maxjhandsome
/
llvm-project
forked from OSchip/llvm-project
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Releases Wiki Activity
llvm-project/llvm/lib/Analysis/TargetTransformInfo.cpp

Ignoring revisions in .git-blame-ignore-revs. Click here to bypass and see the normal blame view.

1444 lines
52 KiB
C++
Raw Normal View History

Move TargetTransformInfo to live under the Analysis library. This no longer would violate any dependency layering and it is in fact an analysis. =] llvm-svn: 171686
2013-01-07 11:08:10 +08:00
//===- llvm/Analysis/TargetTransformInfo.cpp ------------------------------===//
Reapply the TargerTransformInfo changes, minus the changes to LSR and Lowerinvoke. llvm-svn: 166248
2012-10-19 07:22:48 +08:00
//
Update the file headers across all of the LLVM projects in the monorepo to reflect the new license. We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach. Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and repository. llvm-svn: 351636
2019-01-19 16:50:56 +08:00
// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM Exceptions.
// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception
Reapply the TargerTransformInfo changes, minus the changes to LSR and Lowerinvoke. llvm-svn: 166248
2012-10-19 07:22:48 +08:00
//
//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Move TargetTransformInfo to live under the Analysis library. This no longer would violate any dependency layering and it is in fact an analysis. =] llvm-svn: 171686
2013-01-07 11:08:10 +08:00
#include "llvm/Analysis/TargetTransformInfo.h"
Sink all InitializePasses.h includes This file lists every pass in LLVM, and is included by Pass.h, which is very popular. Every time we add, remove, or rename a pass in LLVM, it caused lots of recompilation. I found this fact by looking at this table, which is sorted by the number of times a file was changed over the last 100,000 git commits multiplied by the number of object files that depend on it in the current checkout: recompiles touches affected_files header 342380 95 3604 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/STLExtras.h 314730 234 1345 llvm/include/llvm/InitializePasses.h 307036 118 2602 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/APInt.h 213049 59 3611 llvm/include/llvm/Support/MathExtras.h 170422 47 3626 llvm/include/llvm/Support/Compiler.h 162225 45 3605 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/Optional.h 158319 63 2513 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/Triple.h 140322 39 3598 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/StringRef.h 137647 59 2333 llvm/include/llvm/Support/Error.h 131619 73 1803 llvm/include/llvm/Support/FileSystem.h Before this change, touching InitializePasses.h would cause 1345 files to recompile. After this change, touching it only causes 550 compiles in an incremental rebuild. Reviewers: bkramer, asbirlea, bollu, jdoerfert Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70211
2019-11-14 05:15:01 +08:00
#include "llvm/Analysis/CFG.h"
#include "llvm/Analysis/LoopIterator.h"
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
#include "llvm/Analysis/TargetTransformInfoImpl.h"
[NFC][HardwareLoops] Update some iterators llvm-svn: 373309
2019-10-01 15:53:28 +08:00
#include "llvm/IR/CFG.h"
Introduce a generic interface for querying an operation's expected lowered cost. Currently, this is a direct port of the logic implementing isInstructionFree in CodeMetrics. The hope is that the interface can be improved (f.ex. supporting un-formed instruction queries) and the implementation abstracted so that as we have test cases and target knowledge we can expose increasingly accurate heuristics to clients. I'll start switching existing consumers over and kill off the routine in CodeMetrics in subsequent commits. llvm-svn: 172998
2013-01-21 09:27:39 +08:00
#include "llvm/IR/DataLayout.h"
LoopAnalysisManager.h - reduce includes to forward declarations. NFC. Move implicit include dependencies down to header/source files.
2020-06-06 21:06:25 +08:00
#include "llvm/IR/Dominators.h"
Introduce a generic interface for querying an operation's expected lowered cost. Currently, this is a direct port of the logic implementing isInstructionFree in CodeMetrics. The hope is that the interface can be improved (f.ex. supporting un-formed instruction queries) and the implementation abstracted so that as we have test cases and target knowledge we can expose increasingly accurate heuristics to clients. I'll start switching existing consumers over and kill off the routine in CodeMetrics in subsequent commits. llvm-svn: 172998
2013-01-21 09:27:39 +08:00
#include "llvm/IR/Instruction.h"
#include "llvm/IR/Instructions.h"
Re-sort all of the includes with ./utils/sort_includes.py so that subsequent changes are easier to review. About to fix some layering issues, and wanted to separate out the necessary churn. Also comment and sink the include of "Windows.h" in three .inc files to match the usage in Memory.inc. llvm-svn: 198685
2014-01-07 19:48:04 +08:00
#include "llvm/IR/IntrinsicInst.h"
[PM] Port TTI to the new pass manager, introducing a TargetIRAnalysis to produce it. This adds a function to the TargetMachine that produces this analysis via a callback for each function. This in turn faves the way to produce a *different* TTI per-function with the correct subtarget cached. I've also done the necessary wiring in the opt tool to thread the target machine down and make it available to the pass registry so that we can construct this analysis from a target machine when available. llvm-svn: 227721
2015-02-01 18:11:22 +08:00
#include "llvm/IR/Module.h"
Re-sort all of the includes with ./utils/sort_includes.py so that subsequent changes are easier to review. About to fix some layering issues, and wanted to separate out the necessary churn. Also comment and sink the include of "Windows.h" in three .inc files to match the usage in Memory.inc. llvm-svn: 198685
2014-01-07 19:48:04 +08:00
#include "llvm/IR/Operator.h"
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
#include "llvm/IR/PatternMatch.h"
Sink all InitializePasses.h includes This file lists every pass in LLVM, and is included by Pass.h, which is very popular. Every time we add, remove, or rename a pass in LLVM, it caused lots of recompilation. I found this fact by looking at this table, which is sorted by the number of times a file was changed over the last 100,000 git commits multiplied by the number of object files that depend on it in the current checkout: recompiles touches affected_files header 342380 95 3604 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/STLExtras.h 314730 234 1345 llvm/include/llvm/InitializePasses.h 307036 118 2602 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/APInt.h 213049 59 3611 llvm/include/llvm/Support/MathExtras.h 170422 47 3626 llvm/include/llvm/Support/Compiler.h 162225 45 3605 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/Optional.h 158319 63 2513 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/Triple.h 140322 39 3598 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/StringRef.h 137647 59 2333 llvm/include/llvm/Support/Error.h 131619 73 1803 llvm/include/llvm/Support/FileSystem.h Before this change, touching InitializePasses.h would cause 1345 files to recompile. After this change, touching it only causes 550 compiles in an incremental rebuild. Reviewers: bkramer, asbirlea, bollu, jdoerfert Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70211
2019-11-14 05:15:01 +08:00
#include "llvm/InitializePasses.h"
Extend memcpy expansion in Transform/Utils to handle wider operand types. Adds loop expansions for known-size and unknown-sized memcpy calls, allowing the target to provide the operand types through TTI callbacks. The default values for the TTI callbacks use int8 operand types and matches the existing behaviour if they aren't overridden by the target. Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32536 llvm-svn: 307346
2017-07-07 10:00:06 +08:00
#include "llvm/Support/CommandLine.h"
Reapply the TargerTransformInfo changes, minus the changes to LSR and Lowerinvoke. llvm-svn: 166248
2012-10-19 07:22:48 +08:00
#include "llvm/Support/ErrorHandling.h"
Apply clang-tidy's misc-move-constructor-init throughout LLVM. No functionality change intended, maybe a tiny performance improvement. llvm-svn: 270997
2016-05-27 22:27:24 +08:00
#include <utility>
Reapply the TargerTransformInfo changes, minus the changes to LSR and Lowerinvoke. llvm-svn: 166248
2012-10-19 07:22:48 +08:00
using namespace llvm;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
using namespace PatternMatch;
Reapply the TargerTransformInfo changes, minus the changes to LSR and Lowerinvoke. llvm-svn: 166248
2012-10-19 07:22:48 +08:00
[Modules] Fix potential ODR violations by sinking the DEBUG_TYPE definition below all the header #include lines, lib/Analysis/... edition. This one has a bit extra as there were *other* #define's before #include lines in addition to DEBUG_TYPE. I've sunk all of them as a block. llvm-svn: 206843
2014-04-22 10:48:03 +08:00
#define DEBUG_TYPE "tti"
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
static cl::opt<bool> EnableReduxCost("costmodel-reduxcost", cl::init(false),
cl::Hidden,
cl::desc("Recognize reduction patterns."));
[PM] Switch the TargetMachine interface from accepting a pass manager base which it adds a single analysis pass to, to instead return the type erased TargetTransformInfo object constructed for that TargetMachine. This removes all of the pass variants for TTI. There is now a single TTI *pass* in the Analysis layer. All of the Analysis <-> Target communication is through the TTI's type erased interface itself. While the diff is large here, it is nothing more that code motion to make types available in a header file for use in a different source file within each target. I've tried to keep all the doxygen comments and file boilerplate in line with this move, but let me know if I missed anything. With this in place, the next step to making TTI work with the new pass manager is to introduce a really simple new-style analysis that produces a TTI object via a callback into this routine on the target machine. Once we have that, we'll have the building blocks necessary to accept a function argument as well. llvm-svn: 227685
2015-01-31 19:17:59 +08:00
namespace {
Remove \brief commands from doxygen comments. We've been running doxygen with the autobrief option for a couple of years now. This makes the \brief markers into our comments redundant. Since they are a visual distraction and we don't want to encourage more \brief markers in new code either, this patch removes them all. Patch produced by for i in $(git grep -l '\\brief'); do perl -pi -e 's/\\brief //g' $i & done Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46290 llvm-svn: 331272
2018-05-01 23:54:18 +08:00
/// No-op implementation of the TTI interface using the utility base
[PM] Switch the TargetMachine interface from accepting a pass manager base which it adds a single analysis pass to, to instead return the type erased TargetTransformInfo object constructed for that TargetMachine. This removes all of the pass variants for TTI. There is now a single TTI *pass* in the Analysis layer. All of the Analysis <-> Target communication is through the TTI's type erased interface itself. While the diff is large here, it is nothing more that code motion to make types available in a header file for use in a different source file within each target. I've tried to keep all the doxygen comments and file boilerplate in line with this move, but let me know if I missed anything. With this in place, the next step to making TTI work with the new pass manager is to introduce a really simple new-style analysis that produces a TTI object via a callback into this routine on the target machine. Once we have that, we'll have the building blocks necessary to accept a function argument as well. llvm-svn: 227685
2015-01-31 19:17:59 +08:00
/// classes.
///
/// This is used when no target specific information is available.
struct NoTTIImpl : TargetTransformInfoImplCRTPBase<NoTTIImpl> {
Make TargetTransformInfo keeping a reference to the Module DataLayout DataLayout is no longer optional. It was initialized with or without a DataLayout, and the DataLayout when supplied could have been the one from the TargetMachine. Summary: This change is part of a series of commits dedicated to have a single DataLayout during compilation by using always the one owned by the module. Reviewers: echristo Subscribers: jholewinski, llvm-commits, rafael, yaron.keren Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11021 From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com> llvm-svn: 241774
2015-07-09 10:08:42 +08:00
explicit NoTTIImpl(const DataLayout &DL)
[PM] Switch the TargetMachine interface from accepting a pass manager base which it adds a single analysis pass to, to instead return the type erased TargetTransformInfo object constructed for that TargetMachine. This removes all of the pass variants for TTI. There is now a single TTI *pass* in the Analysis layer. All of the Analysis <-> Target communication is through the TTI's type erased interface itself. While the diff is large here, it is nothing more that code motion to make types available in a header file for use in a different source file within each target. I've tried to keep all the doxygen comments and file boilerplate in line with this move, but let me know if I missed anything. With this in place, the next step to making TTI work with the new pass manager is to introduce a really simple new-style analysis that produces a TTI object via a callback into this routine on the target machine. Once we have that, we'll have the building blocks necessary to accept a function argument as well. llvm-svn: 227685
2015-01-31 19:17:59 +08:00
: TargetTransformInfoImplCRTPBase<NoTTIImpl>(DL) {}
};
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
} // namespace
[PM] Switch the TargetMachine interface from accepting a pass manager base which it adds a single analysis pass to, to instead return the type erased TargetTransformInfo object constructed for that TargetMachine. This removes all of the pass variants for TTI. There is now a single TTI *pass* in the Analysis layer. All of the Analysis <-> Target communication is through the TTI's type erased interface itself. While the diff is large here, it is nothing more that code motion to make types available in a header file for use in a different source file within each target. I've tried to keep all the doxygen comments and file boilerplate in line with this move, but let me know if I missed anything. With this in place, the next step to making TTI work with the new pass manager is to introduce a really simple new-style analysis that produces a TTI object via a callback into this routine on the target machine. Once we have that, we'll have the building blocks necessary to accept a function argument as well. llvm-svn: 227685
2015-01-31 19:17:59 +08:00
[HardwareLoops] NFC - move loop with irreducible control flow checking logic to HarewareLoopInfo. llvm-svn: 364415
2019-06-26 20:02:43 +08:00
bool HardwareLoopInfo::canAnalyze(LoopInfo &LI) {
// If the loop has irreducible control flow, it can not be converted to
// Hardware loop.
[NFC] Remove trailing space sed -Ei 's/[[:space:]]+$//' include/**/*.{def,h,td} lib/**/*.{cpp,h,td}
2020-02-18 10:48:38 +08:00
LoopBlocksRPO RPOT(L);
[HardwareLoops] NFC - move loop with irreducible control flow checking logic to HarewareLoopInfo. llvm-svn: 364415
2019-06-26 20:02:43 +08:00
RPOT.perform(&LI);
if (containsIrreducibleCFG<const BasicBlock *>(RPOT, LI))
return false;
return true;
}
[NFCI][CostModel] Refactor getIntrinsicInstrCost Combine the two API calls into one by introducing a structure to hold the relevant data. This has the added benefit of moving the boiler plate code for arguments and flags, into the constructors. This is intended to be a non-functional change, but the complicated web of logic involved here makes it very hard to guarantee. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79941
2020-05-20 16:18:42 +08:00
IntrinsicCostAttributes::IntrinsicCostAttributes(const IntrinsicInst &I) :
II(&I), RetTy(I.getType()), IID(I.getIntrinsicID()) {
FunctionType *FTy = I.getCalledFunction()->getFunctionType();
ParamTys.insert(ParamTys.begin(), FTy->param_begin(), FTy->param_end());
Arguments.insert(Arguments.begin(), I.arg_begin(), I.arg_end());
if (auto *FPMO = dyn_cast<FPMathOperator>(&I))
FMF = FPMO->getFastMathFlags();
}
[CostModel] Unify Intrinsic Costs. Recommitting most of the remaining changes from 259eb619ff6dcd5b6111d1686e18559b9ca004d4, but excluding the call to getUserCost from getInstructionThroughput. Though there's still no test changes, I doubt that this is an NFC... With the two getIntrinsicInstrCosts folded into one, now fold in the scalar/code-size orientated getIntrinsicCost. The remaining scalar intrinsics were memcpy, cttz and ctlz which now have special handling in the BasicTTI implementation. This had required a change in the AMDGPU backend for fabs as it should always be 'free'. I've also changed the X86 backend to return the BaseT implementation when the CostKind isn't RecipThroughput. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80012
2020-05-26 16:23:18 +08:00
IntrinsicCostAttributes::IntrinsicCostAttributes(Intrinsic::ID Id,
const CallBase &CI) :
II(dyn_cast<IntrinsicInst>(&CI)), RetTy(CI.getType()), IID(Id) {
[NFCI][CostModel] Add const to Value*. Summary: Get back `const` partially lost in one of recent changes. Additionally specify explicit qualifiers in few places. Reviewers: samparker Reviewed By: samparker Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82383
2020-06-23 21:07:44 +08:00
if (const auto *FPMO = dyn_cast<FPMathOperator>(&CI))
[CostModel] Unify Intrinsic Costs. Recommitting most of the remaining changes from 259eb619ff6dcd5b6111d1686e18559b9ca004d4, but excluding the call to getUserCost from getInstructionThroughput. Though there's still no test changes, I doubt that this is an NFC... With the two getIntrinsicInstrCosts folded into one, now fold in the scalar/code-size orientated getIntrinsicCost. The remaining scalar intrinsics were memcpy, cttz and ctlz which now have special handling in the BasicTTI implementation. This had required a change in the AMDGPU backend for fabs as it should always be 'free'. I've also changed the X86 backend to return the BaseT implementation when the CostKind isn't RecipThroughput. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80012
2020-05-26 16:23:18 +08:00
FMF = FPMO->getFastMathFlags();
[CostModel] fill in arguments as part of intrinsic attribute constructor This appears to be an error of code duplication - instead of one constructor variant calling another, we have N similar but not identical versions. I think this is 'NFC' based on the current callers, but it's hard to tell or guess the intent in all cases.
