Commit Graph

170 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Sander de Smalen 51d648c119 Revert "[LV] Calculate max feasible scalable VF."
Temporarily reverting this patch due to some unexpected issue found
by one of the PPC buildbots.

This reverts commit 584e9b6e4b.
2021-04-29 16:04:37 +01:00
David Sherwood 00e65f3345 [LoopVectorize][SVE] Fix crash when vectorising FP negation
This patch fixes a crash encountered when vectorising the following loop:

 void foo(float *dst, float *src, long long n) {
   for (long long i = 0; i < n; i++)
     dst[i] = -src[i];
 }

using scalable vectors. I've added a test to

 Transforms/LoopVectorize/AArch64/sve-basic-vec.ll

as well as cleaned up the other tests in the same file.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98054
2021-04-28 15:22:35 +01:00
David Sherwood 6998f8ae2d [LoopVectorize] Simplify scalar cost calculation in getInstructionCost
This patch simplifies the calculation of certain costs in
getInstructionCost when isScalarAfterVectorization() returns a true value.
There are a few places where we multiply a cost by a number N, i.e.

  unsigned N = isScalarAfterVectorization(I, VF) ? VF.getKnownMinValue() : 1;
  return N * TTI.getArithmeticInstrCost(...

After some investigation it seems that there are only these cases that occur
in practice:

1. VF is a scalar, in which case N = 1.
2. VF is a vector. We can only get here if: a) the instruction is a
GEP/bitcast/PHI with scalar uses, or b) this is an update to an induction
variable that remains scalar.

I have changed the code so that N is assumed to always be 1. For GEPs
the cost is always 0, since this is calculated later on as part of the
load/store cost. PHI nodes are costed separately and were never previously
multiplied by VF. For all other cases I have added an assert that none of
the users needs scalarising, which didn't fire in any unit tests.

Only one test required fixing and I believe the original cost for the scalar
add instruction to have been wrong, since only one copy remains after
vectorisation.

I have also added a new test for the case when a pointer PHI feeds directly
into a store that will be scalarised as we were previously never testing it.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99718
2021-04-28 13:41:07 +01:00
Sander de Smalen 584e9b6e4b [LV] Calculate max feasible scalable VF.
This patch also refactors the way the feasible max VF is calculated,
although this is NFC for fixed-width vectors.

After this change scalable VF hints are no longer truncated/clamped
to a shorter scalable VF, nor does it drop the 'scalable flag' from
the suggested VF to vectorize with a similar VF that is fixed.

Instead, the hint is ignored which means the vectorizer is free
to find a more suitable VF, using the CostModel to determine the
best possible VF.

Reviewed By: c-rhodes, fhahn

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98509
2021-04-28 12:30:00 +01:00
Kerry McLaughlin 9cc217ab36 [LoopVectorize] Prevent multiple Phis being generated with in-order reductions
When using the -enable-strict-reductions flag where UF>1 we generate multiple
Phi nodes, though only one of these is used as an input to the vector.reduce.fadd
intrinsics. The unused Phi nodes are removed later by instcombine.

This patch changes widenPHIInstruction/fixReduction to only generate
one Phi, and adds an additional test for unrolling to strict-fadd.ll

Reviewed By: david-arm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100570
2021-04-28 11:29:01 +01:00
David Sherwood 6968520c3b Revert "[LoopVectorize] Simplify scalar cost calculation in getInstructionCost"
This reverts commit 4afeda9157.
2021-04-27 15:46:03 +01:00
David Sherwood 4afeda9157 [LoopVectorize] Simplify scalar cost calculation in getInstructionCost
This patch simplifies the calculation of certain costs in
getInstructionCost when isScalarAfterVectorization() returns a true value.
There are a few places where we multiply a cost by a number N, i.e.

  unsigned N = isScalarAfterVectorization(I, VF) ? VF.getKnownMinValue() : 1;
  return N * TTI.getArithmeticInstrCost(...

