Commit Graph

513 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Kerry McLaughlin 6f16ee5e14 Revert "[LoopVectorize] Extract the last lane from a uniform store"
This reverts commit 0d748b4d32.
This is causing some failures when building Spec2017 with scalable
vectors. Reverting to investigate.
2021-11-10 11:21:19 +00:00
Dmitry Makogon 62f86d4f95 Reapply 5ec2386 "Reapply db28934 "[IndVars] Pass TTI to replaceCongruentIVs""
This reverts commit 7cd273c339.

Several patches with tests fixes have been applied:
0cada82f0a "[Test] Remove incorrect test in GVN"
97cb13615d "[Test] Separate IndVars test into AArch64 and X86 parts"
985cc490f1 "[Test] Remove separated test in IndVars",
and test failures caused by 5ec2386 should be resolved now.
2021-11-10 17:36:14 +07:00
Douglas Yung 7cd273c339 Revert "Reapply db28934 "[IndVars] Pass TTI to replaceCongruentIVs""
This reverts commit 5ec2386332.

This change is causing test failures on the PS4 linux build bot: https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/139/builds/12871
2021-11-09 10:28:41 -08:00
Kerry McLaughlin 0d748b4d32 [LoopVectorize] Extract the last lane from a uniform store
Changes VPReplicateRecipe to extract the last lane from an unconditional,
uniform store instruction. collectLoopUniforms will also add stores to
the list of uniform instructions where Legal->isUniformMemOp is true.

setCostBasedWideningDecision now sets the widening decision for
all uniform memory ops to Scalarize, where previously GatherScatter
may have been chosen for scalable stores.

This fixes an assert ("Cannot yet scalarize uniform stores") in
setCostBasedWideningDecision when we have a loop containing a
uniform i1 store and a scalable VF, which we cannot create a scatter for.

Reviewed By: sdesmalen, david-arm, fhahn

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112725
2021-11-09 14:43:16 +00:00
Dmitry Makogon 5ec2386332 Reapply db28934 "[IndVars] Pass TTI to replaceCongruentIVs"
This reapplies patch db289340c8.

The test failures on build with expensive checks caused by the patch happened due
to the fact that we sorted loop Phis in replaceCongruentIVs using llvm::sort,
which shuffles the given container if the expensive checks are enabled,
so equivalent Phis in the sorted vector had different mutual order from run
to run. replaceCongruentIVs tries to replace narrow Phis with truncations
of wide ones. In some test cases there were several Phis with the same
width, so if their order differs from run to run, the narrow Phis would
be replaced with a different Phi, depending on the shuffling result.

The patch ae14fae0ff fixed this issue by
replacing llvm::sort with llvm::stable_sort.
2021-11-09 17:42:29 +07:00
Dmitry Makogon 8d4eba6c0d Revert "[IndVars] Pass TTI to replaceCongruentIVs"
This reverts commit db289340c8.

The patch caused 2 crashes with expensive checks enabled.
2021-11-08 19:35:14 +07:00
Dmitry Makogon db289340c8 [IndVars] Pass TTI to replaceCongruentIVs
In IndVarSimplify after simplifying and extending loop IVs we call 'replaceCongruentIVs'.
This function optionally takes a TTI argument to be able to replace narrow IVs uses
with truncates of the widest one.
For some reason the TTI wasn't passed to the function, so it couldn't perform such
transform.
This patch fixes it.

Reviewed By: mkazantsev

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D113024
2021-11-08 19:20:53 +07:00
Philip Reames 6caff716da Regen some autogen tests to account for format change 2021-10-28 09:22:20 -07:00
Roman Lebedev b291597112
Revert rest of `IRBuilderBase`'s short-circuiting folds
Upon further investigation and discussion,
this is actually the opposite direction from what we should be taking,
and this direction wouldn't solve the motivational problem anyway.

Additionally, some more (polly) tests have escaped being updated.
So, let's just take a step back here.