2020-09-29 03:23:36 +08:00
Arguments.insert(Arguments.begin(), CI.arg_begin(), CI.arg_end());
[CostModel] Unify Intrinsic Costs. Recommitting most of the remaining changes from 259eb619ff6dcd5b6111d1686e18559b9ca004d4, but excluding the call to getUserCost from getInstructionThroughput. Though there's still no test changes, I doubt that this is an NFC... With the two getIntrinsicInstrCosts folded into one, now fold in the scalar/code-size orientated getIntrinsicCost. The remaining scalar intrinsics were memcpy, cttz and ctlz which now have special handling in the BasicTTI implementation. This had required a change in the AMDGPU backend for fabs as it should always be 'free'. I've also changed the X86 backend to return the BaseT implementation when the CostKind isn't RecipThroughput. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80012
2020-05-26 16:23:18 +08:00
FunctionType *FTy =
CI.getCalledFunction()->getFunctionType();
ParamTys.insert(ParamTys.begin(), FTy->param_begin(), FTy->param_end());
}
IntrinsicCostAttributes::IntrinsicCostAttributes(Intrinsic::ID Id,
const CallBase &CI,
[NFCI][CostModel] Refactor getIntrinsicInstrCost Combine the two API calls into one by introducing a structure to hold the relevant data. This has the added benefit of moving the boiler plate code for arguments and flags, into the constructors. This is intended to be a non-functional change, but the complicated web of logic involved here makes it very hard to guarantee. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79941
2020-05-20 16:18:42 +08:00
unsigned Factor) :
RetTy(CI.getType()), IID(Id), VF(Factor) {
if (auto *FPMO = dyn_cast<FPMathOperator>(&CI))
FMF = FPMO->getFastMathFlags();
Arguments.insert(Arguments.begin(), CI.arg_begin(), CI.arg_end());
FunctionType *FTy =
CI.getCalledFunction()->getFunctionType();
ParamTys.insert(ParamTys.begin(), FTy->param_begin(), FTy->param_end());
}
[CostModel] Unify Intrinsic Costs. Recommitting most of the remaining changes from 259eb619ff6dcd5b6111d1686e18559b9ca004d4, but excluding the call to getUserCost from getInstructionThroughput. Though there's still no test changes, I doubt that this is an NFC... With the two getIntrinsicInstrCosts folded into one, now fold in the scalar/code-size orientated getIntrinsicCost. The remaining scalar intrinsics were memcpy, cttz and ctlz which now have special handling in the BasicTTI implementation. This had required a change in the AMDGPU backend for fabs as it should always be 'free'. I've also changed the X86 backend to return the BaseT implementation when the CostKind isn't RecipThroughput. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80012
2020-05-26 16:23:18 +08:00
IntrinsicCostAttributes::IntrinsicCostAttributes(Intrinsic::ID Id,
const CallBase &CI,
[NFCI][CostModel] Refactor getIntrinsicInstrCost Combine the two API calls into one by introducing a structure to hold the relevant data. This has the added benefit of moving the boiler plate code for arguments and flags, into the constructors. This is intended to be a non-functional change, but the complicated web of logic involved here makes it very hard to guarantee. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79941
2020-05-20 16:18:42 +08:00
unsigned Factor,
unsigned ScalarCost) :
RetTy(CI.getType()), IID(Id), VF(Factor), ScalarizationCost(ScalarCost) {
[NFCI][CostModel] Add const to Value*. Summary: Get back `const` partially lost in one of recent changes. Additionally specify explicit qualifiers in few places. Reviewers: samparker Reviewed By: samparker Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82383
2020-06-23 21:07:44 +08:00
if (const auto *FPMO = dyn_cast<FPMathOperator>(&CI))
[NFCI][CostModel] Refactor getIntrinsicInstrCost Combine the two API calls into one by introducing a structure to hold the relevant data. This has the added benefit of moving the boiler plate code for arguments and flags, into the constructors. This is intended to be a non-functional change, but the complicated web of logic involved here makes it very hard to guarantee. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79941
2020-05-20 16:18:42 +08:00
FMF = FPMO->getFastMathFlags();
Arguments.insert(Arguments.begin(), CI.arg_begin(), CI.arg_end());
FunctionType *FTy =
CI.getCalledFunction()->getFunctionType();
ParamTys.insert(ParamTys.begin(), FTy->param_begin(), FTy->param_end());
}
IntrinsicCostAttributes::IntrinsicCostAttributes(Intrinsic::ID Id, Type *RTy,
ArrayRef<Type *> Tys,
FastMathFlags Flags) :
RetTy(RTy), IID(Id), FMF(Flags) {
ParamTys.insert(ParamTys.begin(), Tys.begin(), Tys.end());
}
IntrinsicCostAttributes::IntrinsicCostAttributes(Intrinsic::ID Id, Type *RTy,
ArrayRef<Type *> Tys,
FastMathFlags Flags,
unsigned ScalarCost) :
RetTy(RTy), IID(Id), FMF(Flags), ScalarizationCost(ScalarCost) {
ParamTys.insert(ParamTys.begin(), Tys.begin(), Tys.end());
}
IntrinsicCostAttributes::IntrinsicCostAttributes(Intrinsic::ID Id, Type *RTy,
ArrayRef<Type *> Tys,
FastMathFlags Flags,
unsigned ScalarCost,
const IntrinsicInst *I) :
II(I), RetTy(RTy), IID(Id), FMF(Flags), ScalarizationCost(ScalarCost) {
ParamTys.insert(ParamTys.begin(), Tys.begin(), Tys.end());
}
IntrinsicCostAttributes::IntrinsicCostAttributes(Intrinsic::ID Id, Type *RTy,
ArrayRef<Type *> Tys) :
RetTy(RTy), IID(Id) {
ParamTys.insert(ParamTys.begin(), Tys.begin(), Tys.end());
}
IntrinsicCostAttributes::IntrinsicCostAttributes(Intrinsic::ID Id, Type *Ty,
[NFCI][CostModel] Add const to Value*. Summary: Get back `const` partially lost in one of recent changes. Additionally specify explicit qualifiers in few places. Reviewers: samparker Reviewed By: samparker Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82383
2020-06-23 21:07:44 +08:00
ArrayRef<const Value *> Args)
: RetTy(Ty), IID(Id) {
[NFCI][CostModel] Refactor getIntrinsicInstrCost Combine the two API calls into one by introducing a structure to hold the relevant data. This has the added benefit of moving the boiler plate code for arguments and flags, into the constructors. This is intended to be a non-functional change, but the complicated web of logic involved here makes it very hard to guarantee. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79941
2020-05-20 16:18:42 +08:00
Arguments.insert(Arguments.begin(), Args.begin(), Args.end());
ParamTys.reserve(Arguments.size());
for (unsigned Idx = 0, Size = Arguments.size(); Idx != Size; ++Idx)
ParamTys.push_back(Arguments[Idx]->getType());
}
[NFC] move some hardware loop checking code to a common place for other using. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63478 llvm-svn: 363758
2019-06-19 09:26:31 +08:00
bool HardwareLoopInfo::isHardwareLoopCandidate(ScalarEvolution &SE,
LoopInfo &LI, DominatorTree &DT,
bool ForceNestedLoop,
Revert "[HardwareLoops] NFC - move hardware loop checking code to isHardwareLoopProfitable()" This reverts commit d95557306585404893d610784edb3e32f1bfce18. llvm-svn: 365520
2019-07-10 01:53:09 +08:00
bool ForceHardwareLoopPHI) {
[NFC] move some hardware loop checking code to a common place for other using. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63478 llvm-svn: 363758
2019-06-19 09:26:31 +08:00
SmallVector<BasicBlock *, 4> ExitingBlocks;
L->getExitingBlocks(ExitingBlocks);
[NFC][HardwareLoops] Update some iterators llvm-svn: 373309
2019-10-01 15:53:28 +08:00
for (BasicBlock *BB : ExitingBlocks) {
[NFC] move some hardware loop checking code to a common place for other using. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63478 llvm-svn: 363758
2019-06-19 09:26:31 +08:00
// If we pass the updated counter back through a phi, we need to know
// which latch the updated value will be coming from.
if (!L->isLoopLatch(BB)) {
if (ForceHardwareLoopPHI || CounterInReg)
continue;
}
const SCEV *EC = SE.getExitCount(L, BB);
if (isa<SCEVCouldNotCompute>(EC))
continue;
if (const SCEVConstant *ConstEC = dyn_cast<SCEVConstant>(EC)) {
if (ConstEC->getValue()->isZero())
continue;
} else if (!SE.isLoopInvariant(EC, L))
continue;
if (SE.getTypeSizeInBits(EC->getType()) > CountType->getBitWidth())
continue;
// If this exiting block is contained in a nested loop, it is not eligible
// for insertion of the branch-and-decrement since the inner loop would
// end up messing up the value in the CTR.
if (!IsNestingLegal && LI.getLoopFor(BB) != L && !ForceNestedLoop)
continue;
// We now have a loop-invariant count of loop iterations (which is not the
// constant zero) for which we know that this loop will not exit via this
// existing block.
// We need to make sure that this block will run on every loop iteration.
// For this to be true, we must dominate all blocks with backedges. Such
// blocks are in-loop predecessors to the header block.
bool NotAlways = false;
[NFC][HardwareLoops] Update some iterators llvm-svn: 373309
2019-10-01 15:53:28 +08:00
for (BasicBlock *Pred : predecessors(L->getHeader())) {
if (!L->contains(Pred))
[NFC] move some hardware loop checking code to a common place for other using. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63478 llvm-svn: 363758
2019-06-19 09:26:31 +08:00
continue;
[NFC][HardwareLoops] Update some iterators llvm-svn: 373309
2019-10-01 15:53:28 +08:00
if (!DT.dominates(BB, Pred)) {
[NFC] move some hardware loop checking code to a common place for other using. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63478 llvm-svn: 363758
2019-06-19 09:26:31 +08:00
NotAlways = true;
break;
}
}
if (NotAlways)
continue;
// Make sure this blocks ends with a conditional branch.
Instruction *TI = BB->getTerminator();
if (!TI)
continue;
if (BranchInst *BI = dyn_cast<BranchInst>(TI)) {
if (!BI->isConditional())
continue;
ExitBranch = BI;
} else
continue;
// Note that this block may not be the loop latch block, even if the loop
// has a latch block.
[NFC][HardwareLoops] Update some iterators llvm-svn: 373309
2019-10-01 15:53:28 +08:00
ExitBlock = BB;
[NFC] move some hardware loop checking code to a common place for other using. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63478 llvm-svn: 363758
2019-06-19 09:26:31 +08:00
ExitCount = EC;
break;
}
if (!ExitBlock)
return false;
return true;
}
Make TargetTransformInfo keeping a reference to the Module DataLayout DataLayout is no longer optional. It was initialized with or without a DataLayout, and the DataLayout when supplied could have been the one from the TargetMachine. Summary: This change is part of a series of commits dedicated to have a single DataLayout during compilation by using always the one owned by the module. Reviewers: echristo Subscribers: jholewinski, llvm-commits, rafael, yaron.keren Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11021 From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com> llvm-svn: 241774
2015-07-09 10:08:42 +08:00
TargetTransformInfo::TargetTransformInfo(const DataLayout &DL)
[PM] Switch the TargetMachine interface from accepting a pass manager base which it adds a single analysis pass to, to instead return the type erased TargetTransformInfo object constructed for that TargetMachine. This removes all of the pass variants for TTI. There is now a single TTI *pass* in the Analysis layer. All of the Analysis <-> Target communication is through the TTI's type erased interface itself. While the diff is large here, it is nothing more that code motion to make types available in a header file for use in a different source file within each target. I've tried to keep all the doxygen comments and file boilerplate in line with this move, but let me know if I missed anything. With this in place, the next step to making TTI work with the new pass manager is to introduce a really simple new-style analysis that produces a TTI object via a callback into this routine on the target machine. Once we have that, we'll have the building blocks necessary to accept a function argument as well. llvm-svn: 227685
2015-01-31 19:17:59 +08:00
: TTIImpl(new Model<NoTTIImpl>(NoTTIImpl(DL))) {}
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
TargetTransformInfo::~TargetTransformInfo() {}
Reapply the TargerTransformInfo changes, minus the changes to LSR and Lowerinvoke. llvm-svn: 166248
2012-10-19 07:22:48 +08:00
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
TargetTransformInfo::TargetTransformInfo(TargetTransformInfo &&Arg)
: TTIImpl(std::move(Arg.TTIImpl)) {}
Switch TargetTransformInfo from an immutable analysis pass that requires a TargetMachine to construct (and thus isn't always available), to an analysis group that supports layered implementations much like AliasAnalysis does. This is a pretty massive change, with a few parts that I was unable to easily separate (sorry), so I'll walk through it. The first step of this conversion was to make TargetTransformInfo an analysis group, and to sink the nonce implementations in ScalarTargetTransformInfo and VectorTargetTranformInfo into a NoTargetTransformInfo pass. This allows other passes to add a hard requirement on TTI, and assume they will always get at least on implementation. The TargetTransformInfo analysis group leverages the delegation chaining trick that AliasAnalysis uses, where the base class for the analysis group delegates to the previous analysis *pass*, allowing all but tho NoFoo analysis passes to only implement the parts of the interfaces they support. It also introduces a new trick where each pass in the group retains a pointer to the top-most pass that has been initialized. This allows passes to implement one API in terms of another API and benefit when some other pass above them in the stack has more precise results for the second API. The second step of this conversion is to create a pass that implements the TargetTransformInfo analysis using the target-independent abstractions in the code generator. This replaces the ScalarTargetTransformImpl and VectorTargetTransformImpl classes in lib/Target with a single pass in lib/CodeGen called BasicTargetTransformInfo. This class actually provides most of the TTI functionality, basing it upon the TargetLowering abstraction and other information in the target independent code generator. The third step of the conversion adds support to all TargetMachines to register custom analysis passes. This allows building those passes with access to TargetLowering or other target-specific classes, and it also allows each target to customize the set of analysis passes desired in the pass manager. The baseline LLVMTargetMachine implements this interface to add the BasicTTI pass to the pass manager, and all of the tools that want to support target-aware TTI passes call this routine on whatever target machine they end up with to add the appropriate passes. The fourth step of the conversion created target-specific TTI analysis passes for the X86 and ARM backends. These passes contain the custom logic that was previously in their extensions of the ScalarTargetTransformInfo and VectorTargetTransformInfo interfaces. I separated them into their own file, as now all of the interface bits are private and they just expose a function to create the pass itself. Then I extended these target machines to set up a custom set of analysis passes, first adding BasicTTI as a fallback, and then adding their customized TTI implementations. The fourth step required logic that was shared between the target independent layer and the specific targets to move to a different interface, as they no longer derive from each other. As a consequence, a helper functions were added to TargetLowering representing the common logic needed both in the target implementation and the codegen implementation of the TTI pass. While technically this is the only change that could have been committed separately, it would have been a nightmare to extract. The final step of the conversion was just to delete all the old boilerplate. This got rid of the ScalarTargetTransformInfo and VectorTargetTransformInfo classes, all of the support in all of the targets for producing instances of them, and all of the support in the tools for manually constructing a pass based around them. Now that TTI is a relatively normal analysis group, two things become straightforward. First, we can sink it into lib/Analysis which is a more natural layer for it to live. Second, clients of this interface can depend on it *always* being available which will simplify their code and behavior. These (and other) simplifications will follow in subsequent commits, this one is clearly big enough. Finally, I'm very aware that much of the comments and documentation needs to be updated. As soon as I had this working, and plausibly well commented, I wanted to get it committed and in front of the build bots. I'll be doing a few passes over documentation later if it sticks. Commits to update DragonEgg and Clang will be made presently. llvm-svn: 171681
2013-01-07 09:37:14 +08:00
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
TargetTransformInfo &TargetTransformInfo::operator=(TargetTransformInfo &&RHS) {
TTIImpl = std::move(RHS.TTIImpl);
return *this;
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
[TTI] Add getInliningThresholdMultiplier. Summary: InlineCost's threshold is multiplied by this value. This lets us adjust the inlining threshold up or down on a per-target basis. For example, we might want to increase the threshold on targets where calls are unusually expensive. Reviewers: chandlerc Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18560 llvm-svn: 266405
2016-04-15 09:38:48 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getInliningThresholdMultiplier() const {
return TTIImpl->getInliningThresholdMultiplier();
}
[AMDGPU] Tune inlining parameters for AMDGPU target Summary: Since the target has no significant advantage of vectorization, vector instructions bous threshold bonus should be optional. amdgpu-inline-arg-alloca-cost parameter default value and the target InliningThresholdMultiplier value tuned then respectively. Reviewers: arsenm, rampitec Subscribers: kzhuravl, jvesely, wdng, nhaehnle, yaxunl, dstuttard, tpr, t-tye, eraman, hiraditya, haicheng, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64642 llvm-svn: 366348
2019-07-18 00:51:29 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getInlinerVectorBonusPercent() const {
return TTIImpl->getInlinerVectorBonusPercent();
}
[TTI] Expose TTI::getGEPCost and use it in SLSR and NaryReassociate. NFC. llvm-svn: 274940
2016-07-09 05:48:05 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getGEPCost(Type *PointeeType, const Value *Ptr,
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
ArrayRef<const Value *> Operands,
TTI::TargetCostKind CostKind) const {
return TTIImpl->getGEPCost(PointeeType, Ptr, Operands, CostKind);
[TTI] Expose TTI::getGEPCost and use it in SLSR and NaryReassociate. NFC. llvm-svn: 274940
2016-07-09 05:48:05 +08:00
}
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getEstimatedNumberOfCaseClusters(
[PGO][PGSO] TargetLowering/TargetTransformationInfo/SwitchLoweringUtils part. Summary: (Split of off D67120) TargetLowering/TargetTransformationInfo/SwitchLoweringUtils changes for profile guided size optimization. Reviewers: davidxl Subscribers: eraman, hiraditya, haicheng, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69580
2019-10-30 02:30:30 +08:00
const SwitchInst &SI, unsigned &JTSize, ProfileSummaryInfo *PSI,
BlockFrequencyInfo *BFI) const {
return TTIImpl->getEstimatedNumberOfCaseClusters(SI, JTSize, PSI, BFI);
[InlineCost] Improve the cost heuristic for Switch Summary: The motivation example is like below which has 13 cases but only 2 distinct targets ``` lor.lhs.false2: ; preds = %if.then switch i32 %Status, label %if.then27 [ i32 -7012, label %if.end35 i32 -10008, label %if.end35 i32 -10016, label %if.end35 i32 15000, label %if.end35 i32 14013, label %if.end35 i32 10114, label %if.end35 i32 10107, label %if.end35 i32 10105, label %if.end35 i32 10013, label %if.end35 i32 10011, label %if.end35 i32 7008, label %if.end35 i32 7007, label %if.end35 i32 5002, label %if.end35 ] ``` which is compiled into a balanced binary tree like this on AArch64 (similar on X86) ``` .LBB853_9: // %lor.lhs.false2 mov w8, #10012 cmp w19, w8 b.gt .LBB853_14 // BB#10: // %lor.lhs.false2 mov w8, #5001 cmp w19, w8 b.gt .LBB853_18 // BB#11: // %lor.lhs.false2 mov w8, #-10016 cmp w19, w8 b.eq .LBB853_23 // BB#12: // %lor.lhs.false2 mov w8, #-10008 cmp w19, w8 b.eq .LBB853_23 // BB#13: // %lor.lhs.false2 mov w8, #-7012 cmp w19, w8 b.eq .LBB853_23 b .LBB853_3 .LBB853_14: // %lor.lhs.false2 mov w8, #14012 cmp w19, w8 b.gt .LBB853_21 // BB#15: // %lor.lhs.false2 mov w8, #-10105 add w8, w19, w8 cmp w8, #9 // =9 b.hi .LBB853_17 // BB#16: // %lor.lhs.false2 orr w9, wzr, #0x1 lsl w8, w9, w8 mov w9, #517 and w8, w8, w9 cbnz w8, .LBB853_23 .LBB853_17: // %lor.lhs.false2 mov w8, #10013 cmp w19, w8 b.eq .LBB853_23 b .LBB853_3 .LBB853_18: // %lor.lhs.false2 mov w8, #-7007 add w8, w19, w8 cmp w8, #2 // =2 b.lo .LBB853_23 // BB#19: // %lor.lhs.false2 mov w8, #5002 cmp w19, w8 b.eq .LBB853_23 // BB#20: // %lor.lhs.false2 mov w8, #10011 cmp w19, w8 b.eq .LBB853_23 b .LBB853_3 .LBB853_21: // %lor.lhs.false2 mov w8, #14013 cmp w19, w8 b.eq .LBB853_23 // BB#22: // %lor.lhs.false2 mov w8, #15000 cmp w19, w8 b.ne .LBB853_3 ``` However, the inline cost model estimates the cost to be linear with the number of distinct targets and the cost of the above switch is just 2 InstrCosts. The function containing this switch is then inlined about 900 times. This change use the general way of switch lowering for the inline heuristic. It etimate the number of case clusters with the suitability check for a jump table or bit test. Considering the binary search tree built for the clusters, this change modifies the model to be linear with the size of the balanced binary tree. The model is off by default for now : -inline-generic-switch-cost=false This change was originally proposed by Haicheng in D29870. Reviewers: hans, bmakam, chandlerc, eraman, haicheng, mcrosier Reviewed By: hans Subscribers: joerg, aemerson, llvm-commits, rengolin Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31085 llvm-svn: 301649
2017-04-29 00:04:03 +08:00
}
[TargetTransformInfo, API] Add a list of operands to TTI::getUserCost The changes are a result of discussion of https://reviews.llvm.org/D33685. It solves the following problem: 1. We can inform getGEPCost about simplified indices to help it with calculating the cost. But getGEPCost does not take into account the context which GEPs are used in. 2. We have getUserCost which can take the context into account but we cannot inform about simplified indices. With the changes getUserCost will have access to additional information as getGEPCost has. The one parameter getUserCost is also provided. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34057 llvm-svn: 306674
2017-06-29 21:42:12 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getUserCost(const User *U,
[TTI] Add TargetCostKind argument to getUserCost There are several different types of cost that TTI tries to provide explicit information for: throughput, latency, code size along with a vague 'intersection of code-size cost and execution cost'. The vectorizer is a keen user of RecipThroughput and there's at least 'getInstructionThroughput' and 'getArithmeticInstrCost' designed to help with this cost. The latency cost has a single use and a single implementation. The intersection cost appears to cover most of the rest of the API. getUserCost is explicitly called from within TTI when the user has been explicit in wanting the code size (also only one use) as well as a few passes which are concerned with a mixture of size and/or a relative cost. In many cases these costs are closely related, such as when multiple instructions are required, but one evident diverging cost in this function is for div/rem. This patch adds an argument so that the cost required is explicit, so that we can make the important distinction when necessary. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78635
2020-04-27 16:02:14 +08:00
ArrayRef<const Value *> Operands,
enum TargetCostKind CostKind) const {
int Cost = TTIImpl->getUserCost(U, Operands, CostKind);
[CostModel] getUserCost for intrinsic throughput Last part of recommitting 'Unify Intrinsic Costs' 259eb619ff6dcd5b6111d1686e18559b9ca004d4. This patch now uses getUserCost from getInstructionThroughput. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80012
2020-05-26 19:17:26 +08:00
assert((CostKind == TTI::TCK_RecipThroughput || Cost >= 0) &&
"TTI should not produce negative costs!");
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
return Cost;
Introduce a generic interface for querying an operation's expected lowered cost. Currently, this is a direct port of the logic implementing isInstructionFree in CodeMetrics. The hope is that the interface can be improved (f.ex. supporting un-formed instruction queries) and the implementation abstracted so that as we have test cases and target knowledge we can expose increasingly accurate heuristics to clients. I'll start switching existing consumers over and kill off the routine in CodeMetrics in subsequent commits. llvm-svn: 172998
2013-01-21 09:27:39 +08:00
}
SimplifyCFG: Use parallel-and and parallel-or mode to consolidate branch conditions Merge consecutive if-regions if they contain identical statements. Both transformations reduce number of branches. The transformation is guarded by a target-hook, and is currently enabled only for +R600, but the correctness has been tested on X86 target using a variety of CPU benchmarks. Patch by: Mei Ye llvm-svn: 187278
2013-07-27 08:01:07 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::hasBranchDivergence() const {
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
return TTIImpl->hasBranchDivergence();
SimplifyCFG: Use parallel-and and parallel-or mode to consolidate branch conditions Merge consecutive if-regions if they contain identical statements. Both transformations reduce number of branches. The transformation is guarded by a target-hook, and is currently enabled only for +R600, but the correctness has been tested on X86 target using a variety of CPU benchmarks. Patch by: Mei Ye llvm-svn: 187278
2013-07-27 08:01:07 +08:00
}
Resubmit: [DA][TTI][AMDGPU] Add option to select GPUDA with TTI Summary: Enable the new diveregence analysis by default for AMDGPU. Resubmit with test updates since GPUDA was causing failures on Windows. Reviewers: rampitec, nhaehnle, arsenm, thakis Subscribers: kzhuravl, jvesely, wdng, yaxunl, dstuttard, tpr, t-tye, hiraditya, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D73315
2020-01-20 23:25:20 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::useGPUDivergenceAnalysis() const {
return TTIImpl->useGPUDivergenceAnalysis();
}
Divergence analysis for GPU programs Summary: Some optimizations such as jump threading and loop unswitching can negatively affect performance when applied to divergent branches. The divergence analysis added in this patch conservatively estimates which branches in a GPU program can diverge. This information can then help LLVM to run certain optimizations selectively. Test Plan: test/Analysis/DivergenceAnalysis/NVPTX/diverge.ll Reviewers: resistor, hfinkel, eliben, meheff, jholewinski Subscribers: broune, bjarke.roune, madhur13490, tstellarAMD, dberlin, echristo, jholewinski, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D8576 llvm-svn: 234567
2015-04-10 13:03:50 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isSourceOfDivergence(const Value *V) const {
return TTIImpl->isSourceOfDivergence(V);
}
DivergencyAnalysis patch for review llvm-svn: 305494
2017-06-16 03:33:10 +08:00
bool llvm::TargetTransformInfo::isAlwaysUniform(const Value *V) const {
return TTIImpl->isAlwaysUniform(V);
}
NVPTX: Refactor NVPTXInferAddressSpaces to check TTI Add a new TTI hook for getting the generic address space value. llvm-svn: 293563
2017-01-31 07:02:12 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getFlatAddressSpace() const {
return TTIImpl->getFlatAddressSpace();
}
InferAddressSpaces: Move target intrinsic handling to TTI I'm planning on handling intrinsics that will benefit from checking the address space enums. Don't bother moving the address collection for now, since those won't need th enums. llvm-svn: 368895
2019-08-15 02:13:00 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::collectFlatAddressOperands(
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
SmallVectorImpl<int> &OpIndexes, Intrinsic::ID IID) const {
InferAddressSpaces: Move target intrinsic handling to TTI I'm planning on handling intrinsics that will benefit from checking the address space enums. Don't bother moving the address collection for now, since those won't need th enums. llvm-svn: 368895
2019-08-15 02:13:00 +08:00
return TTIImpl->collectFlatAddressOperands(OpIndexes, IID);
}
[TTI] Expose isNoopAddrSpaceCast in TTI. Reviewers: arsenm Subscribers: wdng, hiraditya, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82025
2020-06-10 03:07:08 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isNoopAddrSpaceCast(unsigned FromAS,
unsigned ToAS) const {
return TTIImpl->isNoopAddrSpaceCast(FromAS, ToAS);
}
[InferAddrSpace] Teach to handle assumed address space. - In certain cases, a generic pointer could be assumed as a pointer to the global memory space or other spaces. With a dedicated target hook to query that address space from a given value, infer-address-space pass could infer and propagate that to all its users. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D91121
2020-11-07 19:47:57 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getAssumedAddrSpace(const Value *V) const {
return TTIImpl->getAssumedAddrSpace(V);
}
InferAddressSpaces: Handle ptrmask intrinsic This one is slightly odd since it counts as an address expression, which previously could never fail. Allow the existing TTI hook to return the value to use, and re-use it for handling how to handle ptrmask. Handles the no-op addrspacecasts for AMDGPU. We could probably do something better based on analysis of the mask value based on the address space, but leave that for now.
