the dependencies will be seen by the scheduler.
This can lead to failed scheduling (and thus failed vectorization)
for perfectly vectorizable tree.
Here is code example which is likely to fire the assertion:
for (i : VL0->getNumOperands()) {
...
TE->setOperand(i, Operands);
buildTree_rec(Operands, Depth + 1,...);
}
Correct way is two steps process: first set all operands to a tree entry
and then recursively process each operand.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75296
This patch deletes some dead code out of SLP vectorizer.
Couple of changes taken out of D57059 to slightly lighten it
plus one more similar case fixed.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75276
A recent commit
(https://reviews.llvm.org/rG66c120f02560ef528a60924104ead66f330190f1) changed
the cost for calls to functions that have a vector version for some
vectorization factor. However, no check is performed for whether the
vectorization factor matches the current one being cost modeled. This leads to
attempts to widen call instructions to a vectorization factor for which such a
function does not exist, which in turn leads to an assertion failure.
This patch adds the check for vectorization factor (i.e. not just that the
called function has a vector version for some VF, but that it has a vector
version for this VF).
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74944
As suggested in D75145 -
I'm not sure why, but several passes have this kind of disable/enable flag
implemented at the pass manager level. But that means we have to duplicate
the flag for both pass managers and add code to check the flag every time
the pass appears in the pipeline.
We want a debug option to see if this pass is misbehaving regardless of the
pass managers, so just add a disablement check at the single point before
any transforms run.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75204
Code duplication (subsequently removed by refactoring) allowed
a logic discrepancy to creep in here.
We were being conservative about creating a vector binop -- but
not a vector cmp -- in the case where a vector op has the same
estimated cost as the scalar op. We want to be more aggressive
here because that can allow other combines based on reduced
instruction count/uses.
We can reverse the transform in DAGCombiner (potentially with a
more accurate cost model) if this causes regressions.
AFAIK, this does not conflict with InstCombine. We have a
scalarize transform there, but it relies on finding a constant
operand or a matching insertelement, so that means it eliminates
an extractelement from the sequence (so we won't have 2 extracts
by the time we get here if InstCombine succeeds).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75062
This should be the last step in the current cleanup.
Follow-ups should resolve the TODO about cost calc
and enable the more general case where we extract
different elements.
ToVectorTy is defined and used in multiple places. Hoist it to
VectorUtils.h to avoid duplication and improve re-usability.
Reviewers: rengolin, hsaito, Ayal, gilr, fpetrogalli
Reviewed By: fpetrogalli
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74959
Essentially, fold OrderedBasicBlock into BasicBlock, and make it
auto-invalidate the instruction ordering when new instructions are
added. Notably, we don't need to invalidate it when removing
instructions, which is helpful when a pass mostly delete dead
instructions rather than transforming them.
The downside is that Instruction grows from 56 bytes to 64 bytes. The
resulting LLVM code is substantially simpler and automatically handles
invalidation, which makes me think that this is the right speed and size
tradeoff.
The important change is in SymbolTableTraitsImpl.h, where the numbering
is invalidated. Everything else should be straightforward.
We probably want to implement a fancier re-numbering scheme so that
local updates don't invalidate the ordering, but I plan for that to be
future work, maybe for someone else.
Reviewed By: lattner, vsk, fhahn, dexonsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51664
The index of an ExtractElementInst is not guaranteed to be a
ConstantInt. It can be any integer value. Check explicitly for
ConstantInts.
The new test cases illustrate scenarios where we crash without
this patch. I've also added another test case to check the matching
of extractelement vector ops works.
Reviewers: RKSimon, ABataev, dtemirbulatov, vporpo
Reviewed By: ABataev
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74758
getOperationCost() is not the cost we wanted; that's not the
throughput value that the rest of the calculation uses.
We may want to switch everything in this code to use the
getInstructionThroughput() wrapper to avoid these kinds of
problems, but I'll look at that as a follow-up because that
can create other logical diffs via using optional parameters
(we'd need to speculatively create the vector instruction to
make a fair(er) comparison).
binop (extelt X, C), (extelt Y, C) --> extelt (binop X, Y), C
This is a transform that has been considered for canonicalization (instcombine)
in the past because it reduces instruction count. But as shown in the x86 tests,
it's impossible to know if it's profitable without a cost model. There are many
potential target constraints to consider.