After some investigation it seems that there are only these cases that occur
in practice:

1. VF is a scalar, in which case N = 1.
2. VF is a vector. We can only get here if: a) the instruction is a
GEP/bitcast/PHI with scalar uses, or b) this is an update to an induction
variable that remains scalar.

I have changed the code so that N is assumed to always be 1. For GEPs
the cost is always 0, since this is calculated later on as part of the
load/store cost. PHI nodes are costed separately and were never previously
multiplied by VF. For all other cases I have added an assert that none of
the users needs scalarising, which didn't fire in any unit tests.

Only one test required fixing and I believe the original cost for the scalar
add instruction to have been wrong, since only one copy remains after
vectorisation.

I have also added a new test for the case when a pointer PHI feeds directly
into a store that will be scalarised as we were previously never testing it.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99718
2021-04-27 15:26:15 +01:00
David Sherwood cf7276820c [NFC] Add scalable vectorisation tests for int/FP <> int/FP conversions
We can already vectorize loops that involve int<>int, fp<>fp, int<>fp
and fp<>int conversions, however we didn't previously have any tests
for them. This patch adds some tests for each conversion type.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99951
2021-04-26 11:01:14 +01:00
David Sherwood a458b7855e [AArch64] Add AArch64TTIImpl::getMaskedMemoryOpCost function
When vectorising for AArch64 targets if you specify the SVE attribute
we automatically then treat masked loads and stores as legal. Also,
since we have no cost model for masked memory ops we believe it's
cheap to use the masked load/store intrinsics even for fixed width
vectors. This can lead to poor code quality as the intrinsics will
currently be scalarised in the backend. This patch adds a basic
cost model that marks fixed-width masked memory ops as significantly
more expensive than for scalable vectors.

Tests for the cost model are added here:

  Transforms/LoopVectorize/AArch64/masked-op-cost.ll

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100745
2021-04-26 11:00:03 +01:00
Joe Ellis 2c551aedcf [LoopVectorize] Fix bug where predicated loads/stores were dropped
This commit fixes a bug where the loop vectoriser fails to predicate
loads/stores when interleaving for targets that support masked
loads and stores.

Code such as:

     1  void foo(int *restrict data1, int *restrict data2)
     2  {
     3    int counter = 1024;
     4    while (counter--)
     5      if (data1[counter] > data2[counter])
     6        data1[counter] = data2[counter];
     7  }

... could previously be transformed in such a way that the predicated
store implied by:

    if (data1[counter] > data2[counter])
       data1[counter] = data2[counter];

... was lost, resulting in miscompiles.

This bug was causing some tests in llvm-test-suite to fail when built
for SVE.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99569
2021-04-22 15:05:54 +00:00
Alexey Bataev 673e2f1b70 [COST][AARCH64] Improve cost of reverse shuffles for AArch64.
Introduced the cost of thre reverse shuffles for AArch64, currently just
copied the costs for PermuteSingleSrc.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100871
2021-04-20 13:47:56 -07:00
Alexey Bataev 683dc41695 Update tests checks, NFC. 2021-04-20 10:20:15 -07:00
Kerry McLaughlin 62ee638a87 [NFC] Add tests for scalable vectorization of loops with in-order reductions
D98435 added support for in-order reductions and included tests for fixed-width
vectorization with the -enable-strict-reductions flag.

This patch adds similar tests to verify support for scalable vectorization of loops
with in-order reductions.

Reviewed By: david-arm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100385
2021-04-19 11:15:55 +01:00
Kerry McLaughlin 93f54fae9d [NFC] Remove the -instcombine flag from strict-fadd.ll
This also fixes a CHECK line in @fadd_strict_unroll which ensures the
changes made to fixReduction() to support in-order reductions with
unrolling are being tested correctly.
2021-04-15 15:10:48 +01:00
David Sherwood ea14df695e [SVE][LoopVectorize] Fix crash in InnerLoopVectorizer::widenPHIInstruction
There were a few places in widenPHIInstruction where calculations of
offsets were failing to take the runtime calculation of VF into
account for scalable vectors. I've fixed those cases in this patch
as well as adding an assert that we should not be scalarising for
scalable vectors.