2020-05-16 02:54:51 +08:00
Value *TargetTransformInfo::rewriteIntrinsicWithAddressSpace(
IntrinsicInst *II, Value *OldV, Value *NewV) const {
InferAddressSpaces: Move target intrinsic handling to TTI I'm planning on handling intrinsics that will benefit from checking the address space enums. Don't bother moving the address collection for now, since those won't need th enums. llvm-svn: 368895
2019-08-15 02:13:00 +08:00
return TTIImpl->rewriteIntrinsicWithAddressSpace(II, OldV, NewV);
}
Begin fleshing out an interface in TTI for modelling the costs of generic function calls and intrinsics. This is somewhat overlapping with an existing intrinsic cost method, but that one seems targetted at vector intrinsics. I'll merge them or separate their names and use cases in a separate commit. This sinks the test of 'callIsSmall' down into TTI where targets can control it. The whole thing feels very hack-ish to me though. I've left a FIXME comment about the fundamental design problem this presents. It isn't yet clear to me what the users of this function *really* care about. I'll have to do more analysis to figure that out. Putting this here at least provides it access to proper analysis pass tools and other such. It also allows us to more cleanly implement the baseline cost interfaces in TTI. With this commit, it is now theoretically possible to simplify much of the inline cost analysis's handling of calls by calling through to this interface. That conversion will have to happen in subsequent commits as it requires more extensive restructuring of the inline cost analysis. The CodeMetrics class is now really only in the business of running over a block of code and aggregating the metrics on that block of code, with the actual cost evaluation done entirely in terms of TTI. llvm-svn: 173148
2013-01-22 19:26:02 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isLoweredToCall(const Function *F) const {
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
return TTIImpl->isLoweredToCall(F);
Begin fleshing out an interface in TTI for modelling the costs of generic function calls and intrinsics. This is somewhat overlapping with an existing intrinsic cost method, but that one seems targetted at vector intrinsics. I'll merge them or separate their names and use cases in a separate commit. This sinks the test of 'callIsSmall' down into TTI where targets can control it. The whole thing feels very hack-ish to me though. I've left a FIXME comment about the fundamental design problem this presents. It isn't yet clear to me what the users of this function *really* care about. I'll have to do more analysis to figure that out. Putting this here at least provides it access to proper analysis pass tools and other such. It also allows us to more cleanly implement the baseline cost interfaces in TTI. With this commit, it is now theoretically possible to simplify much of the inline cost analysis's handling of calls by calling through to this interface. That conversion will have to happen in subsequent commits as it requires more extensive restructuring of the inline cost analysis. The CodeMetrics class is now really only in the business of running over a block of code and aggregating the metrics on that block of code, with the actual cost evaluation done entirely in terms of TTI. llvm-svn: 173148
2013-01-22 19:26:02 +08:00
}
[CodeGen] Generic Hardware Loop Support Patch which introduces a target-independent framework for generating hardware loops at the IR level. Most of the code has been taken from PowerPC CTRLoops and PowerPC has been ported over to use this generic pass. The target dependent parts have been moved into TargetTransformInfo, via isHardwareLoopProfitable, with HardwareLoopInfo introduced to transfer information from the backend. Three generic intrinsics have been introduced: - void @llvm.set_loop_iterations Takes as a single operand, the number of iterations to be executed. - i1 @llvm.loop_decrement(anyint) Takes the maximum number of elements processed in an iteration of the loop body and subtracts this from the total count. Returns false when the loop should exit. - anyint @llvm.loop_decrement_reg(anyint, anyint) Takes the number of elements remaining to be processed as well as the maximum numbe of elements processed in an iteration of the loop body. Returns the updated number of elements remaining. llvm-svn: 362774
2019-06-07 15:35:30 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isHardwareLoopProfitable(
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
Loop *L, ScalarEvolution &SE, AssumptionCache &AC,
TargetLibraryInfo *LibInfo, HardwareLoopInfo &HWLoopInfo) const {
[CodeGen] Generic Hardware Loop Support Patch which introduces a target-independent framework for generating hardware loops at the IR level. Most of the code has been taken from PowerPC CTRLoops and PowerPC has been ported over to use this generic pass. The target dependent parts have been moved into TargetTransformInfo, via isHardwareLoopProfitable, with HardwareLoopInfo introduced to transfer information from the backend. Three generic intrinsics have been introduced: - void @llvm.set_loop_iterations Takes as a single operand, the number of iterations to be executed. - i1 @llvm.loop_decrement(anyint) Takes the maximum number of elements processed in an iteration of the loop body and subtracts this from the total count. Returns false when the loop should exit. - anyint @llvm.loop_decrement_reg(anyint, anyint) Takes the number of elements remaining to be processed as well as the maximum numbe of elements processed in an iteration of the loop body. Returns the updated number of elements remaining. llvm-svn: 362774
2019-06-07 15:35:30 +08:00
return TTIImpl->isHardwareLoopProfitable(L, SE, AC, LibInfo, HWLoopInfo);
}
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::preferPredicateOverEpilogue(
Loop *L, LoopInfo *LI, ScalarEvolution &SE, AssumptionCache &AC,
TargetLibraryInfo *TLI, DominatorTree *DT,
const LoopAccessInfo *LAI) const {
[TTI][LV] preferPredicateOverEpilogue We have two ways to steer creating a predicated vector body over creating a scalar epilogue. To force this, we have 1) a command line option and 2) a pragma available. This adds a third: a target hook to TargetTransformInfo that can be queried whether predication is preferred or not, which allows the vectoriser to make the decision without forcing it. While this change behaves as a non-functional change for now, it shows the required TTI plumbing, usage of this new hook in the vectoriser, and the beginning of an ARM MVE implementation. I will follow up on this with: - a complete MVE implementation, see D69845. - a patch to disable this, i.e. we should respect "vector_predicate(disable)" and its corresponding loophint. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69040
2019-11-06 17:58:36 +08:00
return TTIImpl->preferPredicateOverEpilogue(L, LI, SE, AC, TLI, DT, LAI);
}
[TTI] Refactor emitGetActiveLaneMask Refactor TTI hook emitGetActiveLaneMask and remove the unused arguments as suggested in D79100.
2020-06-10 00:19:57 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::emitGetActiveLaneMask() const {
return TTIImpl->emitGetActiveLaneMask();
[TTI] New target hook emitGetActiveLaneMask This is split off from D79100 and adds a new target hook emitGetActiveLaneMask that can be queried to check if the intrinsic @llvm.get.active.lane.mask() is supported by the backend and if it should be emitted for a given loop. See also commit rG7fb8a40e5220 and its commit message for more details/context on this new intrinsic. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80597
2020-05-29 16:05:41 +08:00
}
[InstCombine] Move target-specific inst combining For a long time, the InstCombine pass handled target specific intrinsics. Having target specific code in general passes was noted as an area for improvement for a long time. D81728 moves most target specific code out of the InstCombine pass. Applying the target specific combinations in an extra pass would probably result in inferior optimizations compared to the current fixed-point iteration, therefore the InstCombine pass resorts to newly introduced functions in the TargetTransformInfo when it encounters unknown intrinsics. The patch should not have any effect on generated code (under the assumption that code never uses intrinsics from a foreign target). This introduces three new functions: TargetTransformInfo::instCombineIntrinsic TargetTransformInfo::simplifyDemandedUseBitsIntrinsic TargetTransformInfo::simplifyDemandedVectorEltsIntrinsic A few target specific parts are left in the InstCombine folder, where it makes sense to share code. The largest left-over part in InstCombineCalls.cpp is the code shared between arm and aarch64. This allows to move about 3000 lines out from InstCombine to the targets. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81728
2020-06-03 21:56:40 +08:00
Optional<Instruction *>
TargetTransformInfo::instCombineIntrinsic(InstCombiner &IC,
IntrinsicInst &II) const {
return TTIImpl->instCombineIntrinsic(IC, II);
}
Optional<Value *> TargetTransformInfo::simplifyDemandedUseBitsIntrinsic(
InstCombiner &IC, IntrinsicInst &II, APInt DemandedMask, KnownBits &Known,
bool &KnownBitsComputed) const {
return TTIImpl->simplifyDemandedUseBitsIntrinsic(IC, II, DemandedMask, Known,
KnownBitsComputed);
}
Optional<Value *> TargetTransformInfo::simplifyDemandedVectorEltsIntrinsic(
InstCombiner &IC, IntrinsicInst &II, APInt DemandedElts, APInt &UndefElts,
APInt &UndefElts2, APInt &UndefElts3,
std::function<void(Instruction *, unsigned, APInt, APInt &)>
SimplifyAndSetOp) const {
return TTIImpl->simplifyDemandedVectorEltsIntrinsic(
IC, II, DemandedElts, UndefElts, UndefElts2, UndefElts3,
SimplifyAndSetOp);
}
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
void TargetTransformInfo::getUnrollingPreferences(
[LoopUnroll] Pass SCEV to getUnrollingPreferences hook. NFCI. Reviewers: sanjoy, anna, reames, apilipenko, igor-laevsky, mkuper Subscribers: jholewinski, arsenm, mzolotukhin, nemanjai, nhaehnle, javed.absar, mcrosier, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34531 llvm-svn: 306554
2017-06-28 23:53:17 +08:00
Loop *L, ScalarEvolution &SE, UnrollingPreferences &UP) const {
return TTIImpl->getUnrollingPreferences(L, SE, UP);
Add getUnrollingPreferences to TTI Allow targets to customize the default behavior of the generic loop unrolling transformation. This will be used by the PowerPC backend when targeting the A2 core (which is in-order with a deep pipeline), and using more aggressive defaults is important. llvm-svn: 190542
2013-09-12 03:25:43 +08:00
}
[NFC] Separate Peeling Properties into its own struct (re-land after minor fix) Summary: This patch separates the peeling specific parameters from the UnrollingPreferences, and creates a new struct called PeelingPreferences. Functions which used the UnrollingPreferences struct for peeling have been updated to use the PeelingPreferences struct. Author: sidbav (Sidharth Baveja) Reviewers: Whitney (Whitney Tsang), Meinersbur (Michael Kruse), skatkov (Serguei Katkov), ashlykov (Arkady Shlykov), bogner (Justin Bogner), hfinkel (Hal Finkel), anhtuyen (Anh Tuyen Tran), nikic (Nikita Popov) Reviewed By: Meinersbur (Michael Kruse) Subscribers: fhahn (Florian Hahn), hiraditya (Aditya Kumar), llvm-commits, LLVM Tag: LLVM Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80580
2020-07-11 02:38:08 +08:00
void TargetTransformInfo::getPeelingPreferences(Loop *L, ScalarEvolution &SE,
PeelingPreferences &PP) const {
return TTIImpl->getPeelingPreferences(L, SE, PP);
}
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isLegalAddImmediate(int64_t Imm) const {
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
return TTIImpl->isLegalAddImmediate(Imm);
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
bool TargetTransformInfo::isLegalICmpImmediate(int64_t Imm) const {
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
return TTIImpl->isLegalICmpImmediate(Imm);
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isLegalAddressingMode(Type *Ty, GlobalValue *BaseGV,
int64_t BaseOffset,
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
bool HasBaseReg, int64_t Scale,
[SystemZ, LoopStrengthReduce] This patch makes LSR generate better code for SystemZ in the cases of memory intrinsics, Load->Store pairs or comparison of immediate with memory. In order to achieve this, the following common code changes were made: * New TTI hook: LSRWithInstrQueries(), which defaults to false. Controls if LSR should do instruction-based addressing evaluations by calling isLegalAddressingMode() with the Instruction pointers. * In LoopStrengthReduce: handle address operands of memset, memmove and memcpy as address uses, and call isFoldableMemAccessOffset() for any LSRUse::Address, not just loads or stores. SystemZ changes: * isLSRCostLess() implemented with Insns first, and without ImmCost. * New function supportedAddressingMode() that is a helper for TTI methods looking at Instructions passed via pointers. Review: Ulrich Weigand, Quentin Colombet https://reviews.llvm.org/D35262 https://reviews.llvm.org/D35049 llvm-svn: 308729
2017-07-21 19:59:37 +08:00
unsigned AddrSpace,
Instruction *I) const {
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
return TTIImpl->isLegalAddressingMode(Ty, BaseGV, BaseOffset, HasBaseReg,
[SystemZ, LoopStrengthReduce] This patch makes LSR generate better code for SystemZ in the cases of memory intrinsics, Load->Store pairs or comparison of immediate with memory. In order to achieve this, the following common code changes were made: * New TTI hook: LSRWithInstrQueries(), which defaults to false. Controls if LSR should do instruction-based addressing evaluations by calling isLegalAddressingMode() with the Instruction pointers. * In LoopStrengthReduce: handle address operands of memset, memmove and memcpy as address uses, and call isFoldableMemAccessOffset() for any LSRUse::Address, not just loads or stores. SystemZ changes: * isLSRCostLess() implemented with Insns first, and without ImmCost. * New function supportedAddressingMode() that is a helper for TTI methods looking at Instructions passed via pointers. Review: Ulrich Weigand, Quentin Colombet https://reviews.llvm.org/D35262 https://reviews.llvm.org/D35049 llvm-svn: 308729
2017-07-21 19:59:37 +08:00
Scale, AddrSpace, I);
Masked Load / Store Intrinsics - the CodeGen part. I'm recommiting the codegen part of the patch. The vectorizer part will be send to review again. Masked Vector Load and Store Intrinsics. Introduced new target-independent intrinsics in order to support masked vector loads and stores. The loop vectorizer optimizes loops containing conditional memory accesses by generating these intrinsics for existing targets AVX2 and AVX-512. The vectorizer asks the target about availability of masked vector loads and stores. Added SDNodes for masked operations and lowering patterns for X86 code generator. Examples: <16 x i32> @llvm.masked.load.v16i32(i8* %addr, <16 x i32> %passthru, i32 4 /* align */, <16 x i1> %mask) declare void @llvm.masked.store.v8f64(i8* %addr, <8 x double> %value, i32 4, <8 x i1> %mask) Scalarizer for other targets (not AVX2/AVX-512) will be done in a separate patch. http://reviews.llvm.org/D6191 llvm-svn: 223348
2014-12-04 17:40:44 +08:00
}
Fix PR23384 (part 2 of 3) NFC Summary: The patch moves LSR cost comparison to target part. Reviewers: qcolombet Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D30561 From: Evgeny Stupachenko <evstupac@gmail.com> llvm-svn: 304750
2017-06-06 07:37:00 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isLSRCostLess(LSRCost &C1, LSRCost &C2) const {
return TTIImpl->isLSRCostLess(C1, C2);
}
[LSR] fix typo in comments and rename for a new added hook.