We have implemented similar transforms in the backend (DAGCombiner and
target-specific), but I don't think we have this exact fold there either (and if
we did it in SDAG, it wouldn't work across blocks).
Note: this patch was intended to handle the more general case where the extract
indexes do not match, but it got too big, so I scaled it back to this pattern
for now.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74495
This is apparently worse than 1-byte alignment. This does not attempt
to decompose 2-byte aligned wide stores, but will stop trying to
produce them.
Also fix bug in LoadStoreVectorizer which was decreasing the alignment
and vectorizing stack accesses. It was assuming a stack object was an
alloca that could have its base alignment changed, which is not true
if the pointer is derived from a function argument.
The variable was added to the initial commit via copy/paste of existing
code, but it wasn't actually used in the code. We can add it back with
the proper usage if/when that is needed.
We have several bug reports that could be characterized as "reducing scalarization",
and this topic was also raised on llvm-dev recently:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-January/138157.html
...so I'm proposing that we deal with these patterns in a new, lightweight IR vector
pass that runs before/after other vectorization passes.
There are 4 alternate options that I can think of to deal with this kind of problem
(and we've seen various attempts at all of these), but they all have flaws:
InstCombine - can't happen without TTI, but we don't want target-specific
folds there.
SDAG - too late to assist other vectorization passes; TLI is not equipped
for these kind of cost queries; limited to a single basic block.
CGP - too late to assist other vectorization passes; would need to re-implement
basic cleanups like CSE/instcombine.
SLP - doesn't fit with existing transforms; limited to a single basic block.
This initial patch/transform is based on existing code in AggressiveInstCombine:
we walk backwards through the function looking for a pattern match. But we diverge
from that cost-independent IR canonicalization pass by using TTI to decide if the
vector alternative is profitable.
We probably have at least 10 similar bug reports/patterns (binops, constants,
inserts, cheap shuffles, etc) that would fit in this pass as follow-up enhancements.
It's possible that we could iterate on a worklist to fix-point like InstCombine does,
but it's safer to start with a most basic case and evolve from there, so I didn't
try to do anything fancy with this initial implementation.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D73480
Dead instructions do not need to be sunk. Currently we try and record
the recipies for them, but there are no recipes emitted for them and
there's nothing to sink. They can be removed from SinkAfter while
marking them for recording.
Fixes PR44634.
Reviewers: rengolin, hsaito, fhahn, Ayal, gilr
Reviewed By: gilr
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D73423
Currently due to the edge caching, we create wrong predicates for
branches with matching true and false successors. We will cache the
condition for the edge from the true successor, and then lookup the same
edge (src and dst are the same) for the edge to the false successor.
If both successors match, the condition should always be true. At the
moment, we cannot really create constant VPValues, but we can just
create a true condition as X | !X. Later passes will clean that up.
Fixes PR44488.
Reviewers: rengolin, hsaito, fhahn, Ayal, dorit, gilr
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D73079
Summary:
We don't have control/verify what will be the RHS of the division, so it might
happen to be zero, causing UB.
Reviewers: Vasilis, RKSimon, ABataev
Reviewed By: ABataev
Subscribers: vporpo, ABataev, hiraditya, llvm-commits, vdmitrie
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D72740
Summary: Vectorized loop processes VFxUF number of elements in one iteration thus total number of iterations decreases proportionally. In addition epilog loop may not have more than VFxUF - 1 iterations. This patch updates profile information accordingly.
Reviewers: hsaito, Ayal, fhahn, reames, silvas, dcaballe, SjoerdMeijer, mkuper, DaniilSuchkov
Reviewed By: Ayal, DaniilSuchkov
Subscribers: fedor.sergeev, hiraditya, rkruppe, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67905
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
Memory instruction widening recipes use the pointer operand of their load/store
ingredient for generating the needed GEPs, making it difficult to feed these
recipes with pointers based on other ingredients or none at all.