This reverts commit f3190dedee.
This reverts commit 749581d21f.
This reverts commit f3df87d57e.
This reverts commit ab1dbcecd6.
2021-10-28 02:15:14 +03:00
Roman Lebedev 101aaf62ef
Revert "[NFC] `IRBuilderBase::CreateAdd()`: place constant onto RHS"
Clang OpenMP codegen tests are failing,
will recommit afterwards.

This reverts commit 4723c9b3c6.
2021-10-27 22:21:37 +03:00
Roman Lebedev 42712698fd
Revert "[IR] `IRBuilderBase::CreateAdd()`: short-circuit `x + 0` --> `x`"
Clang OpenMP codegen tests are failing.

This reverts commit 288f1f8abe.
This reverts commit cb90e5356a.
2021-10-27 22:21:37 +03:00
Roman Lebedev cb90e5356a
[IR] `IRBuilderBase::CreateAdd()`: short-circuit `x + 0` --> `x`
There's precedent for that in `CreateOr()`/`CreateAnd()`.

The motivation here is to avoid bloating the run-time check's IR
in `SCEVExpander::generateOverflowCheck()`.

Refs. https://reviews.llvm.org/D109368#3089809
2021-10-27 21:34:38 +03:00
Roman Lebedev 4723c9b3c6
[NFC] `IRBuilderBase::CreateAdd()`: place constant onto RHS 2021-10-27 21:34:38 +03:00
Roman Lebedev 156f10c840
[IR] `SCEVExpander::generateOverflowCheck()`: short-circuit `umul_with_overflow`-by-one
It's a no-op, no overflow happens ever: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/Zw89rZ

While generally i don't like such hacks,
we have a very good reason to do this: here we are expanding
a run-time correctness check for the vectorization,
and said `umul_with_overflow` will not be optimized out
before we query the cost of the checks we've generated.

Which means, the cost of run-time checks would be artificially inflated,
and after https://reviews.llvm.org/D109368 that will affect
the minimal trip count for which these checks are even evaluated.
And if they aren't even evaluated, then the vectorized code
certainly won't be run.

We could consider doing this in IRBuilder,  but then we'd need to
also teach `CreateExtractValue()` to look into chain of `insertvalue`'s,
and i'm not sure there's precedent for that.

Refs. https://reviews.llvm.org/D109368#3089809
2021-10-27 19:45:55 +03:00
Roman Lebedev f3df87d57e
[IR] `IRBuilderBase::CreateOr()`: fix short-circuiting for constant on LHS
There is no guarantee that the constant is on RHS here,
we have to handle both cases.

Refs. https://reviews.llvm.org/D109368#3089809
2021-10-27 18:01:06 +03:00
Roman Lebedev ab1dbcecd6
[IR] `IRBuilderBase::CreateSelect()`: if cond is a constant i1, short-circuit
While we could emit such a tautological `select`,
it will stick around until the next instsimplify invocation,
which may happen after we count the cost of this redundant `select`.
Which is precisely what happens with loop vectorization legality checks,
and that artificially increases the cost of said checks,
which is bad.

There is prior art for this in `IRBuilderBase::CreateAnd()`/`IRBuilderBase::CreateOr()`.

Refs. https://reviews.llvm.org/D109368#3089809
2021-10-27 18:01:05 +03:00
Roman Lebedev 5a8a7b3bf8
[NFC] Re-autogenerate check lines in some tests to ease of future update 2021-10-27 18:01:05 +03:00
Roman Lebedev e1db72703f
[NFC] Re-harden test/Transforms/LoopVectorize/X86/pr48340.ll
This test is quite fragile WRT improvements to the interleaved load cost
modelling. Let's bump the stride way up so that is no longer a concern.
2021-10-22 15:07:53 +03:00
Roman Lebedev 6f6842d782
Revert "[NFC][LV] Autogenerate check lines in a test for ease of future update"
This reverts commit 8ae83a1baf.
2021-10-22 15:07:53 +03:00
Roman Lebedev 8ae83a1baf
[NFC][LV] Autogenerate check lines in a test for ease of future update 2021-10-22 14:08:58 +03:00
Arthur Eubanks 15fefcb9eb [opt] Directly translate -O# to -passes='default<O#>'
Right now when we see -O# we add the corresponding 'default<O#>' into
the list of passes to run when translating legacy -pass-name. This has
the side effect of not using the default AA pipeline.