2020-10-27 10:29:22 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isNumRegsMajorCostOfLSR() const {
return TTIImpl->isNumRegsMajorCostOfLSR();
[LSR] ignore profitable chain when reg num is not major cost. Reviewed By: samparker Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D89665
2020-10-21 11:25:27 +08:00
}
[LSR][ARM] Add new TTI hook to mark some LSR chains as profitable This patch adds a new TTI hook to allow targets to tell LSR that a chain including some instruction is already profitable and should not be optimized. This patch also adds an implementation of this TTI hook for ARM so LSR doesn't optimize chains that include the VCTP intrinsic. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79418
2020-05-05 21:25:23 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isProfitableLSRChainElement(Instruction *I) const {
return TTIImpl->isProfitableLSRChainElement(I);
}
[LoopStrengthReduce, x86] don't add cost for a cmp that will be macro-fused (PR35681) In the motivating case from PR35681 and represented by the macro-fuse-cmp test: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35681 ...there's a 37 -> 31 byte size win for the loop because we eliminate the big base address offsets. SPEC2017 on Ryzen shows no significant perf difference. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42607 llvm-svn: 324289
2018-02-06 07:43:05 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::canMacroFuseCmp() const {
return TTIImpl->canMacroFuseCmp();
}
[PowerPC] exclude ICmpZero in LSR if icmp can be replaced in later hardware loop. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63477 llvm-svn: 364993
2019-07-03 09:49:03 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::canSaveCmp(Loop *L, BranchInst **BI,
ScalarEvolution *SE, LoopInfo *LI,
DominatorTree *DT, AssumptionCache *AC,
TargetLibraryInfo *LibInfo) const {
return TTIImpl->canSaveCmp(L, BI, SE, LI, DT, AC, LibInfo);
}
[LSR] Allow giving priority to post-incrementing addressing modes Implement TTI interface for targets to indicate that the LSR should give priority to post-incrementing addressing modes. Combination of patches by Sebastian Pop and Brendon Cahoon. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44758 llvm-svn: 328490
2018-03-26 21:10:09 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::shouldFavorPostInc() const {
return TTIImpl->shouldFavorPostInc();
}
[LSR] Generate cross iteration indexes Modify GenerateConstantOffsetsImpl to create offsets that can be used by indexed addressing modes. If formulae can be generated which result in the constant offset being the same size as the recurrence, we can generate a pre-indexed access. This allows the pointer to be updated via the single pre-indexed access so that (hopefully) no add/subs are required to update it for the next iteration. For small cores, this can significantly improve performance DSP-like loops. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55373 llvm-svn: 353403
2019-02-07 21:32:54 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::shouldFavorBackedgeIndex(const Loop *L) const {
return TTIImpl->shouldFavorBackedgeIndex(L);
}
[NFC][TTI] Add Alignment for isLegalMasked[Load/Store] Add an extra parameter so the backend can take the alignment into consideration. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68400 llvm-svn: 374763
2019-10-14 18:00:21 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isLegalMaskedStore(Type *DataType,
[NFC] Replace MaybeAlign with Align in TargetTransformInfo.
2020-05-19 10:16:06 +08:00
Align Alignment) const {
[NFC][TTI] Add Alignment for isLegalMasked[Load/Store] Add an extra parameter so the backend can take the alignment into consideration. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68400 llvm-svn: 374763
2019-10-14 18:00:21 +08:00
return TTIImpl->isLegalMaskedStore(DataType, Alignment);
Masked Load / Store Intrinsics - the CodeGen part. I'm recommiting the codegen part of the patch. The vectorizer part will be send to review again. Masked Vector Load and Store Intrinsics. Introduced new target-independent intrinsics in order to support masked vector loads and stores. The loop vectorizer optimizes loops containing conditional memory accesses by generating these intrinsics for existing targets AVX2 and AVX-512. The vectorizer asks the target about availability of masked vector loads and stores. Added SDNodes for masked operations and lowering patterns for X86 code generator. Examples: <16 x i32> @llvm.masked.load.v16i32(i8* %addr, <16 x i32> %passthru, i32 4 /* align */, <16 x i1> %mask) declare void @llvm.masked.store.v8f64(i8* %addr, <8 x double> %value, i32 4, <8 x i1> %mask) Scalarizer for other targets (not AVX2/AVX-512) will be done in a separate patch. http://reviews.llvm.org/D6191 llvm-svn: 223348
2014-12-04 17:40:44 +08:00
}
[NFC][TTI] Add Alignment for isLegalMasked[Load/Store] Add an extra parameter so the backend can take the alignment into consideration. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68400 llvm-svn: 374763
2019-10-14 18:00:21 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isLegalMaskedLoad(Type *DataType,
[NFC] Replace MaybeAlign with Align in TargetTransformInfo.
2020-05-19 10:16:06 +08:00
Align Alignment) const {
[NFC][TTI] Add Alignment for isLegalMasked[Load/Store] Add an extra parameter so the backend can take the alignment into consideration. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68400 llvm-svn: 374763
2019-10-14 18:00:21 +08:00
return TTIImpl->isLegalMaskedLoad(DataType, Alignment);
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
[LV] Suppress vectorization in some nontemporal cases When considering a loop containing nontemporal stores or loads for vectorization, suppress the vectorization if the corresponding vectorized store or load with the aligment of the original scaler memory op is not supported with the nontemporal hint on the target. This adds two new functions: bool isLegalNTStore(Type *DataType, unsigned Alignment) const; bool isLegalNTLoad(Type *DataType, unsigned Alignment) const; to TTI, leaving the target independent default implementation as returning true, but with overriding implementations for X86 that check the legality based on available Subtarget features. This fixes https://llvm.org/PR40759 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61764 llvm-svn: 363581
2019-06-18 01:20:08 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isLegalNTStore(Type *DataType,
[Alignment][NFC] Remove unneeded llvm:: scoping on Align types llvm-svn: 373081
2019-09-27 20:54:21 +08:00
Align Alignment) const {
[LV] Suppress vectorization in some nontemporal cases When considering a loop containing nontemporal stores or loads for vectorization, suppress the vectorization if the corresponding vectorized store or load with the aligment of the original scaler memory op is not supported with the nontemporal hint on the target. This adds two new functions: bool isLegalNTStore(Type *DataType, unsigned Alignment) const; bool isLegalNTLoad(Type *DataType, unsigned Alignment) const; to TTI, leaving the target independent default implementation as returning true, but with overriding implementations for X86 that check the legality based on available Subtarget features. This fixes https://llvm.org/PR40759 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61764 llvm-svn: 363581
2019-06-18 01:20:08 +08:00
return TTIImpl->isLegalNTStore(DataType, Alignment);
}
[Alignment][NFC] Remove unneeded llvm:: scoping on Align types llvm-svn: 373081
2019-09-27 20:54:21 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isLegalNTLoad(Type *DataType, Align Alignment) const {
[LV] Suppress vectorization in some nontemporal cases When considering a loop containing nontemporal stores or loads for vectorization, suppress the vectorization if the corresponding vectorized store or load with the aligment of the original scaler memory op is not supported with the nontemporal hint on the target. This adds two new functions: bool isLegalNTStore(Type *DataType, unsigned Alignment) const; bool isLegalNTLoad(Type *DataType, unsigned Alignment) const; to TTI, leaving the target independent default implementation as returning true, but with overriding implementations for X86 that check the legality based on available Subtarget features. This fixes https://llvm.org/PR40759 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61764 llvm-svn: 363581
2019-06-18 01:20:08 +08:00
return TTIImpl->isLegalNTLoad(DataType, Alignment);
}
[NFC][TTI] Add Alignment for isLegalMasked[Gather/Scatter] Add an extra parameter so alignment can be taken under consideration in gather/scatter legalization. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71610
2019-12-18 16:42:53 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isLegalMaskedGather(Type *DataType,
[NFC] Replace MaybeAlign with Align in TargetTransformInfo.
2020-05-19 10:16:06 +08:00
Align Alignment) const {
[NFC][TTI] Add Alignment for isLegalMasked[Gather/Scatter] Add an extra parameter so alignment can be taken under consideration in gather/scatter legalization. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71610
2019-12-18 16:42:53 +08:00
return TTIImpl->isLegalMaskedGather(DataType, Alignment);
Scalarizer for masked.gather and masked.scatter intrinsics. When the target does not support these intrinsics they should be converted to a chain of scalar load or store operations. If the mask is not constant, the scalarizer will build a chain of conditional basic blocks. I added isLegalMaskedGather() isLegalMaskedScatter() APIs. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13722 llvm-svn: 251237
2015-10-25 23:37:55 +08:00
}
[NFC][TTI] Add Alignment for isLegalMasked[Gather/Scatter] Add an extra parameter so alignment can be taken under consideration in gather/scatter legalization. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71610
2019-12-18 16:42:53 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isLegalMaskedScatter(Type *DataType,
[NFC] Replace MaybeAlign with Align in TargetTransformInfo.
2020-05-19 10:16:06 +08:00
Align Alignment) const {
[NFC][TTI] Add Alignment for isLegalMasked[Gather/Scatter] Add an extra parameter so alignment can be taken under consideration in gather/scatter legalization. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71610
2019-12-18 16:42:53 +08:00
return TTIImpl->isLegalMaskedScatter(DataType, Alignment);
Scalarizer for masked.gather and masked.scatter intrinsics. When the target does not support these intrinsics they should be converted to a chain of scalar load or store operations. If the mask is not constant, the scalarizer will build a chain of conditional basic blocks. I added isLegalMaskedGather() isLegalMaskedScatter() APIs. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13722 llvm-svn: 251237
2015-10-25 23:37:55 +08:00
}
[ScalarizeMaskedMemIntrin] Add support for scalarizing expandload and compressstore intrinsics. This adds support for scalarizing these intrinsics as well the X86TargetTransformInfo support to avoid scalarizing them in the cases X86 can handle. I've omitted handling special cases for constant masks for this first pass. Though CodeGenPrepare can constant fold the branch conditions and remove some of the control flow anyway. Fixes PR40994 and is covers most of PR3666. Might want to implement constant masks to close that. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59180 llvm-svn: 356687
2019-03-22 01:38:52 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isLegalMaskedCompressStore(Type *DataType) const {
return TTIImpl->isLegalMaskedCompressStore(DataType);
}
bool TargetTransformInfo::isLegalMaskedExpandLoad(Type *DataType) const {
return TTIImpl->isLegalMaskedExpandLoad(DataType);
}
[DivRempairs] add a pass to optimize div/rem pairs (PR31028) This is intended to be a superset of the functionality from D31037 (EarlyCSE) but implemented as an independent pass, so there's no stretching of scope and feature creep for an existing pass. I also proposed a weaker version of this for SimplifyCFG in D30910. And I initially had almost this same functionality as an addition to CGP in the motivating example of PR31028: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31028 The advantage of positioning this ahead of SimplifyCFG in the pass pipeline is that it can allow more flattening. But it needs to be after passes (InstCombine) that could sink a div/rem and undo the hoisting that is done here. Decomposing remainder may allow removing some code from the backend (PPC and possibly others). Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37121 llvm-svn: 312862
2017-09-09 21:38:18 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::hasDivRemOp(Type *DataType, bool IsSigned) const {
return TTIImpl->hasDivRemOp(DataType, IsSigned);
}
[NVPTX] allow address space inference for volatile loads/stores. If particular target supports volatile memory access operations, we can avoid AS casting to generic AS. Currently it's only enabled in NVPTX for loads and stores that access global & shared AS. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39026 llvm-svn: 316495
2017-10-25 04:31:44 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::hasVolatileVariant(Instruction *I,
unsigned AddrSpace) const {
return TTIImpl->hasVolatileVariant(I, AddrSpace);
}
[LoopVectorizer] Let target prefer scalar addressing computations. The loop vectorizer usually vectorizes any instruction it can and then extracts the elements for a scalarized use. On SystemZ, all elements containing addresses must be extracted into address registers (GRs). Since this extraction is not free, it is better to have the address in a suitable register to begin with. By forcing address arithmetic instructions and loads of addresses to be scalar after vectorization, two benefits result: * No need to extract the register * LSR optimizations trigger (LSR isn't handling vector addresses currently) Benchmarking show improvements on SystemZ with this new behaviour. Any other target could try this by returning false in the new hook prefersVectorizedAddressing(). Review: Renato Golin, Elena Demikhovsky, Ulrich Weigand https://reviews.llvm.org/D32422 llvm-svn: 303744
2017-05-24 21:42:56 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::prefersVectorizedAddressing() const {
return TTIImpl->prefersVectorizedAddressing();
}
Loop Strength Reduce: Scaling factor cost. Account for the cost of scaling factor in Loop Strength Reduce when rating the formulae. This uses a target hook. The default implementation of the hook is: if the addressing mode is legal, the scaling factor is free. <rdar://problem/13806271> llvm-svn: 183045
2013-06-01 05:29:03 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getScalingFactorCost(Type *Ty, GlobalValue *BaseGV,
int64_t BaseOffset,
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
bool HasBaseReg, int64_t Scale,
Add isLegalAddressingMode address space argument to TTI Update to match the TLI version, and remove the TLI version's default argument. llvm-svn: 239260
2015-06-08 04:12:03 +08:00
unsigned AddrSpace) const {
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
int Cost = TTIImpl->getScalingFactorCost(Ty, BaseGV, BaseOffset, HasBaseReg,
Scale, AddrSpace);
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
Loop Strength Reduce: Scaling factor cost. Account for the cost of scaling factor in Loop Strength Reduce when rating the formulae. This uses a target hook. The default implementation of the hook is: if the addressing mode is legal, the scaling factor is free. <rdar://problem/13806271> llvm-svn: 183045
2013-06-01 05:29:03 +08:00
}
[SystemZ, LoopStrengthReduce] This patch makes LSR generate better code for SystemZ in the cases of memory intrinsics, Load->Store pairs or comparison of immediate with memory. In order to achieve this, the following common code changes were made: * New TTI hook: LSRWithInstrQueries(), which defaults to false. Controls if LSR should do instruction-based addressing evaluations by calling isLegalAddressingMode() with the Instruction pointers. * In LoopStrengthReduce: handle address operands of memset, memmove and memcpy as address uses, and call isFoldableMemAccessOffset() for any LSRUse::Address, not just loads or stores. SystemZ changes: * isLSRCostLess() implemented with Insns first, and without ImmCost. * New function supportedAddressingMode() that is a helper for TTI methods looking at Instructions passed via pointers. Review: Ulrich Weigand, Quentin Colombet https://reviews.llvm.org/D35262 https://reviews.llvm.org/D35049 llvm-svn: 308729
2017-07-21 19:59:37 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::LSRWithInstrQueries() const {
return TTIImpl->LSRWithInstrQueries();
}
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isTruncateFree(Type *Ty1, Type *Ty2) const {
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
return TTIImpl->isTruncateFree(Ty1, Ty2);
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
Prevent hoisting fmul from THEN/ELSE to IF if there is fmsub/fmadd opportunity. This patch adds the isProfitableToHoist API. For AArch64, we want to prevent a fmul from being hoisted in cases where it is more profitable to form a fmsub/fmadd. Phabricator Review: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7299 Patch by Lawrence Hu <lawrence@codeaurora.org> llvm-svn: 230241
2015-02-24 03:15:16 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isProfitableToHoist(Instruction *I) const {
return TTIImpl->isProfitableToHoist(I);
}
Plumb useAA through TargetTransformInfo to remove Transforms->CodeGen header dependency Thanks to echristo for the pointers on direction. llvm-svn: 328737
2018-03-29 06:28:50 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::useAA() const { return TTIImpl->useAA(); }
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isTypeLegal(Type *Ty) const {
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
return TTIImpl->isTypeLegal(Ty);
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
Reland [LoopVectorizer] NFCI: Calculate register usage based on TLI.getTypeLegalizationCost. This relands https://reviews.llvm.org/D91059 and reverts commit 30fded75b48bcbc034120154a57a00c7f3d07e06. GetRegUsage now returns 0 when Ty is not a valid vector element type.