Tests are added here:

  Transforms/LoopVectorize/AArch64/sve-widen-phi.ll

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99254
2021-04-15 10:51:49 +01:00
Sander de Smalen 672f673004 [SVE] Remove checks for warnings in scalable-vector tests.
After D98856 these tests will by default break (fatal_error) if any of
the wrong interfaces are used, so there's no longer a need to have a
RUN line that checks for a warning message emitted by the compiler.
2021-04-07 15:59:32 +01:00
Kerry McLaughlin 7344f3d39a [LoopVectorize] Add strict in-order reduction support for fixed-width vectorization
Previously we could only vectorize FP reductions if fast math was enabled, as this allows us to
reorder FP operations. However, it may still be beneficial to vectorize the loop by moving
the reduction inside the vectorized loop and making sure that the scalar reduction value
be an input to the horizontal reduction, e.g:

  %phi = phi float [ 0.0, %entry ], [ %reduction, %vector_body ]
  %load = load <8 x float>
  %reduction = call float @llvm.vector.reduce.fadd.v8f32(float %phi, <8 x float> %load)

This patch adds a new flag (IsOrdered) to RecurrenceDescriptor and makes use of the changes added
by D75069 as much as possible, which already teaches the vectorizer about in-loop reductions.
For now in-order reduction support is off by default and controlled with the `-enable-strict-reductions` flag.

Reviewed By: david-arm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98435
2021-04-06 14:45:34 +01:00
David Sherwood e3a13304fc [NFC] Add tests for scalable vectorization of loops with large stride acesses
This patch just adds tests that we can vectorize loop such as these:

  for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
    dst[i * 7] += 1;

and

  for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
    if (cond[i])
      dst[i * 7] += 1;

using scalable vectors, where we expect to use gathers and scatters in the
vectorized loop. The vector of pointers used for the gather is identical
to those used for the scatter so there should be no memory dependences.

Tests are added here:

  Transforms/LoopVectorize/AArch64/sve-large-strides.ll

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99192
2021-04-01 10:25:06 +01:00
Sander de Smalen 7108b2dec1 [SVE] Fix LoopVectorizer test scalalable-call.ll
This marks FSIN and other operations to EXPAND for scalable
vectors, so that they are not assumed to be legal by the cost-model.

Depends on D97470

Reviewed By: dmgreen, paulwalker-arm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D97471
2021-03-31 14:52:49 +01:00
David Sherwood a08c7736a7 [LoopVectorize] Add support for scalable vectorization of induction variables
This patch adds support for the vectorization of induction variables when
using scalable vectors, which required the following changes:

1. Removed assert from InnerLoopVectorizer::getStepVector.
2. Modified InnerLoopVectorizer::createVectorIntOrFpInductionPHI to use
   a runtime determined value for VF and removed an assert.
3. Modified InnerLoopVectorizer::buildScalarSteps to work for scalable
   vectors. I did this by calculating the full vector value for each Part
   of the unroll factor (UF) and caching this in the VP state. This means
   that we are always able to extract an arbitrary element from the vector
   if necessary. In addition to this, I also permitted the caching of the
   individual lane values themselves for the known minimum number of elements
   in the same way we do for fixed width vectors. This is a further
   optimisation that improves the code quality since it avoids unnecessary
   extractelement operations when extracting the first lane.
4. Added an assert to InnerLoopVectorizer::widenPHIInstruction, since while
   testing some code paths I noticed this is currently broken for scalable
   vectors.