Instead, treat -O# as -passes='default<O#>', but don't allow any other
-passes or -pass-name. I think we can keep `opt -O#` as shorthand for
`opt -passes='default<O#>` but disallow anything more than just -O#.

Tests need to be updated to not use `opt -O# -pass-name`.

Reviewed By: asbirlea

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112036
2021-10-18 16:48:10 -07:00
Florian Hahn e844f05397
[LoopUtils] Simplify addRuntimeCheck to return a single value.
This simplifies the return value of addRuntimeCheck from a pair of
instructions to a single `Value *`.

The existing users of addRuntimeChecks were ignoring the first element
of the pair, hence there is not reason to track FirstInst and return
it.

Additionally all users of addRuntimeChecks use the second returned
`Instruction *` just as `Value *`, so there is no need to return an
`Instruction *`. Therefore there is no need to create a redundant
dummy `and X, true` instruction any longer.

Effectively this change should not impact the generated code because the
redundant AND will be folded by later optimizations. But it is easy to
avoid creating it in the first place and it allows more accurately
estimating the cost of the runtime checks.
2021-10-18 18:03:09 +01:00
Simon Pilgrim 85b87179f4 [TTI][X86] Add v8i16 -> 2 x v4i16 stride 2 interleaved load costs
Split SSE2 and SSSE3 costs to correctly handle PSHUFB lowering - as was noted on D111938
2021-10-16 17:28:07 +01:00
Simon Pilgrim 6ec644e215 [TTI][X86] Add SSE2 sub-128bit vXi16/32 and v2i64 stride 2 interleaved load costs
These cases use the same codegen as AVX2 (pshuflw/pshufd) for the sub-128bit vector deinterleaving, and unpcklqdq for v2i64.

It's going to take a while to add full interleaved cost coverage, but since these are the same for SSE2 -> AVX2 it should be an easy win.

Fixes PR47437

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111938
2021-10-16 16:21:45 +01:00
Simon Pilgrim d5f5121ea6 [LV][X86] Add PR47437 test case 2021-10-16 13:40:54 +01:00
Roman Lebedev d137f1288e
[X86][LV] X86 does *not* prefer vectorized addressing
And another attempt to start untangling this ball of threads around gather.
There's `TTI::prefersVectorizedAddressing()`hoop, which confusingly defaults to `true`,
which tells LV to try to vectorize the addresses that lead to loads,
but X86 generally can not deal with vectors of addresses,
the only instructions that support that are GATHER/SCATTER,
but even those aren't available until AVX2, and aren't really usable until AVX512.

This specializes the hook for X86, to return true only if we have AVX512 or AVX2 w/ fast gather.

Reviewed By: RKSimon

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111546
2021-10-16 12:32:18 +03:00
Roman Lebedev 3d7bf6625a
[X86][Costmodel] Improve cost modelling for not-fully-interleaved load
While i've modelled most of the relevant tuples for AVX2,
that only covered fully-interleaved groups.