2020-11-12 20:33:36 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getRegUsageForType(Type *Ty) const {
return TTIImpl->getRegUsageForType(Ty);
}
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::shouldBuildLookupTables() const {
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
return TTIImpl->shouldBuildLookupTables();
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::shouldBuildLookupTablesForConstant(
Constant *C) const {
[ARM] Don't convert switches to lookup tables of pointers with ROPI/RWPI With the ROPI and RWPI relocation models we can't always have pointers to global data or functions in constant data, so don't try to convert switches into lookup tables if any value in the lookup table would require a relocation. We can still safely emit lookup tables of other values, such as simple constants. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24462 llvm-svn: 283530
2016-10-07 16:48:24 +08:00
return TTIImpl->shouldBuildLookupTablesForConstant(C);
}
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
Re-commit : [PowerPC] Add handling for ColdCC calling convention and a pass to mark candidates with coldcc attribute. This recommits r322721 reverted due to sanitizer memory leak build bot failures. Original commit message: This patch adds support for the coldcc calling convention for Power. This changes the set of non-volatile registers. It includes a pass to stress test the implementation by marking all static directly called functions with the coldcc attribute through the option -enable-coldcc-stress-test. It also includes an option, -ppc-enable-coldcc, to add the coldcc attribute to functions which are cold at all call sites based on BlockFrequencyInfo when the containing function does not call any non cold functions. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38413 llvm-svn: 323778
2018-01-31 00:17:22 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::useColdCCForColdCall(Function &F) const {
return TTIImpl->useColdCCForColdCall(F);
}
[TTI] getScalarizationOverhead - use explicit VectorType operand getScalarizationOverhead is only ever called with vectors (and we already had a load of cast<VectorType> calls immediately inside the functions). Followup to D78357 Reviewed By: @samparker Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79341
2020-05-05 23:57:55 +08:00
unsigned
TargetTransformInfo::getScalarizationOverhead(VectorType *Ty,
const APInt &DemandedElts,
bool Insert, bool Extract) const {
[TTI] Add DemandedElts to getScalarizationOverhead The improvements to the x86 vector insert/extract element costs in D74976 resulted in the estimated costs for vector initialization and scalarization increasing higher than should be expected. This is particularly noticeable on pre-SSE4 targets where the available of legal INSERT_VECTOR_ELT ops is more limited. This patch does 2 things: 1 - it implements X86TTIImpl::getScalarizationOverhead to more accurately represent the typical costs of a ISD::BUILD_VECTOR pattern. 2 - it adds a DemandedElts mask to getScalarizationOverhead to permit the SLP's BoUpSLP::getGatherCost to be rewritten to use it directly instead of accumulating raw vector insertion costs. This fixes PR45418 where a v4i8 (zext'd to v4i32) was no longer vectorizing. A future patch should extend X86TTIImpl::getScalarizationOverhead to tweak the EXTRACT_VECTOR_ELT scalarization costs as well. Reviewed By: @craig.topper Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78216
2020-04-29 18:39:13 +08:00
return TTIImpl->getScalarizationOverhead(Ty, DemandedElts, Insert, Extract);
[TargetTransformInfo] Refactor and improve getScalarizationOverhead() Refactoring to remove duplications of this method. New method getOperandsScalarizationOverhead() that looks at the present unique operands and add extract costs for them. Old behaviour was to just add extract costs for one operand of the type always, which still happens in getArithmeticInstrCost() if no operands are provided by the caller. This is a good start of improving on this, but there are more places that can be improved by using getOperandsScalarizationOverhead(). Review: Hal Finkel https://reviews.llvm.org/D29017 llvm-svn: 293155
2017-01-26 15:03:25 +08:00
}
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getOperandsScalarizationOverhead(
ArrayRef<const Value *> Args, unsigned VF) const {
[TargetTransformInfo] Refactor and improve getScalarizationOverhead() Refactoring to remove duplications of this method. New method getOperandsScalarizationOverhead() that looks at the present unique operands and add extract costs for them. Old behaviour was to just add extract costs for one operand of the type always, which still happens in getArithmeticInstrCost() if no operands are provided by the caller. This is a good start of improving on this, but there are more places that can be improved by using getOperandsScalarizationOverhead(). Review: Hal Finkel https://reviews.llvm.org/D29017 llvm-svn: 293155
2017-01-26 15:03:25 +08:00
return TTIImpl->getOperandsScalarizationOverhead(Args, VF);
}
[LoopVectorizer, TTI] New method supportsEfficientVectorElementLoadStore() Since SystemZ supports vector element load/store instructions, there is no need for extracts/inserts if a vector load/store gets scalarized. This patch lets Target specify that it supports such instructions by means of a new TTI hook that defaults to false. The use for this is in the LoopVectorizer getScalarizationOverhead() method, which will with this patch produce a smaller sum for a vector load/store on SystemZ. New test: test/Transforms/LoopVectorize/SystemZ/load-store-scalarization-cost.ll Review: Adam Nemet https://reviews.llvm.org/D30680 llvm-svn: 300056
2017-04-12 20:41:37 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::supportsEfficientVectorElementLoadStore() const {
return TTIImpl->supportsEfficientVectorElementLoadStore();
}
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::enableAggressiveInterleaving(
bool LoopHasReductions) const {
Do not restrict interleaved unrolling to small loops, depending on the target. llvm-svn: 231528
2015-03-07 07:12:04 +08:00
return TTIImpl->enableAggressiveInterleaving(LoopHasReductions);
}
[ExpandMemCmp] Move all options to TargetTransformInfo. Split off from D60318. llvm-svn: 364281
2019-06-25 16:04:13 +08:00
TargetTransformInfo::MemCmpExpansionOptions
TargetTransformInfo::enableMemCmpExpansion(bool OptSize, bool IsZeroCmp) const {
return TTIImpl->enableMemCmpExpansion(OptSize, IsZeroCmp);
[PPC] Inline expansion of memcmp This patch does an inline expansion of memcmp. It changes the memcmp library call into an inline expansion when the size is known at compile time and is under a target specified threshold. This expansion is implemented in CodeGenPrepare and expands into straight line code. The target specifies a maximum load size and the expansion works by using this size to load the two sources, compare, and exit early if a difference is found. It also has a special case when the memcmp result is used in a compare to zero equality. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28637 llvm-svn: 304313
2017-06-01 01:12:38 +08:00
}
[TTI] Add a hook for specifying per-target defaults for Interleaved Accesses Summary: This adds a hook to TTI which enables us to selectively turn on by default interleaved access vectorization for targets on which we have have performed the required benchmarking. Reviewers: rengolin Subscribers: rengolin, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11901 llvm-svn: 244449
2015-08-10 22:50:54 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::enableInterleavedAccessVectorization() const {
return TTIImpl->enableInterleavedAccessVectorization();
}
recommit 344472 after fixing build failure on ARM and PPC. llvm-svn: 344475
2018-10-14 16:50:06 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::enableMaskedInterleavedAccessVectorization() const {
return TTIImpl->enableMaskedInterleavedAccessVectorization();
}
[ARM] Adding IEEE-754 SIMD detection to loop vectorizer Some SIMD implementations are not IEEE-754 compliant, for example ARM's NEON. This patch teaches the loop vectorizer to only allow transformations of loops that either contain no floating-point operations or have enough allowance flags supporting lack of precision (ex. -ffast-math, Darwin). For that, the target description now has a method which tells us if the vectorizer is allowed to handle FP math without falling into unsafe representations, plus a check on every FP instruction in the candidate loop to check for the safety flags. This commit makes LLVM behave like GCC with respect to ARM NEON support, but it stops short of fixing the underlying problem: sub-normals. Neither GCC nor LLVM have a flag for allowing sub-normal operations. Before this patch, GCC only allows it using unsafe-math flags and LLVM allows it by default with no way to turn it off (short of not using NEON at all). As a first step, we push this change to make it safe and in sync with GCC. The second step is to discuss a new sub-normal's flag on both communitues and come up with a common solution. The third step is to improve the FastMath flags in LLVM to encode sub-normals and use those flags to restrict NEON FP. Fixes PR16275. llvm-svn: 266363
2016-04-15 04:42:18 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isFPVectorizationPotentiallyUnsafe() const {
return TTIImpl->isFPVectorizationPotentiallyUnsafe();
}
LoadStoreVectorizer: Remove TargetBaseAlign. Keep alignment for stack adjustments. Summary: TargetBaseAlign is no longer required since LSV checks if target allows misaligned accesses. A constant defining a base alignment is still needed for stack accesses where alignment can be adjusted. Previous patch (D22936) was reverted because tests were failing. This patch also fixes the cause of those failures: - x86 failing tests either did not have the right target, or the right alignment. - NVPTX failing tests did not have the right alignment. - AMDGPU failing test (merge-stores) should allow vectorization with the given alignment but the target info considers <3xi32> a non-standard type and gives up early. This patch removes the condition and only checks for a maximum size allowed and relies on the next condition checking for %4 for correctness. This should be revisited to include 3xi32 as a MVT type (on arsenm's non-immediate todo list). Note that checking the sizeInBits for a MVT is undefined (leads to an assertion failure), so we need to create an EVT, hence the interface change in allowsMisaligned to include the Context. Reviewers: arsenm, jlebar, tstellarAMD Subscribers: jholewinski, arsenm, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23068 llvm-svn: 277735
2016-08-05 00:38:44 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::allowsMisalignedMemoryAccesses(LLVMContext &Context,
unsigned BitWidth,
Add TLI.allowsMisalignedMemoryAccesses to LoadStoreVectorizer Summary: Extend TTI to access TLI.allowsMisalignedMemoryAccesses(). Check condition when vectorizing load and store chains. Add additional parameters: AddressSpace, Alignment, Fast. Reviewers: llvm-commits, jlebar Subscribers: arsenm, mzolotukhin Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21935 llvm-svn: 275100
2016-07-12 04:46:17 +08:00
unsigned AddressSpace,
unsigned Alignment,
bool *Fast) const {
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
return TTIImpl->allowsMisalignedMemoryAccesses(Context, BitWidth,
AddressSpace, Alignment, Fast);
Add TLI.allowsMisalignedMemoryAccesses to LoadStoreVectorizer Summary: Extend TTI to access TLI.allowsMisalignedMemoryAccesses(). Check condition when vectorizing load and store chains. Add additional parameters: AddressSpace, Alignment, Fast. Reviewers: llvm-commits, jlebar Subscribers: arsenm, mzolotukhin Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21935 llvm-svn: 275100
2016-07-12 04:46:17 +08:00
}
Make the popcnt support enums and methods have more clear names and follow the conding conventions regarding enumerating a set of "kinds" of things. llvm-svn: 171687
2013-01-07 11:16:03 +08:00
TargetTransformInfo::PopcntSupportKind
TargetTransformInfo::getPopcntSupport(unsigned IntTyWidthInBit) const {
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
return TTIImpl->getPopcntSupport(IntTyWidthInBit);
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
Turn MipsOptimizeMathLibCalls into a target-independent scalar transform ...so that it can be used for z too. Most of the code is the same. The only real change is to use TargetTransformInfo to test when a sqrt instruction is available. The pass is opt-in because at the moment it only handles sqrt. llvm-svn: 189097
2013-08-23 18:27:02 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::haveFastSqrt(Type *Ty) const {
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
return TTIImpl->haveFastSqrt(Ty);
Turn MipsOptimizeMathLibCalls into a target-independent scalar transform ...so that it can be used for z too. Most of the code is the same. The only real change is to use TargetTransformInfo to test when a sqrt instruction is available. The pass is opt-in because at the moment it only handles sqrt. llvm-svn: 189097
2013-08-23 18:27:02 +08:00
}
[PartiallyInlineLibCalls][x86] add TTI hook to allow sqrt inlining to depend on arg rather than result This should fix PR31455: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31455 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28314 llvm-svn: 319094
2017-11-28 05:15:43 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isFCmpOrdCheaperThanFCmpZero(Type *Ty) const {
return TTIImpl->isFCmpOrdCheaperThanFCmpZero(Ty);
}
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getFPOpCost(Type *Ty) const {
int Cost = TTIImpl->getFPOpCost(Ty);
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
Value soft float calls as more expensive in the inliner. Summary: When evaluating floating point instructions in the inliner, ask the TTI whether it is an expensive operation. By default, it's not an expensive operation. This keeps the default behavior the same as before. The ARM TTI has been updated to return back TCC_Expensive for targets which don't have hardware floating point. Reviewers: chandlerc, echristo Reviewed By: echristo Subscribers: t.p.northover, aemerson, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6936 llvm-svn: 228263
2015-02-05 10:09:33 +08:00
}
This implements a more optimal algorithm for selecting a base constant in constant hoisting. It not only takes into account the number of uses and the cost of expressions in which constants appear, but now also the resulting integer range of the offsets. Thus, the algorithm maximizes the number of uses within an integer range that will enable more efficient code generation. On ARM, for example, this will enable code size optimisations because less negative offsets will be created. Negative offsets/immediates are not supported by Thumb1 thus preventing more compact instruction encoding. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21183 llvm-svn: 275382
2016-07-14 15:44:20 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getIntImmCodeSizeCost(unsigned Opcode, unsigned Idx,
const APInt &Imm,
Type *Ty) const {
int Cost = TTIImpl->getIntImmCodeSizeCost(Opcode, Idx, Imm, Ty);
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
}
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getIntImmCost(const APInt &Imm, Type *Ty,
TTI::TargetCostKind CostKind) const {
int Cost = TTIImpl->getIntImmCost(Imm, Ty, CostKind);
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
[ARM][TTI] Prevents constants in a min(max) or max(min) pattern from being hoisted when in a loop Changes TTI function getIntImmCostInst to take an additional Instruction parameter, which enables us to be able to check it is part of a min(max())/max(min()) pattern that will match SSAT. We can then mark the constant used as free to prevent it being hoisted so SSAT can still be generated. Required minor changes in some non-ARM backends to allow for the optional parameter to be included. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87457
2020-09-22 19:54:10 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getIntImmCostInst(unsigned Opcode, unsigned Idx,
const APInt &Imm, Type *Ty,
TTI::TargetCostKind CostKind,
Instruction *Inst) const {
int Cost = TTIImpl->getIntImmCostInst(Opcode, Idx, Imm, Ty, CostKind, Inst);
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
Revert "Revert "Add Constant Hoisting Pass" (r200034)" This reverts commit r200058 and adds the using directive for ARMTargetTransformInfo to silence two g++ overload warnings. llvm-svn: 200062
2014-01-25 10:02:55 +08:00
}
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
int
TargetTransformInfo::getIntImmCostIntrin(Intrinsic::ID IID, unsigned Idx,
const APInt &Imm, Type *Ty,
TTI::TargetCostKind CostKind) const {
int Cost = TTIImpl->getIntImmCostIntrin(IID, Idx, Imm, Ty, CostKind);
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
Revert "Revert "Add Constant Hoisting Pass" (r200034)" This reverts commit r200058 and adds the using directive for ARMTargetTransformInfo to silence two g++ overload warnings. llvm-svn: 200062
2014-01-25 10:02:55 +08:00
}
recommit: [LoopVectorize][PowerPC] Estimate int and float register pressure separately in loop-vectorize In loop-vectorize, interleave count and vector factor depend on target register number. Currently, it does not estimate different register pressure for different register class separately(especially for scalar type, float type should not be on the same position with int type), so it's not accurate. Specifically, it causes too many times interleaving/unrolling, result in too many register spills in loop body and hurting performance. So we need classify the register classes in IR level, and importantly these are abstract register classes, and are not the target register class of backend provided in td file. It's used to establish the mapping between the types of IR values and the number of simultaneous live ranges to which we'd like to limit for some set of those types. For example, POWER target, register num is special when VSX is enabled. When VSX is enabled, the number of int scalar register is 32(GPR), float is 64(VSR), but for int and float vector register both are 64(VSR). So there should be 2 kinds of register class when vsx is enabled, and 3 kinds of register class when VSX is NOT enabled. It runs on POWER target, it makes big(+~30%) performance improvement in one specific bmk(503.bwaves_r) of spec2017 and no other obvious degressions. Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67148 llvm-svn: 374634
2019-10-12 10:53:04 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getNumberOfRegisters(unsigned ClassID) const {
return TTIImpl->getNumberOfRegisters(ClassID);
}
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getRegisterClassForType(bool Vector,
Type *Ty) const {
recommit: [LoopVectorize][PowerPC] Estimate int and float register pressure separately in loop-vectorize In loop-vectorize, interleave count and vector factor depend on target register number. Currently, it does not estimate different register pressure for different register class separately(especially for scalar type, float type should not be on the same position with int type), so it's not accurate. Specifically, it causes too many times interleaving/unrolling, result in too many register spills in loop body and hurting performance. So we need classify the register classes in IR level, and importantly these are abstract register classes, and are not the target register class of backend provided in td file. It's used to establish the mapping between the types of IR values and the number of simultaneous live ranges to which we'd like to limit for some set of those types. For example, POWER target, register num is special when VSX is enabled. When VSX is enabled, the number of int scalar register is 32(GPR), float is 64(VSR), but for int and float vector register both are 64(VSR). So there should be 2 kinds of register class when vsx is enabled, and 3 kinds of register class when VSX is NOT enabled. It runs on POWER target, it makes big(+~30%) performance improvement in one specific bmk(503.bwaves_r) of spec2017 and no other obvious degressions. Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67148 llvm-svn: 374634
2019-10-12 10:53:04 +08:00
return TTIImpl->getRegisterClassForType(Vector, Ty);
}
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
const char *TargetTransformInfo::getRegisterClassName(unsigned ClassID) const {
recommit: [LoopVectorize][PowerPC] Estimate int and float register pressure separately in loop-vectorize In loop-vectorize, interleave count and vector factor depend on target register number. Currently, it does not estimate different register pressure for different register class separately(especially for scalar type, float type should not be on the same position with int type), so it's not accurate. Specifically, it causes too many times interleaving/unrolling, result in too many register spills in loop body and hurting performance. So we need classify the register classes in IR level, and importantly these are abstract register classes, and are not the target register class of backend provided in td file. It's used to establish the mapping between the types of IR values and the number of simultaneous live ranges to which we'd like to limit for some set of those types. For example, POWER target, register num is special when VSX is enabled. When VSX is enabled, the number of int scalar register is 32(GPR), float is 64(VSR), but for int and float vector register both are 64(VSR). So there should be 2 kinds of register class when vsx is enabled, and 3 kinds of register class when VSX is NOT enabled. It runs on POWER target, it makes big(+~30%) performance improvement in one specific bmk(503.bwaves_r) of spec2017 and no other obvious degressions. Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67148 llvm-svn: 374634
2019-10-12 10:53:04 +08:00
return TTIImpl->getRegisterClassName(ClassID);
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
ARM Cost model: Use the size of vector registers and widest vectorizable instruction to determine the max vectorization factor. llvm-svn: 172010
2013-01-10 06:29:00 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getRegisterBitWidth(bool Vector) const {
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
return TTIImpl->getRegisterBitWidth(Vector);
ARM Cost model: Use the size of vector registers and widest vectorizable instruction to determine the max vectorization factor. llvm-svn: 172010
2013-01-10 06:29:00 +08:00
}
[SLP] Enable 64-bit wide vectorization on AArch64 ARM Neon has native support for half-sized vector registers (64 bits). This is beneficial for example for 2D and 3D graphics. This patch adds the option to lower MinVecRegSize from 128 via a TTI in the SLP Vectorizer. *** Performance Analysis This change was motivated by some internal benchmarks but it is also beneficial on SPEC and the LLVM testsuite. The results are with -O3 and PGO. A negative percentage is an improvement. The testsuite was run with a sample size of 4. ** SPEC * CFP2006/482.sphinx3 -3.34% A pretty hot loop is SLP vectorized resulting in nice instruction reduction. This used to be a +22% regression before rL299482. * CFP2000/177.mesa -3.34% * CINT2000/256.bzip2 +6.97% My current plan is to extend the fix in rL299482 to i16 which brings the regression down to +2.5%. There are also other problems with the codegen in this loop so there is further room for improvement. ** LLVM testsuite * SingleSource/Benchmarks/Misc/ReedSolomon -10.75% There are multiple small SLP vectorizations outside the hot code. It's a bit surprising that it adds up to 10%. Some of this may be code-layout noise. * MultiSource/Benchmarks/VersaBench/beamformer/beamformer -8.40% The opt-viewer screenshot can be seen at F3218284. We start at a colder store but the tree leads us into the hottest loop. * MultiSource/Applications/lambda-0.1.3/lambda -2.68% * MultiSource/Benchmarks/Bullet/bullet -2.18% This is using 3D vectors. * SingleSource/Benchmarks/Shootout-C++/Shootout-C++-lists +6.67% Noise, binary is unchanged. * MultiSource/Benchmarks/Ptrdist/anagram/anagram +4.90% There is an additional SLP in the cold code. The test runs for ~1sec and prints out over 2000 lines. This is most likely noise. * MultiSource/Applications/aha/aha +1.63% * MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod/lencod +1.41% * SingleSource/Benchmarks/Misc/richards_benchmark +1.15% Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31965 llvm-svn: 303116
2017-05-16 05:15:01 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getMinVectorRegisterBitWidth() const {
return TTIImpl->getMinVectorRegisterBitWidth();
}
[LV] Add TTI::shouldMaximizeVectorBandwidth to allow enabling it per target The default implementation returns false and keeps the current behavior. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44735 llvm-svn: 328632
2018-03-28 00:14:11 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::shouldMaximizeVectorBandwidth(bool OptSize) const {
return TTIImpl->shouldMaximizeVectorBandwidth(OptSize);
}
[LV] Introduce TTI::getMinimumVF The function getMinimumVF(ElemWidth) will return the minimum VF for a vector with elements of size ElemWidth bits. This value will only apply to targets for which TTI::shouldMaximizeVectorBandwidth returns true. The value of 0 indicates that there is no minimum VF. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45271 llvm-svn: 330062
2018-04-14 04:16:32 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getMinimumVF(unsigned ElemWidth) const {
return TTIImpl->getMinimumVF(ElemWidth);
}
[CodeGenPrep] move aarch64-type-promotion to CGP Summary: Move the aarch64-type-promotion pass within the existing type promotion framework in CGP. This change also support forking sexts when a new sext is required for promotion. Note that change is based on D27853 and I am submitting this out early to provide a better idea on D27853. Reviewers: jmolloy, mcrosier, javed.absar, qcolombet Reviewed By: qcolombet Subscribers: llvm-commits, aemerson, rengolin, mcrosier Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28680 llvm-svn: 299379
2017-04-04 03:20:07 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::shouldConsiderAddressTypePromotion(
const Instruction &I, bool &AllowPromotionWithoutCommonHeader) const {