Various tests to support different cases have been added here:

  Transforms/LoopVectorize/AArch64/sve-inductions.ll

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98715
2021-03-30 11:13:31 +01:00
David Sherwood c39460cc4f Revert "[LoopVectorize] Simplify scalar cost calculation in getInstructionCost"
This reverts commit 240aa96cf2.
2021-03-26 11:36:53 +00:00
David Sherwood 240aa96cf2 [LoopVectorize] Simplify scalar cost calculation in getInstructionCost
This patch simplifies the calculation of certain costs in
getInstructionCost when isScalarAfterVectorization() returns a true value.
There are a few places where we multiply a cost by a number N, i.e.

  unsigned N = isScalarAfterVectorization(I, VF) ? VF.getKnownMinValue() : 1;
  return N * TTI.getArithmeticInstrCost(...

After some investigation it seems that there are only these cases that occur
in practice:

1. VF is a scalar, in which case N = 1.
2. VF is a vector. We can only get here if: a) the instruction is a
GEP/bitcast with scalar uses, or b) this is an update to an induction variable
that remains scalar.

I have changed the code so that N is assumed to always be 1. For GEPs
the cost is always 0, since this is calculated later on as part of the
load/store cost. For all other cases I have added an assert that none of the
users needs scalarising, which didn't fire in any unit tests.

Only one test required fixing and I believe the original cost for the scalar
add instruction to have been wrong, since only one copy remains after
vectorisation.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98512
2021-03-26 11:27:12 +00:00
Kerry McLaughlin 1f46499690 [SVE][LoopVectorize] Verify support for vectorizing loops with invariant loads
D95598 added a cost model for broadcast shuffle, which should enable loops
such as the following to vectorize, where the load of b[42] is invariant
and can be done using a scalar load + splat:

  for (int i=0; i<n; ++i)
    a[i] = b[i] + b[42];

This patch adds tests to verify that we can vectorize such loops.

Reviewed By: joechrisellis

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98506
2021-03-25 14:10:21 +00:00
Caroline Concatto 3c03635d53 [SVE][LoopVectorize] Add support for scalable vectorization of loops with vector reverse
This patch adds support for reverse loop vectorization.
It is possible to vectorize the following loop:
```
  for (int i = n-1; i >= 0; --i)
    a[i] = b[i] + 1.0;
```
with fixed or scalable vector.
The loop-vectorizer will use 'reverse' on the loads/stores to make
sure the lanes themselves are also handled in the right order.
This patch adds support for scalable vector on IRBuilder interface to
create a reverse vector. The IR function
CreateVectorReverse lowers to experimental.vector.reverse for scalable vector
and keedp the original behavior for fixed vector using shuffle reverse.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D95363
2021-03-16 07:51:59 +00:00
David Sherwood de3185647d [LoopVectorize][SVE] Add tests for vectorising conditional loads of invariant addresses
For loops of the form:

 void foo(int *a, int *cond, short *inv, long long n) {
   for (long long i=0; i<n; ++i) {
     if (cond[i])
       a[i] = *inv;
   }
 }

we can vectorise for SVE using masked gather loads where the array
of pointers is simply a vector splat of 'inv' and the mask comes
from the condition 'cond[i] != 0'.

This patch simply adds tests upstream to defend this capability.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98043
2021-03-08 08:38:31 +00:00
David Sherwood fec0a0adac [SVE][LoopVectorize] Add support for extracting the last lane of a scalable vector
There are certain loops like this below:

  for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {
    a[i] = b[i] + 1;
    *inv = a[i];
  }