By definition, interleaving load of stride N means:
load N*VF elements, and shuffle them into N VF-sized vectors,
with 0'th vector containing elements `[0, VF)*stride + 0`,
and 1'th vector containing elements `[0, VF)*stride + 1`.
Example: https://godbolt.org/z/df561Me5E (i64 stride 4 vf 2 => cost 6)

Now, not fully interleaved load, is when not all of these vectors is demanded.
So at worst, we could just pretend that everything is demanded,
and discard the non-demanded vectors. What this means is that the cost
for not-fully-interleaved group should be not greater than the cost
for the same fully-interleaved group, but perhaps somewhat less.
Examples:
https://godbolt.org/z/a78dK5Geq (i64 stride 4 (indices 012u) vf 2 => cost 4)
https://godbolt.org/z/G91ceo8dM (i64 stride 4 (indices 01uu) vf 2 => cost 2)
https://godbolt.org/z/5joYob9rx (i64 stride 4 (indices 0uuu) vf 2 => cost 1)

As we have established over the course of last ~70 patches, (wow)
`BaseT::getInterleavedMemoryOpCos()` is absolutely bogus,
it is usually almost an order of magnitude overestimation,
so i would claim that we should at least use the hardcoded costs
of fully interleaved load groups.

We could go further and adjust them e.g. by the number of demanded indices,
but then i'm somewhat fearful of underestimating the cost.

Reviewed By: RKSimon

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111174
2021-10-14 23:14:36 +03:00
Roman Lebedev a8a64eaafc
[NFC][X86][LV] Autogenerate checklines in cost-model.ll to simplify further updates 2021-10-13 22:47:43 +03:00
Roman Lebedev 18eef13dad
[X86][Costmodel] Fix `X86TTIImpl::getGSScalarCost()`
`X86TTIImpl::getGSScalarCost()` has (at least) two issues:
* it naively computes the cost of sequence of `insertelement`/`extractelement`.
  If we are operating not on the XMM (but YMM/ZMM),
  this widely overestimates the cost of subvector insertions/extractions.
* Gather/scatter takes a vector of pointers, and scalarization results in us performing
  scalar memory operation for each of these pointers, but we never account for the cost
  of extracting these pointers out of the vector of pointers.

Reviewed By: RKSimon

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111222
2021-10-13 22:35:39 +03:00
Ayal Zaks 15692fd6b5 [LV] Fix 2nd crash for reverse interleaved groups under mask/fold-tail.
This patch fixes another crash revealed by PR51614:
when *deciding* to vectorize with masked interleave groups, check if the access
is reverse (which is currently not supported).

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108900
2021-10-12 21:44:42 +03:00
Roman Lebedev 62d67d9e7c
[NFC][X86][LoopVectorize] Autogenerate check lines in a few tests for ease of updating
For D111220
2021-10-06 22:54:15 +03:00
Roman Lebedev 3a0643e9c2
[X86][Costmodel] Load/store i32/f32 Stride=2 VF=8 interleaving costs
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3

For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/n8aMKeo4E - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `4`.

For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/n8aMKeo4E - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =2.0`
So pick cost of `4`.

I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.

Reviewed By: RKSimon

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110755
2021-10-01 17:48:13 +03:00
Roman Lebedev b12aeaec9a
[X86][Costmodel] Load/store i32/f32 Stride=2 VF=4 interleaving costs
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3

For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/EM5Ean7bd - for intels `Block RThroughput: =2.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =1.0`
So pick cost of `2`.

For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/EM5Ean7bd - for intels `Block RThroughput: =2.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `2`.

I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.

Reviewed By: RKSimon

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110754
2021-10-01 17:48:13 +03:00
Roman Lebedev f44d9009c2
[X86][Costmodel] Load/store i32/f32 Stride=2 VF=2 interleaving costs
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3

For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/4rY96hnGT - for intels `Block RThroughput: =2.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =1.0`
So pick cost of `2`.

For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/vbo37Y3r9 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =1.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =0.5`
So pick cost of `1`.

I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.

Reviewed By: RKSimon

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110753
2021-10-01 17:48:13 +03:00
Simon Pilgrim 17f1fc1e54 [TTI] BasicTTI::getInterleavedMemoryOpCost(): use getScalarizationOverhead()
getScalarizationOverhead() results in a somewhat better cost estimation than counting the insertion/extraction costs directly. Notably, this is still overestimating the costs.