return TTIImpl->shouldConsiderAddressTypePromotion(
I, AllowPromotionWithoutCommonHeader);
}
[TTI] Add getCacheLineSize Summary: And use it in PPCLoopDataPrefetch.cpp. @hfinkel, please let me know if your preference would be to preserve the ppc-loop-prefetch-cache-line option in order to be able to override the value of TTI::getCacheLineSize for PPC. Reviewers: hfinkel Subscribers: hulx2000, mcrosier, mssimpso, hfinkel, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16306 llvm-svn: 258419
2016-01-22 02:28:36 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getCacheLineSize() const {
return TTIImpl->getCacheLineSize();
}
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
llvm::Optional<unsigned>
TargetTransformInfo::getCacheSize(CacheLevel Level) const {
Model cache size and associativity in TargetTransformInfo Summary: We add the precise cache sizes and associativity for the following Intel architectures: - Penry - Nehalem - Westmere - Sandy Bridge - Ivy Bridge - Haswell - Broadwell - Skylake - Kabylake Polly uses since several months a performance model for BLAS computations that derives optimal cache and register tile sizes from cache and latency information (based on ideas from "Analytical Modeling Is Enough for High-Performance BLIS", by Tze Meng Low published at TOMS 2016). While bootstrapping this model, these target values have been kept in Polly. However, as our implementation is now rather mature, it seems time to teach LLVM itself about cache sizes. Interestingly, L1 and L2 cache sizes are pretty constant across micro-architectures, hence a set of architecture specific default values seems like a good start. They can be expanded to more target specific values, in case certain newer architectures require different values. For now a set of Intel architectures are provided. Just as a little teaser, for a simple gemm kernel this model allows us to improve performance from 1.2s to 0.27s. For gemm kernels with less optimal memory layouts even larger speedups can be reported. Reviewers: Meinersbur, bollu, singam-sanjay, hfinkel, gareevroman, fhahn, sebpop, efriedma, asb Reviewed By: fhahn, asb Subscribers: lsaba, asb, pollydev, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37051 llvm-svn: 311647
2017-08-24 17:46:25 +08:00
return TTIImpl->getCacheSize(Level);
}
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
llvm::Optional<unsigned>
TargetTransformInfo::getCacheAssociativity(CacheLevel Level) const {
Model cache size and associativity in TargetTransformInfo Summary: We add the precise cache sizes and associativity for the following Intel architectures: - Penry - Nehalem - Westmere - Sandy Bridge - Ivy Bridge - Haswell - Broadwell - Skylake - Kabylake Polly uses since several months a performance model for BLAS computations that derives optimal cache and register tile sizes from cache and latency information (based on ideas from "Analytical Modeling Is Enough for High-Performance BLIS", by Tze Meng Low published at TOMS 2016). While bootstrapping this model, these target values have been kept in Polly. However, as our implementation is now rather mature, it seems time to teach LLVM itself about cache sizes. Interestingly, L1 and L2 cache sizes are pretty constant across micro-architectures, hence a set of architecture specific default values seems like a good start. They can be expanded to more target specific values, in case certain newer architectures require different values. For now a set of Intel architectures are provided. Just as a little teaser, for a simple gemm kernel this model allows us to improve performance from 1.2s to 0.27s. For gemm kernels with less optimal memory layouts even larger speedups can be reported. Reviewers: Meinersbur, bollu, singam-sanjay, hfinkel, gareevroman, fhahn, sebpop, efriedma, asb Reviewed By: fhahn, asb Subscribers: lsaba, asb, pollydev, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37051 llvm-svn: 311647
2017-08-24 17:46:25 +08:00
return TTIImpl->getCacheAssociativity(Level);
}
[TTI] Add getPrefetchDistance from PPCLoopDataPrefetch, NFC This patch is part of the work to make PPCLoopDataPrefetch target-independent (http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/92758). As it was discussed in the above thread, getPrefetchDistance is currently using instruction count which may change in the future. llvm-svn: 258995
2016-01-28 06:21:25 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getPrefetchDistance() const {
return TTIImpl->getPrefetchDistance();
}
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getMinPrefetchStride(
unsigned NumMemAccesses, unsigned NumStridedMemAccesses,
unsigned NumPrefetches, bool HasCall) const {
[LoopDataPrefetch + SystemZ] Let target decide on prefetching for each loop. This patch adds - New arguments to getMinPrefetchStride() to let the target decide on a per-loop basis if software prefetching should be done even with a stride within the limit of the hw prefetcher. - New TTI hook enableWritePrefetching() to let a target do write prefetching by default (defaults to false). - In LoopDataPrefetch: - A search through the whole loop to gather information before emitting any prefetches. This way the target can get information via new arguments to getMinPrefetchStride() and emit prefetches more selectively. Collected information includes: Does the loop have a call, how many memory accesses, how many of them are strided, how many prefetches will cover them. This is NFC to before as long as the target does not change its definition of getMinPrefetchStride(). - If a previous access to the same exact address was 'read', and the current one is 'write', make it a 'write' prefetch. - If two accesses that are covered by the same prefetch do not dominate each other, put the prefetch in a block that dominates both of them. - If a ConstantMaxTripCount is less than ItersAhead, then skip the loop. - A SystemZ implementation of getMinPrefetchStride(). Review: Ulrich Weigand, Michael Kruse Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70228
2019-10-31 23:05:58 +08:00
return TTIImpl->getMinPrefetchStride(NumMemAccesses, NumStridedMemAccesses,
NumPrefetches, HasCall);
[LoopDataPrefetch/Aarch64] Allow selective prefetching of large-strided accesses Summary: And use this TTI for Cyclone. As it was explained in the original RFC (http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/92758), the HW prefetcher work up to 2KB strides. I am also adding tests for this and the previous change (D17943): * Cyclone prefetching accesses with a large stride * Cyclone not prefetching accesses with a small stride * Generic Aarch64 subtarget not prefetching either Reviewers: hfinkel Subscribers: aemerson, rengolin, llvm-commits, mzolotukhin Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17945 llvm-svn: 263771
2016-03-18 08:27:38 +08:00
}
[LoopDataPrefetch] Add TTI to limit the number of iterations to prefetch ahead Summary: It can hurt performance to prefetch ahead too much. Be conservative for now and don't prefetch ahead more than 3 iterations on Cyclone. Reviewers: hfinkel Subscribers: llvm-commits, mzolotukhin Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17949 llvm-svn: 263772
2016-03-18 08:27:43 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getMaxPrefetchIterationsAhead() const {
return TTIImpl->getMaxPrefetchIterationsAhead();
}
[LoopDataPrefetch + SystemZ] Let target decide on prefetching for each loop. This patch adds - New arguments to getMinPrefetchStride() to let the target decide on a per-loop basis if software prefetching should be done even with a stride within the limit of the hw prefetcher. - New TTI hook enableWritePrefetching() to let a target do write prefetching by default (defaults to false). - In LoopDataPrefetch: - A search through the whole loop to gather information before emitting any prefetches. This way the target can get information via new arguments to getMinPrefetchStride() and emit prefetches more selectively. Collected information includes: Does the loop have a call, how many memory accesses, how many of them are strided, how many prefetches will cover them. This is NFC to before as long as the target does not change its definition of getMinPrefetchStride(). - If a previous access to the same exact address was 'read', and the current one is 'write', make it a 'write' prefetch. - If two accesses that are covered by the same prefetch do not dominate each other, put the prefetch in a block that dominates both of them. - If a ConstantMaxTripCount is less than ItersAhead, then skip the loop. - A SystemZ implementation of getMinPrefetchStride(). Review: Ulrich Weigand, Michael Kruse Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70228
2019-10-31 23:05:58 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::enableWritePrefetching() const {
return TTIImpl->enableWritePrefetching();
}
[X86] Disable loop unrolling in loop vectorization pass when VF is 1. The patch disabled unrolling in loop vectorization pass when VF==1 on x86 architecture, by setting MaxInterleaveFactor to 1. Unrolling in loop vectorization pass may introduce the cost of overflow check, memory boundary check and extra prologue/epilogue code when regular unroller will unroll the loop another time. Disable it when VF==1 remove the unnecessary cost on x86. The same can be done for other platforms after verifying interleaving/memory bound checking to be not perf critical on those platforms. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9515 llvm-svn: 236613
2015-05-07 01:12:25 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getMaxInterleaveFactor(unsigned VF) const {
return TTIImpl->getMaxInterleaveFactor(VF);
Cost Model: Move the 'max unroll factor' variable to the TTI and add initial Cost Model support on ARM. llvm-svn: 171928
2013-01-09 09:15:42 +08:00
}
[LoopVectorizer] Use TTI.getOperandInfo() Call getOperandInfo() instead of using (near) duplicated code in LoopVectorizationCostModel::getInstructionCost(). This gets the OperandValueKind and OperandValueProperties values for a Value passed as operand to an arithmetic instruction. getOperandInfo() used to be a static method in TargetTransformInfo.cpp, but is now instead a public member. Review: Florian Hahn https://reviews.llvm.org/D52883 llvm-svn: 343852
2018-10-05 22:34:04 +08:00
TargetTransformInfo::OperandValueKind
[NFCI][CostModel] Add const to Value*. Summary: Get back `const` partially lost in one of recent changes. Additionally specify explicit qualifiers in few places. Reviewers: samparker Reviewed By: samparker Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82383
2020-06-23 21:07:44 +08:00
TargetTransformInfo::getOperandInfo(const Value *V,
OperandValueProperties &OpProps) {
[LoopVectorizer] Use TTI.getOperandInfo() Call getOperandInfo() instead of using (near) duplicated code in LoopVectorizationCostModel::getInstructionCost(). This gets the OperandValueKind and OperandValueProperties values for a Value passed as operand to an arithmetic instruction. getOperandInfo() used to be a static method in TargetTransformInfo.cpp, but is now instead a public member. Review: Florian Hahn https://reviews.llvm.org/D52883 llvm-svn: 343852
2018-10-05 22:34:04 +08:00
OperandValueKind OpInfo = OK_AnyValue;
OpProps = OP_None;
[NFCI][CostModel] Add const to Value*. Summary: Get back `const` partially lost in one of recent changes. Additionally specify explicit qualifiers in few places. Reviewers: samparker Reviewed By: samparker Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82383
2020-06-23 21:07:44 +08:00
if (const auto *CI = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(V)) {
[LoopVectorizer] Use TTI.getOperandInfo() Call getOperandInfo() instead of using (near) duplicated code in LoopVectorizationCostModel::getInstructionCost(). This gets the OperandValueKind and OperandValueProperties values for a Value passed as operand to an arithmetic instruction. getOperandInfo() used to be a static method in TargetTransformInfo.cpp, but is now instead a public member. Review: Florian Hahn https://reviews.llvm.org/D52883 llvm-svn: 343852
2018-10-05 22:34:04 +08:00
if (CI->getValue().isPowerOf2())
OpProps = OP_PowerOf2;
return OK_UniformConstantValue;
}
[TTI] getOperandInfo - a broadcast shuffle means the result is OK_UniformValue llvm-svn: 346868
2018-11-14 23:04:08 +08:00
// A broadcast shuffle creates a uniform value.
// TODO: Add support for non-zero index broadcasts.
// TODO: Add support for different source vector width.
[NFCI][CostModel] Add const to Value*. Summary: Get back `const` partially lost in one of recent changes. Additionally specify explicit qualifiers in few places. Reviewers: samparker Reviewed By: samparker Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82383
2020-06-23 21:07:44 +08:00
if (const auto *ShuffleInst = dyn_cast<ShuffleVectorInst>(V))
[TTI] getOperandInfo - a broadcast shuffle means the result is OK_UniformValue llvm-svn: 346868
2018-11-14 23:04:08 +08:00
if (ShuffleInst->isZeroEltSplat())
OpInfo = OK_UniformValue;
[LoopVectorizer] Use TTI.getOperandInfo() Call getOperandInfo() instead of using (near) duplicated code in LoopVectorizationCostModel::getInstructionCost(). This gets the OperandValueKind and OperandValueProperties values for a Value passed as operand to an arithmetic instruction. getOperandInfo() used to be a static method in TargetTransformInfo.cpp, but is now instead a public member. Review: Florian Hahn https://reviews.llvm.org/D52883 llvm-svn: 343852
2018-10-05 22:34:04 +08:00
const Value *Splat = getSplatValue(V);
// Check for a splat of a constant or for a non uniform vector of constants
// and check if the constant(s) are all powers of two.
if (isa<ConstantVector>(V) || isa<ConstantDataVector>(V)) {
OpInfo = OK_NonUniformConstantValue;
if (Splat) {
OpInfo = OK_UniformConstantValue;
if (auto *CI = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(Splat))
if (CI->getValue().isPowerOf2())
OpProps = OP_PowerOf2;
[NFCI][CostModel] Add const to Value*. Summary: Get back `const` partially lost in one of recent changes. Additionally specify explicit qualifiers in few places. Reviewers: samparker Reviewed By: samparker Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82383
2020-06-23 21:07:44 +08:00
} else if (const auto *CDS = dyn_cast<ConstantDataSequential>(V)) {
[LoopVectorizer] Use TTI.getOperandInfo() Call getOperandInfo() instead of using (near) duplicated code in LoopVectorizationCostModel::getInstructionCost(). This gets the OperandValueKind and OperandValueProperties values for a Value passed as operand to an arithmetic instruction. getOperandInfo() used to be a static method in TargetTransformInfo.cpp, but is now instead a public member. Review: Florian Hahn https://reviews.llvm.org/D52883 llvm-svn: 343852
2018-10-05 22:34:04 +08:00
OpProps = OP_PowerOf2;
for (unsigned I = 0, E = CDS->getNumElements(); I != E; ++I) {
if (auto *CI = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(CDS->getElementAsConstant(I)))
if (CI->getValue().isPowerOf2())
continue;
OpProps = OP_None;
break;
}
}
}
// Check for a splat of a uniform value. This is not loop aware, so return
// true only for the obviously uniform cases (argument, globalvalue)
if (Splat && (isa<Argument>(Splat) || isa<GlobalValue>(Splat)))
OpInfo = OK_UniformValue;
return OpInfo;
}
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getArithmeticInstrCost(
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
unsigned Opcode, Type *Ty, TTI::TargetCostKind CostKind,
OperandValueKind Opd1Info,
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
OperandValueKind Opd2Info, OperandValueProperties Opd1PropInfo,
[ARM] Teach the Arm cost model that a Shift can be folded into other instructions 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
2019-12-08 23:33:24 +08:00
OperandValueProperties Opd2PropInfo, ArrayRef<const Value *> Args,
const Instruction *CxtI) const {
int Cost = TTIImpl->getArithmeticInstrCost(
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
Opcode, Ty, CostKind, Opd1Info, Opd2Info, Opd1PropInfo, Opd2PropInfo,
Args, CxtI);
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
[NFC][TTI] Explicit use of VectorType The API for shuffles and reductions uses generic Type parameters, instead of VectorType, and so assertions and casts are used a lot. This patch makes those types explicit, which means that the clients can't be lazy, but results in less ambiguity, and that can only be a good thing. Bugzilla: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45562 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78357
2020-04-17 20:29:31 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getShuffleCost(ShuffleKind Kind, VectorType *Ty,
int Index, VectorType *SubTp) const {
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
int Cost = TTIImpl->getShuffleCost(Kind, Ty, Index, SubTp);
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
[Analysis] TTI: Add CastContextHint for getCastInstrCost Currently, getCastInstrCost has limited information about the cast it's rating, often just the opcode and types. Sometimes there is a context instruction as well, but it isn't trustworthy: for instance, when the vectorizer is rating a plan, it calls getCastInstrCost with the old instructions when, in fact, it's trying to evaluate the cost of the instruction post-vectorization. Thus, the current system can get the cost of certain casts incorrect as the correct cost can vary greatly based on the context in which it's used. For example, if the vectorizer queries getCastInstrCost to evaluate the cost of a sext(load) with tail predication enabled, getCastInstrCost will think it's free most of the time, but it's not always free. On ARM MVE, a VLD2 group cannot be extended like a normal VLDR can. Similar situations can come up with how masked loads can be extended when being split. To fix that, this path adds a new parameter to getCastInstrCost to give it a hint about the context of the cast. It adds a CastContextHint enum which contains the type of the load/store being created by the vectorizer - one for each of the types it can produce. Original patch by Pierre van Houtryve Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79162
2020-07-29 20:32:53 +08:00
TTI::CastContextHint
TargetTransformInfo::getCastContextHint(const Instruction *I) {
if (!I)
return CastContextHint::None;
auto getLoadStoreKind = [](const Value *V, unsigned LdStOp, unsigned MaskedOp,
unsigned GatScatOp) {
const Instruction *I = dyn_cast<Instruction>(V);
if (!I)
return CastContextHint::None;
if (I->getOpcode() == LdStOp)
return CastContextHint::Normal;
if (const IntrinsicInst *II = dyn_cast<IntrinsicInst>(I)) {
if (II->getIntrinsicID() == MaskedOp)
return TTI::CastContextHint::Masked;
if (II->getIntrinsicID() == GatScatOp)
return TTI::CastContextHint::GatherScatter;
}
return TTI::CastContextHint::None;
};
switch (I->getOpcode()) {
case Instruction::ZExt:
case Instruction::SExt:
case Instruction::FPExt:
return getLoadStoreKind(I->getOperand(0), Instruction::Load,
Intrinsic::masked_load, Intrinsic::masked_gather);
case Instruction::Trunc:
case Instruction::FPTrunc:
if (I->hasOneUse())
return getLoadStoreKind(*I->user_begin(), Instruction::Store,
Intrinsic::masked_store,
Intrinsic::masked_scatter);
break;
default:
return CastContextHint::None;
}
return TTI::CastContextHint::None;
}
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getCastInstrCost(unsigned Opcode, Type *Dst, Type *Src,
[Analysis] TTI: Add CastContextHint for getCastInstrCost Currently, getCastInstrCost has limited information about the cast it's rating, often just the opcode and types. Sometimes there is a context instruction as well, but it isn't trustworthy: for instance, when the vectorizer is rating a plan, it calls getCastInstrCost with the old instructions when, in fact, it's trying to evaluate the cost of the instruction post-vectorization. Thus, the current system can get the cost of certain casts incorrect as the correct cost can vary greatly based on the context in which it's used. For example, if the vectorizer queries getCastInstrCost to evaluate the cost of a sext(load) with tail predication enabled, getCastInstrCost will think it's free most of the time, but it's not always free. On ARM MVE, a VLD2 group cannot be extended like a normal VLDR can. Similar situations can come up with how masked loads can be extended when being split. To fix that, this path adds a new parameter to getCastInstrCost to give it a hint about the context of the cast. It adds a CastContextHint enum which contains the type of the load/store being created by the vectorizer - one for each of the types it can produce. Original patch by Pierre van Houtryve Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79162
2020-07-29 20:32:53 +08:00
CastContextHint CCH,
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
TTI::TargetCostKind CostKind,
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
const Instruction *I) const {
assert((I == nullptr || I->getOpcode() == Opcode) &&
"Opcode should reflect passed instruction.");
[Analysis] TTI: Add CastContextHint for getCastInstrCost Currently, getCastInstrCost has limited information about the cast it's rating, often just the opcode and types. Sometimes there is a context instruction as well, but it isn't trustworthy: for instance, when the vectorizer is rating a plan, it calls getCastInstrCost with the old instructions when, in fact, it's trying to evaluate the cost of the instruction post-vectorization. Thus, the current system can get the cost of certain casts incorrect as the correct cost can vary greatly based on the context in which it's used. For example, if the vectorizer queries getCastInstrCost to evaluate the cost of a sext(load) with tail predication enabled, getCastInstrCost will think it's free most of the time, but it's not always free. On ARM MVE, a VLD2 group cannot be extended like a normal VLDR can. Similar situations can come up with how masked loads can be extended when being split. To fix that, this path adds a new parameter to getCastInstrCost to give it a hint about the context of the cast. It adds a CastContextHint enum which contains the type of the load/store being created by the vectorizer - one for each of the types it can produce. Original patch by Pierre van Houtryve Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79162
2020-07-29 20:32:53 +08:00
int Cost = TTIImpl->getCastInstrCost(Opcode, Dst, Src, CCH, CostKind, I);
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
[TTI] Add hook for vector extract with extension This change adds a new hook for estimating the cost of vector extracts followed by zero- and sign-extensions. The motivating example for this change is the SMOV and UMOV instructions on AArch64. These instructions move data from vector to general purpose registers while performing the corresponding extension (sign-extend for SMOV and zero-extend for UMOV) at the same time. For these operations, TargetTransformInfo can assume the extensions are free and only report the cost of the vector extract. The SLP vectorizer has been updated to make use of the new hook. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18523 llvm-svn: 267725
2016-04-27 23:20:21 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getExtractWithExtendCost(unsigned Opcode, Type *Dst,
VectorType *VecTy,
unsigned Index) const {
int Cost = TTIImpl->getExtractWithExtendCost(Opcode, Dst, VecTy, Index);
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
}
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getCFInstrCost(unsigned Opcode,
TTI::TargetCostKind CostKind) const {
int Cost = TTIImpl->getCFInstrCost(Opcode, CostKind);
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getCmpSelInstrCost(unsigned Opcode, Type *ValTy,
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
Type *CondTy,
Reland "[TTI] Add VecPred argument to getCmpSelInstrCost." This reverts the revert commit 408c4408facc3a79ee4ff7e9983cc972f797e176. This version of the patch includes a fix for a crash caused by treating ICmp/FCmp constant expressions as instructions. Original message: On some targets, like AArch64, vector selects can be efficiently lowered if the vector condition is a compare with a supported predicate. This patch adds a new argument to getCmpSelInstrCost, to indicate the predicate of the feeding select condition. Note that it is not sufficient to use the context instruction when querying the cost of a vector select starting from a scalar one, because the condition of the vector select could be composed of compares with different predicates. This change greatly improves modeling the costs of certain compare/select patterns on AArch64. I am also planning on putting up patches to make use of the new argument in SLPVectorizer & LV.
2020-11-02 20:40:34 +08:00
CmpInst::Predicate VecPred,
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
TTI::TargetCostKind CostKind,
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
const Instruction *I) const {
assert((I == nullptr || I->getOpcode() == Opcode) &&
"Opcode should reflect passed instruction.");
Reland "[TTI] Add VecPred argument to getCmpSelInstrCost." This reverts the revert commit 408c4408facc3a79ee4ff7e9983cc972f797e176. This version of the patch includes a fix for a crash caused by treating ICmp/FCmp constant expressions as instructions. Original message: On some targets, like AArch64, vector selects can be efficiently lowered if the vector condition is a compare with a supported predicate. This patch adds a new argument to getCmpSelInstrCost, to indicate the predicate of the feeding select condition. Note that it is not sufficient to use the context instruction when querying the cost of a vector select starting from a scalar one, because the condition of the vector select could be composed of compares with different predicates. This change greatly improves modeling the costs of certain compare/select patterns on AArch64. I am also planning on putting up patches to make use of the new argument in SLPVectorizer & LV.
2020-11-02 20:40:34 +08:00
int Cost =
TTIImpl->getCmpSelInstrCost(Opcode, ValTy, CondTy, VecPred, CostKind, I);
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getVectorInstrCost(unsigned Opcode, Type *Val,
unsigned Index) const {
int Cost = TTIImpl->getVectorInstrCost(Opcode, Val, Index);
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getMemoryOpCost(unsigned Opcode, Type *Src,
[NFC] Replace MaybeAlign with Align in TargetTransformInfo.