that can only be vectorised if we are able to extract the last lane of the
vectorised form of 'a[i]'. For fixed width vectors this already works since
we know at compile time what the final lane is, however for scalable vectors
this is a different story. This patch adds support for extracting the last
lane from a scalable vector using a runtime determined lane value. I have
added support to VPIteration for runtime-determined lanes that still permit
the caching of values. I did this by introducing a new class called VPLane,
which describes the lane we're dealing with and provides interfaces to get
both the compile-time known lane and the runtime determined value. Whilst
doing this work I couldn't find any explicit tests for extracting the last
lane values of fixed width vectors so I added tests for both scalable and
fixed width vectors.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D95139
2021-03-05 09:57:56 +00:00
Florian Hahn 0cb9d8acbc
[LV] Add test cases that require a larger number of RT checks.
Precommit tests cases for D75981.
2021-03-02 10:49:38 +00:00
David Green dd2dbf7ee2 [TTI] Change getOperandsScalarizationOverhead to take Type args
As a followup to D95291, getOperandsScalarizationOverhead was still
using a VF as a vector factor if the arguments were scalar, and would
assert on certain matrix intrinsics with differently sized vector
arguments. This patch removes the VF arg, instead passing the Types
through directly. This should allow it to more accurately compute the
cost without having to guess at which operands will be vectorized,
something difficult with more complex intrinsics.

This adjusts one SVE test as it is now calling the wrong intrinsic vs
veccall. Without invalid InstructCosts the cost of the scalarized
intrinsic is too low. This should get fixed when the cost of
scalarization is accounted for with scalable types.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D96287
2021-02-23 13:04:59 +00:00
David Green bd4b61efbd [CostModel] Remove VF from IntrinsicCostAttributes
getIntrinsicInstrCost takes a IntrinsicCostAttributes holding various
parameters of the intrinsic being costed. It can either be called with a
scalar intrinsic (RetTy==Scalar, VF==1), with a vector instruction
(RetTy==Vector, VF==1) or from the vectorizer with a scalar type and
vector width (RetTy==Scalar, VF>1). A RetTy==Vector, VF>1 is considered
an error. Both of the vector modes are expected to be treated the same,
but because this is confusing many backends end up getting it wrong.

Instead of trying work with those two values separately this removes the
VF parameter, widening the RetTy/ArgTys by VF used called from the
vectorizer. This keeps things simpler, but does require some other
modifications to keep things consistent.

Most backends look like this will be an improvement (or were not using
getIntrinsicInstrCost). AMDGPU needed the most changes to keep the code
from c230965ccf working. ARM removed the fix in
dfac521da1, webassembly happens to get a fixup for an SLP cost
issue and both X86 and AArch64 seem to now be using better costs from
the vectorizer.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D95291
2021-02-23 13:03:26 +00:00
Florian Hahn 15a74b64df
[VPlan] Manage pairs of incoming (VPValue, VPBB) in VPWidenPHIRecipe.
This patch extends VPWidenPHIRecipe to manage pairs of incoming
(VPValue, VPBasicBlock) in the VPlan native path. This is made possible
because we now directly manage defined VPValues for recipes.

By keeping both the incoming value and block in the recipe directly,
code-generation in the VPlan native path becomes independent of the
predecessor ordering when fixing up non-induction phis, which currently
can cause crashes in the VPlan native path.

This fixes PR45958.

Reviewed By: sguggill

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D96773
2021-02-22 09:44:25 +00:00
Kerry McLaughlin ba1e150d03 [SVE] Add support for scalable vectorization of loops with int/fast FP reductions
This patch enables scalable vectorization of loops with integer/fast reductions, e.g:

```
unsigned sum = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
  sum += a[i];
}
```

A new TTI interface, isLegalToVectorizeReduction, has been added to prevent
reductions which are not supported for scalable types from vectorizing.
If the reduction is not supported for a given scalable VF,
computeFeasibleMaxVF will fall back to using fixed-width vectorization.

Reviewed By: david-arm, fhahn, dmgreen

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D95245
2021-02-16 13:50:06 +00:00
Kerry McLaughlin fea06efe7c [SVE][LoopVectorize] Support for vectorization of loops with function calls
Changes `getScalarizationOverhead` to return an invalid cost for scalable VFs
and adds some simple tests for loops containing a function for which
there is a vectorized variant available.