Original Patch by: @lebedev.ri (Roman Lebedev)

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110713
2021-09-29 16:41:53 +01:00
Florian Hahn 4b581e87df
[LV] Add tests where rt checks may make vectorization unprofitable.
Add a few additional tests which require a large number of runtime
checks for D109368.
2021-09-27 10:32:28 +01:00
Simon Pilgrim 8c83bd3bd4 [CostModel][X86] Adjust vXi32 multiply costs if it can be performed using PMADDWD
Update the costs to match the codegen from combineMulToPMADDWD - not only can we use PMADDWD is its zero-extended, but also if its a constant or sign-extended from a vXi16 (which can be replaced with a zero-extension).
2021-09-25 16:28:48 +01:00
Simon Pilgrim 41492d77ba [LoopVectorize][X86] Add operands to make it more obvious what line the CHECK concerns
As we're checking the cost debug analysis these should match the original IR line - so we shouldn't have any variable naming issues.

I'm investigating v4i32 mul -> PMADDDW costs handling (for PR47437) and these CHECK lines were proving tricky to keep track of
2021-09-22 10:08:32 +01:00
Simon Pilgrim f114ef3731 [CostModel][X86] Add generic costs for vXi32 MUL -> v2Xi16 PMADDDW folds
Based off the improved fold in D108522

This should eventually allow us to replace the SLM only cost patterns with generic versions.
2021-09-05 16:08:11 +01:00
Simon Pilgrim 10c982e0b3 Revert rG1c9bec727ab5c53fa060560dc8d346a911142170 : [InstCombine] Fold (gep (oneuse(gep Ptr, Idx0)), Idx1) -> (gep Ptr, (add Idx0, Idx1)) (PR51069)
Reverted (manually due to merge conflicts) while regressions reported on PR51540 are investigated

As noticed on D106352, after we've folded "(select C, (gep Ptr, Idx), Ptr) -> (gep Ptr, (select C, Idx, 0))" if the inner Ptr was also a (now one use) gep we could then merge the geps, using the sum of the indices instead.

I've limited this to basic 2-op geps - a more general case further down InstCombinerImpl.visitGetElementPtrInst doesn't have the one-use limitation but only creates the add if it can be created via SimplifyAddInst.

https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/f8pLfD (Thanks Roman!)

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106450
2021-08-23 21:09:26 +01:00
Dorit Nuzman 67278b8a90 [LV] Support Interleaved Store Group With Gaps
Teach LV to use masked-store to support interleave-store-group with
gaps (instead of scatters/scalarization).

The symmetric case of using masked-load to support
interleaved-load-group with gaps was introduced a while ago, by
https://reviews.llvm.org/D53668; This patch completes the store-scenario
leftover from D53668, and solves PR50566.

Reviewed by: Ayal Zaks

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104750
2021-08-08 10:32:02 +03:00
Simon Pilgrim 1c9bec727a [InstCombine] Fold (gep (oneuse(gep Ptr, Idx0)), Idx1) -> (gep Ptr, (add Idx0, Idx1)) (PR51069)
As noticed on D106352, after we've folded "(select C, (gep Ptr, Idx), Ptr) -> (gep Ptr, (select C, Idx, 0))" if the inner Ptr was also a (now one use) gep we could then merge the geps, using the sum of the indices instead.

I've limited this to basic 2-op geps - a more general case further down InstCombinerImpl.visitGetElementPtrInst doesn't have the one-use limitation but only creates the add if it can be created via SimplifyAddInst.

https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/f8pLfD (Thanks Roman!)

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106450
2021-07-22 10:58:51 +01:00
Mindong Chen e908e063d1 [LoopUtils] Fix incorrect RT check bounds of loop-invariant mem accesses
This fixes the lower and upper bound calculation of a
RuntimeCheckingPtrGroup when it has more than one loop
invariant pointers. Resolves PR50686.