2020-05-19 10:16:06 +08:00
Align Alignment, unsigned AddressSpace,
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
TTI::TargetCostKind CostKind,
[SystemZ] TargetTransformInfo cost functions implemented. getArithmeticInstrCost(), getShuffleCost(), getCastInstrCost(), getCmpSelInstrCost(), getVectorInstrCost(), getMemoryOpCost(), getInterleavedMemoryOpCost() implemented. Interleaved access vectorization enabled. BasicTTIImpl::getCastInstrCost() improved to check for legal extending loads, in which case the cost of the z/sext instruction becomes 0. Review: Ulrich Weigand, Renato Golin. https://reviews.llvm.org/D29631 llvm-svn: 300052
2017-04-12 19:49:08 +08:00
const Instruction *I) const {
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
assert((I == nullptr || I->getOpcode() == Opcode) &&
"Opcode should reflect passed instruction.");
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
int Cost = TTIImpl->getMemoryOpCost(Opcode, Src, Alignment, AddressSpace,
CostKind, I);
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
[Alignment][NFC] Migrate TTI::getMaskedMemoryOpCost to Align This is patch is part of a series to introduce an Alignment type. See this thread for context: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-July/133851.html See this patch for the introduction of the type: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64790 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82569
2020-06-26 18:14:16 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getMaskedMemoryOpCost(
unsigned Opcode, Type *Src, Align Alignment, unsigned AddressSpace,
TTI::TargetCostKind CostKind) const {
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
int Cost =
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
TTIImpl->getMaskedMemoryOpCost(Opcode, Src, Alignment, AddressSpace,
CostKind);
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
Implemented cost model for masked load/store operations. llvm-svn: 227035
2015-01-25 16:44:46 +08:00
}
[Alignment][NFC] Migrate TTI::getGatherScatterOpCost to Align This is patch is part of a series to introduce an Alignment type. See this thread for context: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-July/133851.html See this patch for the introduction of the type: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64790 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82577
2020-06-26 19:08:27 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getGatherScatterOpCost(
unsigned Opcode, Type *DataTy, const Value *Ptr, bool VariableMask,
Align Alignment, TTI::TargetCostKind CostKind, const Instruction *I) const {
Implemented cost model for masked gather and scatter operations The cost is calculated for all X86 targets. When gather/scatter instruction is not supported we calculate the cost of scalar sequence. Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15677 llvm-svn: 256519
2015-12-29 04:10:59 +08:00
int Cost = TTIImpl->getGatherScatterOpCost(Opcode, DataTy, Ptr, VariableMask,
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
Alignment, CostKind, I);
Implemented cost model for masked gather and scatter operations The cost is calculated for all X86 targets. When gather/scatter instruction is not supported we calculate the cost of scalar sequence. Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15677 llvm-svn: 256519
2015-12-29 04:10:59 +08:00
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
}
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getInterleavedMemoryOpCost(
[LoopVectorize] Teach Loop Vectorizor about interleaved memory accesses. Interleaved memory accesses are grouped and vectorized into vector load/store and shufflevector. E.g. for (i = 0; i < N; i+=2) { a = A[i]; // load of even element b = A[i+1]; // load of odd element ... // operations on a, b, c, d A[i] = c; // store of even element A[i+1] = d; // store of odd element } The loads of even and odd elements are identified as an interleave load group, which will be transfered into vectorized IRs like: %wide.vec = load <8 x i32>, <8 x i32>* %ptr %vec.even = shufflevector <8 x i32> %wide.vec, <8 x i32> undef, <4 x i32> <i32 0, i32 2, i32 4, i32 6> %vec.odd = shufflevector <8 x i32> %wide.vec, <8 x i32> undef, <4 x i32> <i32 1, i32 3, i32 5, i32 7> The stores of even and odd elements are identified as an interleave store group, which will be transfered into vectorized IRs like: %interleaved.vec = shufflevector <4 x i32> %vec.even, %vec.odd, <8 x i32> <i32 0, i32 4, i32 1, i32 5, i32 2, i32 6, i32 3, i32 7> store <8 x i32> %interleaved.vec, <8 x i32>* %ptr This optimization is currently disabled by defaut. To try it by adding '-enable-interleaved-mem-accesses=true'. llvm-svn: 239291
2015-06-08 14:39:56 +08:00
unsigned Opcode, Type *VecTy, unsigned Factor, ArrayRef<unsigned> Indices,
[Alignment][NFC] Migrate TTI::getInterleavedMemoryOpCost to Align This is patch is part of a series to introduce an Alignment type. See this thread for context: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-July/133851.html See this patch for the introduction of the type: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64790 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82573
2020-06-26 19:00:53 +08:00
Align Alignment, unsigned AddressSpace, TTI::TargetCostKind CostKind,
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
bool UseMaskForCond, bool UseMaskForGaps) const {
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
int Cost = TTIImpl->getInterleavedMemoryOpCost(
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
Opcode, VecTy, Factor, Indices, Alignment, AddressSpace, CostKind,
UseMaskForCond, UseMaskForGaps);
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
[LoopVectorize] Teach Loop Vectorizor about interleaved memory accesses. Interleaved memory accesses are grouped and vectorized into vector load/store and shufflevector. E.g. for (i = 0; i < N; i+=2) { a = A[i]; // load of even element b = A[i+1]; // load of odd element ... // operations on a, b, c, d A[i] = c; // store of even element A[i+1] = d; // store of odd element } The loads of even and odd elements are identified as an interleave load group, which will be transfered into vectorized IRs like: %wide.vec = load <8 x i32>, <8 x i32>* %ptr %vec.even = shufflevector <8 x i32> %wide.vec, <8 x i32> undef, <4 x i32> <i32 0, i32 2, i32 4, i32 6> %vec.odd = shufflevector <8 x i32> %wide.vec, <8 x i32> undef, <4 x i32> <i32 1, i32 3, i32 5, i32 7> The stores of even and odd elements are identified as an interleave store group, which will be transfered into vectorized IRs like: %interleaved.vec = shufflevector <4 x i32> %vec.even, %vec.odd, <8 x i32> <i32 0, i32 4, i32 1, i32 5, i32 2, i32 6, i32 3, i32 7> store <8 x i32> %interleaved.vec, <8 x i32>* %ptr This optimization is currently disabled by defaut. To try it by adding '-enable-interleaved-mem-accesses=true'. llvm-svn: 239291
2015-06-08 14:39:56 +08:00
}
[NFCI][CostModel] Refactor getIntrinsicInstrCost Combine the two API calls into one by introducing a structure to hold the relevant data. This has the added benefit of moving the boiler plate code for arguments and flags, into the constructors. This is intended to be a non-functional change, but the complicated web of logic involved here makes it very hard to guarantee. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79941
2020-05-20 16:18:42 +08:00
int
TargetTransformInfo::getIntrinsicInstrCost(const IntrinsicCostAttributes &ICA,
TTI::TargetCostKind CostKind) const {
int Cost = TTIImpl->getIntrinsicInstrCost(ICA, CostKind);
Implemented cost model for masked gather and scatter operations The cost is calculated for all X86 targets. When gather/scatter instruction is not supported we calculate the cost of scalar sequence. Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15677 llvm-svn: 256519
2015-12-29 04:10:59 +08:00
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
}
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getCallInstrCost(Function *F, Type *RetTy,
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
ArrayRef<Type *> Tys,
TTI::TargetCostKind CostKind) const {
int Cost = TTIImpl->getCallInstrCost(F, RetTy, Tys, CostKind);
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
TTI: Add getCallInstrCost. Review: http://reviews.llvm.org/D8094 llvm-svn: 232524
2015-03-18 03:26:23 +08:00
}
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getNumberOfParts(Type *Tp) const {
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
return TTIImpl->getNumberOfParts(Tp);
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getAddressComputationCost(Type *Tp,
Currently isLikelyComplexAddressComputation tries to figure out if the given stride seems to be 'complex' and need some extra cost for address computation handling. This code seems to be target dependent which may not be the same for all targets. Passed the decision whether the given stride is complex or not to the target by sending stride information via SCEV to getAddressComputationCost instead of 'IsComplex'. Specifically at X86 targets we dont see any significant address computation cost in case of the strided access in general. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27518 llvm-svn: 291106
2017-01-05 22:03:41 +08:00
ScalarEvolution *SE,
const SCEV *Ptr) const {
int Cost = TTIImpl->getAddressComputationCost(Tp, SE, Ptr);
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
ARM cost model: Address computation in vector mem ops not free Adds a function to target transform info to query for the cost of address computation. The cost model analysis pass now also queries this interface. The code in LoopVectorize adds the cost of address computation as part of the memory instruction cost calculation. Only there, we know whether the instruction will be scalarized or not. Increase the penality for inserting in to D registers on swift. This becomes necessary because we now always assume that address computation has a cost and three is a closer value to the architecture. radar://13097204 llvm-svn: 174713
2013-02-08 22:50:48 +08:00
}
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
[ARM] Implement TTI::getMemcpyCost This implements TargetTransformInfo method getMemcpyCost, which estimates the number of instructions to which a memcpy instruction expands to. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59787 llvm-svn: 359547
2019-04-30 18:28:50 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getMemcpyCost(const Instruction *I) const {
int Cost = TTIImpl->getMemcpyCost(I);
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
}
[NFC][TTI] Explicit use of VectorType The API for shuffles and reductions uses generic Type parameters, instead of VectorType, and so assertions and casts are used a lot. This patch makes those types explicit, which means that the clients can't be lazy, but results in less ambiguity, and that can only be a good thing. Bugzilla: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45562 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78357
2020-04-17 20:29:31 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getArithmeticReductionCost(unsigned Opcode,
VectorType *Ty,
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
bool IsPairwiseForm,
TTI::TargetCostKind CostKind) const {
int Cost = TTIImpl->getArithmeticReductionCost(Opcode, Ty, IsPairwiseForm,
CostKind);
[TTI] Make the cost APIs in TargetTransformInfo consistently use 'int' rather than 'unsigned' for their costs. For something like costs in particular there is a natural "negative" value, that of savings or saved cost. As a consequence, there is a lot of code that subtracts or creates negative values based on cost, all of which is prone to awkwardness or bugs when dealing with an unsigned type. Similarly, we *never* want these values to wrap, as that would cause Very Bad code generation (likely percieved as an infinite loop as we try to emit over 2^32 instructions or some such insanity). All around 'int' seems a much better fit for these basic metrics. I've added asserts to ensure that at least the TTI interface never returns negative numbers here. If we ever have a use case for negative numbers, we can remove this, but this way a bug where someone used '-1' to produce a 'very large' cost will be caught by the assert. This passes all tests, and is also UBSan clean. No functional change intended. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11741 llvm-svn: 244080
2015-08-06 02:08:10 +08:00
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
}
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getMinMaxReductionCost(
VectorType *Ty, VectorType *CondTy, bool IsPairwiseForm, bool IsUnsigned,
TTI::TargetCostKind CostKind) const {
[SLP] Support for horizontal min/max reduction. SLP vectorizer supports horizontal reductions for Add/FAdd binary operations. Patch adds support for horizontal min/max reductions. Function getReductionCost() is split to getArithmeticReductionCost() for binary operation reductions and getMinMaxReductionCost() for min/max reductions. Patch fixes PR26956. Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27846 llvm-svn: 312791
2017-09-08 21:49:36 +08:00
int Cost =
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
TTIImpl->getMinMaxReductionCost(Ty, CondTy, IsPairwiseForm, IsUnsigned,
CostKind);
[SLP] Support for horizontal min/max reduction. SLP vectorizer supports horizontal reductions for Add/FAdd binary operations. Patch adds support for horizontal min/max reductions. Function getReductionCost() is split to getArithmeticReductionCost() for binary operation reductions and getMinMaxReductionCost() for min/max reductions. Patch fixes PR26956. Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27846 llvm-svn: 312791
2017-09-08 21:49:36 +08:00
assert(Cost >= 0 && "TTI should not produce negative costs!");
return Cost;
}
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
unsigned
TargetTransformInfo::getCostOfKeepingLiveOverCall(ArrayRef<Type *> Tys) const {
return TTIImpl->getCostOfKeepingLiveOverCall(Tys);
Costmodel: Add support for horizontal vector reductions Upcoming SLP vectorization improvements will want to be able to estimate costs of horizontal reductions. Add infrastructure to support this. We model reductions as a series of (shufflevector,add) tuples ultimately followed by an extractelement. For example, for an add-reduction of <4 x float> we could generate the following sequence: (v0, v1, v2, v3) \ \ / / \ \ / + + (v0+v2, v1+v3, undef, undef) \ / ((v0+v2) + (v1+v3), undef, undef) %rdx.shuf = shufflevector <4 x float> %rdx, <4 x float> undef, <4 x i32> <i32 2, i32 3, i32 undef, i32 undef> %bin.rdx = fadd <4 x float> %rdx, %rdx.shuf %rdx.shuf7 = shufflevector <4 x float> %bin.rdx, <4 x float> undef, <4 x i32> <i32 1, i32 undef, i32 undef, i32 undef> %bin.rdx8 = fadd <4 x float> %bin.rdx, %rdx.shuf7 %r = extractelement <4 x float> %bin.rdx8, i32 0 This commit adds a cost model interface "getReductionCost(Opcode, Ty, Pairwise)" that will allow clients to ask for the cost of such a reduction (as backends might generate more efficient code than the cost of the individual instructions summed up). This interface is excercised by the CostModel analysis pass which looks for reduction patterns like the one above - starting at extractelements - and if it sees a matching sequence will call the cost model interface. We will also support a second form of pairwise reduction that is well supported on common architectures (haddps, vpadd, faddp). (v0, v1, v2, v3) \ / \ / (v0+v1, v2+v3, undef, undef) \ / ((v0+v1)+(v2+v3), undef, undef, undef) %rdx.shuf.0.0 = shufflevector <4 x float> %rdx, <4 x float> undef, <4 x i32> <i32 0, i32 2 , i32 undef, i32 undef> %rdx.shuf.0.1 = shufflevector <4 x float> %rdx, <4 x float> undef, <4 x i32> <i32 1, i32 3, i32 undef, i32 undef> %bin.rdx.0 = fadd <4 x float> %rdx.shuf.0.0, %rdx.shuf.0.1 %rdx.shuf.1.0 = shufflevector <4 x float> %bin.rdx.0, <4 x float> undef, <4 x i32> <i32 0, i32 undef, i32 undef, i32 undef> %rdx.shuf.1.1 = shufflevector <4 x float> %bin.rdx.0, <4 x float> undef, <4 x i32> <i32 1, i32 undef, i32 undef, i32 undef> %bin.rdx.1 = fadd <4 x float> %rdx.shuf.1.0, %rdx.shuf.1.1 %r = extractelement <4 x float> %bin.rdx.1, i32 0 llvm-svn: 190876
2013-09-18 02:06:50 +08:00
}
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::getTgtMemIntrinsic(IntrinsicInst *Inst,
MemIntrinsicInfo &Info) const {
return TTIImpl->getTgtMemIntrinsic(Inst, Info);
Teach the SLP Vectorizer that keeping some values live over a callsite can have a cost. Some types, such as 128-bit vector types on AArch64, don't have any callee-saved registers. So if a value needs to stay live over a callsite, it must be spilled and refilled. This cost is now taken into account. llvm-svn: 214859
2014-08-05 20:30:34 +08:00
}
[Atomics][LoopIdiom] Recognize unordered atomic memcpy Summary: Expanding the loop idiom test for memcpy to also recognize unordered atomic memcpy. The only difference for recognizing an unordered atomic memcpy and instead of a normal memcpy is that the loads and/or stores involved are unordered atomic operations. Background: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-May/112779.html Patch by Daniel Neilson! Reviewers: reames, anna, skatkov Reviewed By: reames, anna Subscribers: llvm-commits, mzolotukhin Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33243 llvm-svn: 304806
2017-06-07 00:45:25 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getAtomicMemIntrinsicMaxElementSize() const {
return TTIImpl->getAtomicMemIntrinsicMaxElementSize();
}
Commoning of target specific load/store intrinsics in Early CSE. Phabricator revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7121 Patch by Sanjin Sijaric <ssijaric@codeaurora.org>! llvm-svn: 227149
2015-01-27 06:51:15 +08:00
Value *TargetTransformInfo::getOrCreateResultFromMemIntrinsic(
IntrinsicInst *Inst, Type *ExpectedType) const {
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
return TTIImpl->getOrCreateResultFromMemIntrinsic(Inst, ExpectedType);
Commoning of target specific load/store intrinsics in Early CSE. Phabricator revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7121 Patch by Sanjin Sijaric <ssijaric@codeaurora.org>! llvm-svn: 227149
2015-01-27 06:51:15 +08:00
}
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
Type *TargetTransformInfo::getMemcpyLoopLoweringType(
LLVMContext &Context, Value *Length, unsigned SrcAddrSpace,
unsigned DestAddrSpace, unsigned SrcAlign, unsigned DestAlign) const {
TTI: Add addrspace parameters to memcpy lowering functions
2020-02-15 02:22:53 +08:00
return TTIImpl->getMemcpyLoopLoweringType(Context, Length, SrcAddrSpace,
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
DestAddrSpace, SrcAlign, DestAlign);
Extend memcpy expansion in Transform/Utils to handle wider operand types. Adds loop expansions for known-size and unknown-sized memcpy calls, allowing the target to provide the operand types through TTI callbacks. The default values for the TTI callbacks use int8 operand types and matches the existing behaviour if they aren't overridden by the target. Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32536 llvm-svn: 307346
2017-07-07 10:00:06 +08:00
}
void TargetTransformInfo::getMemcpyLoopResidualLoweringType(
SmallVectorImpl<Type *> &OpsOut, LLVMContext &Context,
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
unsigned RemainingBytes, unsigned SrcAddrSpace, unsigned DestAddrSpace,
TTI: Add addrspace parameters to memcpy lowering functions
2020-02-15 02:22:53 +08:00
unsigned SrcAlign, unsigned DestAlign) const {
Extend memcpy expansion in Transform/Utils to handle wider operand types. Adds loop expansions for known-size and unknown-sized memcpy calls, allowing the target to provide the operand types through TTI callbacks. The default values for the TTI callbacks use int8 operand types and matches the existing behaviour if they aren't overridden by the target. Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32536 llvm-svn: 307346
2017-07-07 10:00:06 +08:00
TTIImpl->getMemcpyLoopResidualLoweringType(OpsOut, Context, RemainingBytes,
TTI: Add addrspace parameters to memcpy lowering functions
2020-02-15 02:22:53 +08:00
SrcAddrSpace, DestAddrSpace,
Extend memcpy expansion in Transform/Utils to handle wider operand types. Adds loop expansions for known-size and unknown-sized memcpy calls, allowing the target to provide the operand types through TTI callbacks. The default values for the TTI callbacks use int8 operand types and matches the existing behaviour if they aren't overridden by the target. Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32536 llvm-svn: 307346
2017-07-07 10:00:06 +08:00
SrcAlign, DestAlign);
}
Rename hasCompatibleFunctionAttributes->areInlineCompatible based on suggestions. Currently the function is only used for inline purposes and this is more descriptive for the use. llvm-svn: 243578
2015-07-30 06:09:48 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::areInlineCompatible(const Function *Caller,
const Function *Callee) const {
return TTIImpl->areInlineCompatible(Caller, Callee);
[LSR] Allow giving priority to post-incrementing addressing modes Implement TTI interface for targets to indicate that the LSR should give priority to post-incrementing addressing modes. Combination of patches by Sebastian Pop and Brendon Cahoon. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44758 llvm-svn: 328490
2018-03-26 21:10:09 +08:00
}
Only promote args when function attributes are compatible Summary: Check to make sure that the caller and the callee have compatible function arguments before promoting arguments. This uses the same TargetTransformInfo queries that are used to determine if attributes are compatible for inlining. The goal here is to avoid breaking ABI when a called function's ABI depends on a target feature that is not enabled in the caller. This is a very conservative fix for PR37358. Ideally we would have a more sophisticated check for ABI compatiblity rather than checking if the attributes are compatible for inlining. Reviewers: echristo, chandlerc, eli.friedman, craig.topper Reviewed By: echristo, chandlerc Subscribers: nikic, xbolva00, rkruppe, alexcrichton, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53554 llvm-svn: 351296
2019-01-16 13:15:31 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::areFunctionArgsABICompatible(