Reviewed By: david-arm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D96356
2021-02-12 13:47:43 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 79b1b4a581 [Vectorizers][TTI] remove option to bypass creation of vector reduction intrinsics
The vector reduction intrinsics started life as experimental ops, so backend support
was lacking. As part of promoting them to 1st-class intrinsics, however, codegen
support was added/improved:
D58015
D90247

So I think it is safe to now remove this complication from IR.

Note that we still have an IR-level codegen expansion pass for these as discussed
in D95690. Removing that is another step in simplifying the logic. Also note that
x86 was already unconditionally forming reductions in IR, so there should be no
difference for x86.

I spot checked a couple of the tests here by running them through opt+llc and did
not see any asm diffs.

If we do find functional differences for other targets, it should be possible
to (at least temporarily) restore the shuffle IR with the ExpandReductions IR
pass.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D96552
2021-02-12 08:13:50 -05:00
Florian Hahn d5387ec267
[LV] Add tests showing suboptimal vectorization for narrow types.
This patch adds additional test cases showing missing/sub-optimal
vectorization for loops which contain small and wider memory ops on
AArch64.
2021-02-11 17:24:28 +00:00
Jinsong Ji 9202806241 Revert "[CostModel] Remove VF from IntrinsicCostAttributes"
This reverts commit 502a67dd7f.

This expose a failure in test-suite build on PowerPC,
revert to unblock buildbot first,
Dave will re-commit in https://reviews.llvm.org/D96287.

Thanks Dave.
2021-02-09 02:14:14 +00:00
David Green 502a67dd7f [CostModel] Remove VF from IntrinsicCostAttributes
getIntrinsicInstrCost takes a IntrinsicCostAttributes holding various
parameters of the intrinsic being costed. It can either be called with a
scalar intrinsic (RetTy==Scalar, VF==1), with a vector instruction
(RetTy==Vector, VF==1) or from the vectorizer with a scalar type and
vector width (RetTy==Scalar, VF>1). A RetTy==Vector, VF>1 is considered
an error. Both of the vector modes are expected to be treated the same,
but because this is confusing many backends end up getting it wrong.

Instead of trying work with those two values separately this removes the
VF parameter, widening the RetTy/ArgTys by VF used called from the
vectorizer. This keeps things simpler, but does require some other
modifications to keep things consistent.

Most backends look like this will be an improvement (or were not using
getIntrinsicInstrCost). AMDGPU needed the most changes to keep the code
from c230965ccf working. ARM removed the fix in
dfac521da1, webassembly happens to get a fixup for an SLP cost
issue and both X86 and AArch64 seem to now be using better costs from
the vectorizer.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D95291
2021-02-05 09:34:24 +00:00
David Sherwood d4d4ceeb8f [SVE][LoopVectorize] Add masked load/store and gather/scatter support for SVE
This patch updates IRBuilder::CreateMaskedGather/Scatter to work
with ScalableVectorType and adds isLegalMaskedGather/Scatter functions
to AArch64TargetTransformInfo. In addition I've fixed up
isLegalMaskedLoad/Store to return true for supported scalar types,
since this is what the vectorizer asks for.

In LoopVectorize.cpp I've changed
LoopVectorizationCostModel::getInterleaveGroupCost to return an invalid
cost for scalable vectors, since currently this relies upon using shuffle
vector for reversing vectors. In addition, in
LoopVectorizationCostModel::setCostBasedWideningDecision I have assumed
that the cost of scalarising memory ops is infinitely expensive.

I have added some simple masked load/store and gather/scatter tests,
including cases where we use gathers and scatters for conditional invariant
loads and stores.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D95350
2021-02-02 09:52:39 +00:00
David Green 4cc94b7313 [CostModel] Tests for showing the cost of intrinsics from the vectorizer. NFC 2021-01-24 14:47:15 +00:00
David Sherwood 2e080eb00a [SVE] Add support for scalable vectorization of loops with selects and cmps
I have removed an unnecessary assert in LoopVectorizationCostModel::getInstructionCost
that prevented a cost being calculated for select instructions when using
scalable vectors. In addition, I have changed AArch64TTIImpl::getCmpSelInstrCost
to only do special cost calculations for fixed width vectors and fall
back to the base version for scalable vectors.