Reviewed By: fhahn

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104148
2021-07-19 19:38:24 +08:00
Mindong Chen f3814ed3e9 [LV] Re-generate check lines of some fragile tests (NFC)
Reviewed By: fhahn

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105438
2021-07-19 19:38:24 +08:00
Simon Pilgrim ae0d73ac3b [CostModel][X86] Adjust fptosi/fptoui SSE/AVX legalized costs based on llvm-mca reports.
Update (mainly) vXf32/vXf64 -> vXi8/vXi16 fptosi/fptoui costs based on the worst case costs from the script in D103695.

Move to using legalized types wherever possible, which allows us to prune the cost tables.
2021-07-12 20:38:25 +01:00
Alexey Bataev 0d74fd3fdf [SLP][COST][X86]Improve cost model for masked gather.
Revived D101297 in its original form + added some changes in X86
legalization cehcking for masked gathers.

This solution is the most stable and the most correct one. We have to
check the legality before trying to build the masked gather in SLP.
Without this check we have incorrect cost (for SLP) in case if the masked gather
is not legal/slower than the gather. And we're missing some
vectorization opportunities.

This can be fixed in the cost model, but in this case we need to add
special checks for the cost of GEPs for ScatterVectorize node, add
special check for small trees, etc., i.e. there are a lot of corner
cases here and there, which insrease code base and make it harder to
maintain the code.

> Can't we rely on cost model to deal with this? This can be profitable for futher vectorization, when we can start from such gather loads as seed.

The question from D101297. Actually, no, it can't. Actually, simple
gather may give us better result, especially after we started
vectorization of insertelements. Plus, like I said before, the cost for
non-legal masked gathers leads to missed vectorization opportunities.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105042
2021-07-08 11:53:30 -07:00
Simon Pilgrim cdca1785d3 [CostModel][X86] Adjust uitofp(vXi64) SSE/AVX legalized costs based on llvm-mca reports.
Update v4i64 -> v4f32/v4f64 uitofp costs based on the worst case costs from the script in D103695.

Fixes a few regressions before we start adding AVX costs for legalized types.
2021-07-02 13:09:00 +01:00
Simon Pilgrim 0af9b25aff [LoopVectorize][X86] Regenerate conversion-cost.ll tests 2021-07-01 15:34:20 +01:00
Florian Hahn 80aa7e147e
[VPlan] Merge predicated-triangle regions, after sinking.
Sinking scalar operands into predicated-triangle regions may allow
merging regions. This patch adds a VPlan-to-VPlan transform that tries
to merge predicate-triangle regions after sinking.

Reviewed By: Ayal

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100260
2021-06-28 11:10:38 +01:00
Eli Friedman 8f3d16905d [ScalarEvolution] Ensure backedge-taken counts are not pointers.
A backedge-taken count doesn't refer to memory; returning a pointer type
is nonsense. So make sure we always return an integer.

The obvious way to do this would be to just convert the operands of the
icmp to integers, but that doesn't quite work out at the moment:
isLoopEntryGuardedByCond currently gets confused by ptrtoint operations.
So we perform the ptrtoint conversion late for lt/gt operations.

The test changes are mostly innocuous. The most interesting changes are
more complex SCEV expressions of the form "(-1 * (ptrtoint i8* %ptr to
i64)) + %ptr)". This is expected: we can't fold this to zero because we
need to preserve the pointer base.

The call to isLoopEntryGuardedByCond in howFarToZero is less precise
because of ptrtoint operations; this shows up in the function
pr46786_c26_char in ptrtoint.ll. Fixing it here would require more
complex refactoring.  It should eventually be fixed by future
improvements to isImpliedCond.

See https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46786 for context.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103656
2021-06-21 16:24:16 -07:00