This patch modifies these recipes to use a VPValue for the pointer instead, in
order to reduce ingredient def-use usage by ILV as a step towards full
VPlan-based def-use relations. The recipes are constructed with VPValues bound
to these ingredients, maintaining current behavior.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70865
This addresses a vectorisation regression for tail-folded loops that are
counting down, e.g. loops as simple as this:
void foo(char *A, char *B, char *C, uint32_t N) {
while (N > 0) {
*C++ = *A++ + *B++;
N--;
}
}
These are loops that can be vectorised, but when tail-folding is requested, it
can't find a primary induction variable which we do need for predicating the
loop. As a result, the loop isn't vectorised at all, which it is able to do
when tail-folding is not attempted. So, this adds a check for the primary
induction variable where we decide how to lower the scalar epilogue. I.e., when
there isn't a primary induction variable, a scalar epilogue loop is allowed
(i.e. don't request tail-folding) so that vectorisation could still be
triggered.
Having this check for the primary induction variable make sense anyway, and in
addition, in a follow-up of this I will look into discovering earlier the
primary induction variable for counting down loops, so that this can also be
tail-folded.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D72324
SCEVExpander modifies the underlying function so it is more suitable in
Transforms/Utils, rather than Analysis. This allows using other
transform utils in SCEVExpander.
Reviewers: sanjoy.google, efriedma, reames
Reviewed By: sanjoy.google
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71537
A sequence of additions or multiplications that is known not to wrap, may wrap
if it's order is changed (i.e., reassociated). Therefore when vectorizing
integer sum or product reductions, their no-wrap flags need to be removed.
Fixes PR43828
Patch by Denis Antrushin
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69563
Add an extra parameter so alignment can be taken under
consideration in gather/scatter legalization.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71610
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 attempts to teach the cost model in Arm that code such as:
%s = shl i32 %a, 3
%a = and i32 %s, %b
Can under Arm or Thumb2 become:
and r0, r1, r2, lsl #3
So the cost of the shift can essentially be free. To do this without
trying to artificially adjust the cost of the "and" instruction, it
needs to get the users of the shl and check if they are a type of
instruction that the shift can be folded into. And so it needs to have
access to the actual instruction in getArithmeticInstrCost, which if
available is added as an extra parameter much like getCastInstrCost.
We otherwise limit it to shifts with a single user, which should
hopefully handle most of the cases. The list of instruction that the
shift can be folded into include ADC, ADD, AND, BIC, CMP, EOR, MVN, ORR,
ORN, RSB, SBC and SUB. This translates to Add, Sub, And, Or, Xor and
ICmp.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70966
Currently we fail to pick the right insertion point when
PreviousLastPart of a first-order-recurrence is a PHI node not in the
LoopVectorBody. This can happen when PreviousLastPart is produce in a
predicated block. In that case, we should pick the insertion point in
the BB the PHI is in.
Fixes PR44020.
Reviewers: hsaito, fhahn, Ayal, dorit
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71071
The file is intended to gather various VPlan transformations, not only
CFG related transforms. Actually, the only transformation there is not
CFG related.
Reviewers: Ayal, gilr, hsaito, rengolin
Reviewed By: gilr
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70732
InnerLoopVectorizer's code called during VPlan execution still relies on
original IR's def-use relations to decide which vector code to generate,
limiting VPlan transformations ability to modify def-use relations and still
have ILV generate the vector code.
This commit moves GEP operand queries controlling how GEPs are widened to a
dedicated recipe and extracts GEP widening code to its own ILV method taking
those recorded decisions as arguments. This reduces ingredient def-use usage by
ILV as a step towards full VPlan-based def-use relations.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69067
Fix PR40816: avoid considering scalar-with-predication instructions as also
uniform-after-vectorization.
Instructions identified as "scalar with predication" will be "vectorized" using
a replicating region. If such instructions are also optimized as "uniform after
vectorization", namely when only the first of VF lanes is used, such a
replicating region becomes erroneous - only the first instance of the region can
and should be formed. Fix such cases by not considering such instructions as
"uniform after vectorization".
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70298
Austin Kerbow