I have added a simple cost model test for cmps and selects:

  test/Analysis/CostModel/sve-cmpsel.ll

and some simple tests that show we vectorize loops with cmp and select:

  test/Transforms/LoopVectorize/AArch64/sve-basic-vec.ll

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D95039
2021-01-22 09:48:13 +00:00
Cullen Rhodes 1e7efd397a [LV] Legalize scalable VF hints
In the following loop:

  void foo(int *a, int *b, int N) {
    for (int i=0; i<N; ++i)
      a[i + 4] = a[i] + b[i];
  }

The loop dependence constrains the VF to a maximum of (4, fixed), which
would mean using <4 x i32> as the vector type in vectorization.
Extending this to scalable vectorization, a VF of (4, scalable) implies
a vector type of <vscale x 4 x i32>. To determine if this is legal
vscale must be taken into account. For this example, unless
max(vscale)=1, it's unsafe to vectorize.

For SVE, the number of bits in an SVE register is architecturally
defined to be a multiple of 128 bits with a maximum of 2048 bits, thus
the maximum vscale is 16. In the loop above it is therefore unfeasible
to vectorize with SVE. However, in this loop:

  void foo(int *a, int *b, int N) {
    #pragma clang loop vectorize_width(X, scalable)
    for (int i=0; i<N; ++i)
      a[i + 32] = a[i] + b[i];
  }

As long as max(vscale) multiplied by the number of lanes 'X' doesn't
exceed the dependence distance, it is safe to vectorize. For SVE a VF of
(2, scalable) is within this constraint, since a vector of <16 x 2 x 32>
will have no dependencies between lanes. For any number of lanes larger
than this it would be unsafe to vectorize.

This patch extends 'computeFeasibleMaxVF' to legalize scalable VFs
specified as loop hints, implementing the following behaviour:
  * If the backend does not support scalable vectors, ignore the hint.
  * If scalable vectorization is unfeasible given the loop
    dependence, like in the first example above for SVE, then use a
    fixed VF.
  * Accept scalable VFs if it's safe to do so.
  * Otherwise, clamp scalable VFs that exceed the maximum safe VF.

Reviewed By: sdesmalen, fhahn, david-arm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D91718
2021-01-08 10:49:44 +00:00
Peter Waller 3e357ecd44 [llvm][NFC] Disallow all warnings in TypeSize tests
This is a follow-up to a request from a reviewer [0]. The text may change in
the future and these tests should not produce any warning output.

[0] https://reviews.llvm.org/D91806#inline-879243

Reviewed By: sdesmalen, david-arm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94161
2021-01-06 17:17:07 +00:00
Juneyoung Lee 4a8e6ed2f7 [SLP,LV] Use poison constant vector for shufflevector/initial insertelement
This patch makes SLP and LV emit operations with initial vectors set to poison constant instead of undef.
This is a part of efforts for using poison vector instead of undef to represent "doesn't care" vector.
The goal is to make nice shufflevector optimizations valid that is currently incorrect due to the tricky interaction between undef and poison (see https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44185 ).

Reviewed By: fhahn

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94061
2021-01-06 11:22:50 +09:00
Juneyoung Lee 278aa65cc4 [IR] Let IRBuilder's CreateVectorSplat/CreateShuffleVector use poison as placeholder
This patch updates IRBuilder to create insertelement/shufflevector using poison as a placeholder.

Reviewed By: nikic

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93793
2020-12-30 04:21:04 +09:00
Roman Lebedev 49dac4aca0
[SimplifyCFG] MergeBlockIntoPredecessor() already knows how to preserve DomTree
... so just ensure that we pass DomTreeUpdater it into it.

Fixes DomTree preservation for a large number of tests,
all of which are marked as such so that they do not regress.
2020-12-17 01:03:49 +03:00
Cullen Rhodes cba4accda0 [LV] Clamp VF hint when unsafe
In the following loop the dependence distance is 2 and can only be
vectorized if the vector length is no larger than this.

  void foo(int *a, int *b, int N) {
    #pragma clang loop vectorize(enable) vectorize_width(4)
    for (int i=0; i<N; ++i) {
      a[i + 2] = a[i] + b[i];
    }
  }

However, when specifying a VF of 4 via a loop hint this loop is
vectorized. According to [1][2], loop hints are ignored if the
optimization is not safe to apply.

This patch introduces a check to bail of vectorization if the user
specified VF is greater than the maximum feasible VF, unless explicitly
forced with '-force-vector-width=X'.

[1] https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#llvm-loop-vectorize-and-llvm-loop-interleave
[2] https://clang.llvm.org/docs/LanguageExtensions.html#extensions-for-loop-hint-optimizations

Reviewed By: sdesmalen, fhahn, Meinersbur

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90687
2020-12-01 11:30:34 +00:00
Sjoerd Meijer f44ba25135 ExtractValue instruction costs
Instruction ExtractValue wasn't handled in
LoopVectorizationCostModel::getInstructionCost(). As a result, it was modeled
as a mul which is not really accurate. Since it is free (most of the times),
this now gets a cost of 0 using getInstructionCost.

This is a follow-up of D92208, that required changing this regression test.
In a follow up I will look at InsertValue which also isn't handled yet.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92317
2020-12-01 10:42:23 +00:00
Sjoerd Meijer 5110ff0817 [AArch64][CostModel] Fix cost for mul <2 x i64>
This was modeled to have a cost of 1, but since we do not have a MUL.2d this is
scalarized into vector inserts/extracts and scalar muls.

Motivating precommitted test is test/Transforms/SLPVectorizer/AArch64/mul.ll,
which we don't want to SLP vectorize.

Test Transforms/LoopVectorize/AArch64/extractvalue-no-scalarization-required.ll
unfortunately needed changing, but the reason is documented in
LoopVectorize.cpp:6855:

  // The cost of executing VF copies of the scalar instruction. This opcode
  // is unknown. Assume that it is the same as 'mul'.

which I will address next as a follow up of this.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92208
2020-11-30 11:36:55 +00:00
Joe Ellis 462dd4f803 [SVE][AArch64] Improve specificity of vectorization legality TypeSize test
The test was using -O2, where -loop-vectorize will suffice.

Reviewed By: fpetrogalli

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90685
2020-11-10 10:55:25 +00:00
Florian Hahn f067bc3c0a [LoopRotation] Allow loop header duplication if vectorization is forced.
-Oz normally does not allow loop header duplication so this loop wouldn't be
vectorized.  However the vectorization pragma should override this and allow
for loop rotation.

rdar://problem/49281061

Original patch by Adam Nemet.

Reviewed By: Meinersbur

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59832
2020-10-27 09:28:01 +00:00
Joe Ellis 467e5cf40f [SVE][AArch64] Fix TypeSize warning in loop vectorization legality
The warning would fire when calling isDereferenceableAndAlignedInLoop
with a scalable load. Calling isDereferenceableAndAlignedInLoop with a
scalable load would result in the use of the now deprecated implicit
cast of TypeSize to uint64_t through the overloaded operator.

This patch fixes this issue by:

- no longer considering vector loads as candidates in
  canVectorizeWithIfConvert. This doesn't make sense in the context of
  identifying scalar loads to vectorize.

- making use of getFixedSize inside isDereferenceableAndAlignedInLoop --
  this removes the dependency on the deprecated interface, and will
  trigger an assertion error if the function is ever called with a
  scalable type.

Reviewed By: sdesmalen

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D89798
2020-10-26 17:40:04 +00:00