const Function *Caller, const Function *Callee,
SmallPtrSetImpl<Argument *> &Args) const {
return TTIImpl->areFunctionArgsABICompatible(Caller, Callee, Args);
}
[LSR] Allow giving priority to post-incrementing addressing modes Implement TTI interface for targets to indicate that the LSR should give priority to post-incrementing addressing modes. Combination of patches by Sebastian Pop and Brendon Cahoon. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44758 llvm-svn: 328490
2018-03-26 21:10:09 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::isIndexedLoadLegal(MemIndexedMode Mode,
Type *Ty) const {
return TTIImpl->isIndexedLoadLegal(Mode, Ty);
}
bool TargetTransformInfo::isIndexedStoreLegal(MemIndexedMode Mode,
Type *Ty) const {
return TTIImpl->isIndexedStoreLegal(Mode, Ty);
Add a routine to TargetTransformInfo that will allow targets to look at the attributes on a function to determine whether or not to allow inlining. llvm-svn: 241220
2015-07-02 09:11:47 +08:00
}
Add new target hooks for LoadStoreVectorizer Summary: Added 6 new target hooks for the vectorizer in order to filter types, handle size constraints and decide how to split chains. Reviewers: tstellarAMD, arsenm Subscribers: arsenm, mzolotukhin, wdng, llvm-commits, nhaehnle Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24727 llvm-svn: 283099
2016-10-03 18:31:34 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getLoadStoreVecRegBitWidth(unsigned AS) const {
return TTIImpl->getLoadStoreVecRegBitWidth(AS);
}
bool TargetTransformInfo::isLegalToVectorizeLoad(LoadInst *LI) const {
return TTIImpl->isLegalToVectorizeLoad(LI);
}
bool TargetTransformInfo::isLegalToVectorizeStore(StoreInst *SI) const {
return TTIImpl->isLegalToVectorizeStore(SI);
}
bool TargetTransformInfo::isLegalToVectorizeLoadChain(
[Alignment][NFC] Migrate TTI::isLegalToVectorize{Load,Store}Chain to Align This is patch is part of a series to introduce an Alignment type. See this thread for context: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-July/133851.html See this patch for the introduction of the type: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64790 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82653
2020-06-26 22:14:27 +08:00
unsigned ChainSizeInBytes, Align Alignment, unsigned AddrSpace) const {
Add new target hooks for LoadStoreVectorizer Summary: Added 6 new target hooks for the vectorizer in order to filter types, handle size constraints and decide how to split chains. Reviewers: tstellarAMD, arsenm Subscribers: arsenm, mzolotukhin, wdng, llvm-commits, nhaehnle Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24727 llvm-svn: 283099
2016-10-03 18:31:34 +08:00
return TTIImpl->isLegalToVectorizeLoadChain(ChainSizeInBytes, Alignment,
AddrSpace);
}
bool TargetTransformInfo::isLegalToVectorizeStoreChain(
[Alignment][NFC] Migrate TTI::isLegalToVectorize{Load,Store}Chain to Align This is patch is part of a series to introduce an Alignment type. See this thread for context: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-July/133851.html See this patch for the introduction of the type: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64790 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82653
2020-06-26 22:14:27 +08:00
unsigned ChainSizeInBytes, Align Alignment, unsigned AddrSpace) const {
Add new target hooks for LoadStoreVectorizer Summary: Added 6 new target hooks for the vectorizer in order to filter types, handle size constraints and decide how to split chains. Reviewers: tstellarAMD, arsenm Subscribers: arsenm, mzolotukhin, wdng, llvm-commits, nhaehnle Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24727 llvm-svn: 283099
2016-10-03 18:31:34 +08:00
return TTIImpl->isLegalToVectorizeStoreChain(ChainSizeInBytes, Alignment,
AddrSpace);
}
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getLoadVectorFactor(unsigned VF,
unsigned LoadSize,
unsigned ChainSizeInBytes,
VectorType *VecTy) const {
return TTIImpl->getLoadVectorFactor(VF, LoadSize, ChainSizeInBytes, VecTy);
}
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getStoreVectorFactor(unsigned VF,
unsigned StoreSize,
unsigned ChainSizeInBytes,
VectorType *VecTy) const {
return TTIImpl->getStoreVectorFactor(VF, StoreSize, ChainSizeInBytes, VecTy);
}
[nfc] clang-format TargetTransformInfo.cpp
2020-04-15 20:43:26 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::useReductionIntrinsic(unsigned Opcode, Type *Ty,
ReductionFlags Flags) const {
Introduce experimental generic intrinsics for horizontal vector reductions. - This change allows targets to opt-in to using them instead of the log2 shufflevector algorithm. - The SLP and Loop vectorizers have the common code to do shuffle reductions factored out into LoopUtils, and now have a unified interface for generating reductions regardless of the preference of the target. LoopUtils now uses TTI to determine what kind of reductions the target wants to handle. - For CodeGen, basic legalization support is added. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30086 llvm-svn: 302514
2017-05-09 18:43:25 +08:00
return TTIImpl->useReductionIntrinsic(Opcode, Ty, Flags);
}
[LV][ARM] Add preferInloopReduction target hook. This allows the backend to tell the vectorizer to produce inloop reductions through a TTI hook. For the moment on ARM under MVE this means allowing integer add reductions of the correct size. In the future this can include integer min/max too, under -Os. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75512
2020-09-13 00:47:04 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::preferInLoopReduction(unsigned Opcode, Type *Ty,
ReductionFlags Flags) const {
return TTIImpl->preferInLoopReduction(Opcode, Ty, Flags);
}
[ARM][LV] Add a preferPredicatedReductionSelect target hook As part of D84741, this adds a target hook for the preferPredicatedReductionSelect option and makes use of it under MVE, allowing us to tail predicate most reduction loops. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85980
2020-08-21 15:48:12 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::preferPredicatedReductionSelect(
unsigned Opcode, Type *Ty, ReductionFlags Flags) const {
return TTIImpl->preferPredicatedReductionSelect(Opcode, Ty, Flags);
}
Add a late IR expansion pass for the experimental reduction intrinsics. This pass uses a new target hook to decide whether or not to expand a particular intrinsic to the shuffevector sequence. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32245 llvm-svn: 302631
2017-05-10 17:42:49 +08:00
bool TargetTransformInfo::shouldExpandReduction(const IntrinsicInst *II) const {
return TTIImpl->shouldExpandReduction(II);
}
Introduce experimental generic intrinsics for horizontal vector reductions. - This change allows targets to opt-in to using them instead of the log2 shufflevector algorithm. - The SLP and Loop vectorizers have the common code to do shuffle reductions factored out into LoopUtils, and now have a unified interface for generating reductions regardless of the preference of the target. LoopUtils now uses TTI to determine what kind of reductions the target wants to handle. - For CodeGen, basic legalization support is added. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30086 llvm-svn: 302514
2017-05-09 18:43:25 +08:00
[GlobalISel][Localizer] Rewrite localizer to run in 2 phases, inter & intra block. Inter-block localization is the same as what currently happens, except now it only runs on the entry block because that's where the problematic constants with long live ranges come from. The second phase is a new intra-block localization phase which attempts to re-sink the already localized instructions further right before one of the multiple uses. One additional change is to also localize G_GLOBAL_VALUE as they're constants too. However, on some targets like arm64 it takes multiple instructions to materialize the value, so some additional heuristics with a TTI hook have been introduced attempt to prevent code size regressions when localizing these. Overall, these changes improve CTMark code size on arm64 by 1.2%. Full code size results: Program baseline new diff ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ test-suite...-typeset/consumer-typeset.test 1249984 1217216 -2.6% test-suite...:: CTMark/ClamAV/clamscan.test 1264928 1232152 -2.6% test-suite :: CTMark/SPASS/SPASS.test 1394092 1361316 -2.4% test-suite...Mark/mafft/pairlocalalign.test 731320 714928 -2.2% test-suite :: CTMark/lencod/lencod.test 1340592 1324200 -1.2% test-suite :: CTMark/kimwitu++/kc.test 3853512 3820420 -0.9% test-suite :: CTMark/Bullet/bullet.test 3406036 3389652 -0.5% test-suite...ark/tramp3d-v4/tramp3d-v4.test 8017000 8016992 -0.0% test-suite...TMark/7zip/7zip-benchmark.test 2856588 2856588 0.0% test-suite...:: CTMark/sqlite3/sqlite3.test 765704 765704 0.0% Geomean difference -1.2% Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63303 llvm-svn: 363632
2019-06-18 07:20:29 +08:00
unsigned TargetTransformInfo::getGISelRematGlobalCost() const {
return TTIImpl->getGISelRematGlobalCost();
}
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getInstructionLatency(const Instruction *I) const {
return TTIImpl->getInstructionLatency(I);
}
static bool matchPairwiseShuffleMask(ShuffleVectorInst *SI, bool IsLeft,
unsigned Level) {
// We don't need a shuffle if we just want to have element 0 in position 0 of
// the vector.
if (!SI && Level == 0 && IsLeft)
return true;
else if (!SI)
return false;
[SVE] Remove calls to VectorType::getNumElements from Analysis Reviewers: efriedma, fpetrogalli, c-rhodes, asbirlea, RKSimon Reviewed By: RKSimon Subscribers: tschuett, hiraditya, rkruppe, psnobl, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81504
2020-07-23 05:36:48 +08:00
SmallVector<int, 32> Mask(
cast<FixedVectorType>(SI->getType())->getNumElements(), -1);
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
// Build a mask of 0, 2, ... (left) or 1, 3, ... (right) depending on whether
// we look at the left or right side.
for (unsigned i = 0, e = (1 << Level), val = !IsLeft; i != e; ++i, val += 2)
Mask[i] = val;
Remove "mask" operand from shufflevector. Instead, represent the mask as out-of-line data in the instruction. This should be more efficient in the places that currently use getShuffleVector(), and paves the way for further changes to add new shuffles for scalable vectors. This doesn't change the syntax in textual IR. And I don't currently plan to change the bitcode encoding in this patch, although we'll probably need to do something once we extend shufflevector for scalable types. I expect that once this is finished, we can then replace the raw "mask" with something more appropriate for scalable vectors. Not sure exactly what this looks like at the moment, but there are a few different ways we could handle it. Maybe we could try to describe specific shuffles. Or maybe we could define it in terms of a function to convert a fixed-length array into an appropriate scalable vector, using a "step", or something like that. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D72467
2020-04-01 04:08:59 +08:00
ArrayRef<int> ActualMask = SI->getShuffleMask();
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
return Mask == ActualMask;
}
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
static Optional<TTI::ReductionData> getReductionData(Instruction *I) {
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
Value *L, *R;
if (m_BinOp(m_Value(L), m_Value(R)).match(I))
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::ReductionData(TTI::RK_Arithmetic, I->getOpcode(), L, R);
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
if (auto *SI = dyn_cast<SelectInst>(I)) {
if (m_SMin(m_Value(L), m_Value(R)).match(SI) ||
m_SMax(m_Value(L), m_Value(R)).match(SI) ||
m_OrdFMin(m_Value(L), m_Value(R)).match(SI) ||
m_OrdFMax(m_Value(L), m_Value(R)).match(SI) ||
m_UnordFMin(m_Value(L), m_Value(R)).match(SI) ||
m_UnordFMax(m_Value(L), m_Value(R)).match(SI)) {
auto *CI = cast<CmpInst>(SI->getCondition());
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::ReductionData(TTI::RK_MinMax, CI->getOpcode(), L, R);
Remove trailing space sed -Ei 's/[[:space:]]+$//' include/**/*.{def,h,td} lib/**/*.{cpp,h} llvm-svn: 338293
2018-07-31 03:41:25 +08:00
}
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
if (m_UMin(m_Value(L), m_Value(R)).match(SI) ||
m_UMax(m_Value(L), m_Value(R)).match(SI)) {
auto *CI = cast<CmpInst>(SI->getCondition());
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::ReductionData(TTI::RK_UnsignedMinMax, CI->getOpcode(), L, R);
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
}
}
return llvm::None;
}
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
static TTI::ReductionKind matchPairwiseReductionAtLevel(Instruction *I,
unsigned Level,
unsigned NumLevels) {
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
// Match one level of pairwise operations.
// %rdx.shuf.0.0 = shufflevector <4 x float> %rdx, <4 x float> undef,
// <4 x i32> <i32 0, i32 2 , i32 undef, i32 undef>
// %rdx.shuf.0.1 = shufflevector <4 x float> %rdx, <4 x float> undef,
// <4 x i32> <i32 1, i32 3, i32 undef, i32 undef>
// %bin.rdx.0 = fadd <4 x float> %rdx.shuf.0.0, %rdx.shuf.0.1
if (!I)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
assert(I->getType()->isVectorTy() && "Expecting a vector type");
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
Optional<TTI::ReductionData> RD = getReductionData(I);
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
if (!RD)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
ShuffleVectorInst *LS = dyn_cast<ShuffleVectorInst>(RD->LHS);
if (!LS && Level)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
ShuffleVectorInst *RS = dyn_cast<ShuffleVectorInst>(RD->RHS);
if (!RS && Level)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
// On level 0 we can omit one shufflevector instruction.
if (!Level && !RS && !LS)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
// Shuffle inputs must match.
Value *NextLevelOpL = LS ? LS->getOperand(0) : nullptr;
Value *NextLevelOpR = RS ? RS->getOperand(0) : nullptr;
Value *NextLevelOp = nullptr;
if (NextLevelOpR && NextLevelOpL) {
// If we have two shuffles their operands must match.
if (NextLevelOpL != NextLevelOpR)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
NextLevelOp = NextLevelOpL;
} else if (Level == 0 && (NextLevelOpR || NextLevelOpL)) {
// On the first level we can omit the shufflevector <0, undef,...>. So the
// input to the other shufflevector <1, undef> must match with one of the
// inputs to the current binary operation.
// Example:
// %NextLevelOpL = shufflevector %R, <1, undef ...>
// %BinOp = fadd %NextLevelOpL, %R
if (NextLevelOpL && NextLevelOpL != RD->RHS)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
else if (NextLevelOpR && NextLevelOpR != RD->LHS)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
NextLevelOp = NextLevelOpL ? RD->RHS : RD->LHS;
} else
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
// Check that the next levels binary operation exists and matches with the
// current one.
if (Level + 1 != NumLevels) {
[CostModel] Fix cast crash Don't presume instruction operands while matching reductions. Bugzilla: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46430 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82453
2020-07-02 19:13:23 +08:00
if (!isa<Instruction>(NextLevelOp))
return TTI::RK_None;
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
Optional<TTI::ReductionData> NextLevelRD =
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
getReductionData(cast<Instruction>(NextLevelOp));
if (!NextLevelRD || !RD->hasSameData(*NextLevelRD))
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
}
// Shuffle mask for pairwise operation must match.
if (matchPairwiseShuffleMask(LS, /*IsLeft=*/true, Level)) {
if (!matchPairwiseShuffleMask(RS, /*IsLeft=*/false, Level))
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
} else if (matchPairwiseShuffleMask(RS, /*IsLeft=*/true, Level)) {
if (!matchPairwiseShuffleMask(LS, /*IsLeft=*/false, Level))
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
} else {
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
}
if (++Level == NumLevels)
return RD->Kind;
// Match next level.
[CostModel] Fix cast crash Don't presume instruction operands while matching reductions. Bugzilla: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46430 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82453
2020-07-02 19:13:23 +08:00
return matchPairwiseReductionAtLevel(dyn_cast<Instruction>(NextLevelOp), Level,
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
NumLevels);
}
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
TTI::ReductionKind TTI::matchPairwiseReduction(
const ExtractElementInst *ReduxRoot, unsigned &Opcode, VectorType *&Ty) {
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
if (!EnableReduxCost)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
// Need to extract the first element.
ConstantInt *CI = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(ReduxRoot->getOperand(1));
unsigned Idx = ~0u;
if (CI)
Idx = CI->getZExtValue();
if (Idx != 0)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
auto *RdxStart = dyn_cast<Instruction>(ReduxRoot->getOperand(0));
if (!RdxStart)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
Optional<TTI::ReductionData> RD = getReductionData(RdxStart);
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
if (!RD)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
[SVE] Remove calls to VectorType::getNumElements from Analysis Reviewers: efriedma, fpetrogalli, c-rhodes, asbirlea, RKSimon Reviewed By: RKSimon Subscribers: tschuett, hiraditya, rkruppe, psnobl, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81504
2020-07-23 05:36:48 +08:00
auto *VecTy = cast<FixedVectorType>(RdxStart->getType());
Clean up usages of asserting vector getters in Type Summary: Remove usages of asserting vector getters in Type in preparation for the VectorType refactor. The existence of these functions complicates the refactor while adding little value. Reviewers: sunfish, sdesmalen, efriedma Reviewed By: efriedma Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77273
2020-04-10 03:19:23 +08:00
unsigned NumVecElems = VecTy->getNumElements();
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
if (!isPowerOf2_32(NumVecElems))
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
// We look for a sequence of shuffle,shuffle,add triples like the following
// that builds a pairwise reduction tree.
Remove trailing space sed -Ei 's/[[:space:]]+$//' include/**/*.{def,h,td} lib/**/*.{cpp,h} llvm-svn: 338293
2018-07-31 03:41:25 +08:00
//
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
// (X0, X1, X2, X3)
// (X0 + X1, X2 + X3, undef, undef)
// ((X0 + X1) + (X2 + X3), undef, undef, undef)
Remove trailing space sed -Ei 's/[[:space:]]+$//' include/**/*.{def,h,td} lib/**/*.{cpp,h} llvm-svn: 338293
2018-07-31 03:41:25 +08:00
//
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
// %rdx.shuf.0.0 = shufflevector <4 x float> %rdx, <4 x float> undef,
// <4 x i32> <i32 0, i32 2 , i32 undef, i32 undef>
// %rdx.shuf.0.1 = shufflevector <4 x float> %rdx, <4 x float> undef,
// <4 x i32> <i32 1, i32 3, i32 undef, i32 undef>
// %bin.rdx.0 = fadd <4 x float> %rdx.shuf.0.0, %rdx.shuf.0.1
// %rdx.shuf.1.0 = shufflevector <4 x float> %bin.rdx.0, <4 x float> undef,
// <4 x i32> <i32 0, i32 undef, i32 undef, i32 undef>
// %rdx.shuf.1.1 = shufflevector <4 x float> %bin.rdx.0, <4 x float> undef,
// <4 x i32> <i32 1, i32 undef, i32 undef, i32 undef>
// %bin.rdx8 = fadd <4 x float> %rdx.shuf.1.0, %rdx.shuf.1.1
// %r = extractelement <4 x float> %bin.rdx8, i32 0
if (matchPairwiseReductionAtLevel(RdxStart, 0, Log2_32(NumVecElems)) ==
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
TTI::RK_None)
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
Opcode = RD->Opcode;
Ty = VecTy;
return RD->Kind;
}
static std::pair<Value *, ShuffleVectorInst *>
getShuffleAndOtherOprd(Value *L, Value *R) {
ShuffleVectorInst *S = nullptr;
if ((S = dyn_cast<ShuffleVectorInst>(L)))
return std::make_pair(R, S);
S = dyn_cast<ShuffleVectorInst>(R);
return std::make_pair(L, S);
}
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
TTI::ReductionKind TTI::matchVectorSplittingReduction(
const ExtractElementInst *ReduxRoot, unsigned &Opcode, VectorType *&Ty) {
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
if (!EnableReduxCost)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
// Need to extract the first element.
ConstantInt *CI = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(ReduxRoot->getOperand(1));
unsigned Idx = ~0u;
if (CI)
Idx = CI->getZExtValue();
if (Idx != 0)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
auto *RdxStart = dyn_cast<Instruction>(ReduxRoot->getOperand(0));
if (!RdxStart)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
Optional<TTI::ReductionData> RD = getReductionData(RdxStart);
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
if (!RD)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
[SVE] Remove calls to VectorType::getNumElements from Analysis Reviewers: efriedma, fpetrogalli, c-rhodes, asbirlea, RKSimon Reviewed By: RKSimon Subscribers: tschuett, hiraditya, rkruppe, psnobl, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81504
2020-07-23 05:36:48 +08:00
auto *VecTy = cast<FixedVectorType>(ReduxRoot->getOperand(0)->getType());
Clean up usages of asserting vector getters in Type Summary: Remove usages of asserting vector getters in Type in preparation for the VectorType refactor. The existence of these functions complicates the refactor while adding little value. Reviewers: sunfish, sdesmalen, efriedma Reviewed By: efriedma Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77273
2020-04-10 03:19:23 +08:00
unsigned NumVecElems = VecTy->getNumElements();
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
if (!isPowerOf2_32(NumVecElems))
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
// We look for a sequence of shuffles and adds like the following matching one
// fadd, shuffle vector pair at a time.
Remove trailing space sed -Ei 's/[[:space:]]+$//' include/**/*.{def,h,td} lib/**/*.{cpp,h} llvm-svn: 338293
2018-07-31 03:41:25 +08:00
//
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
// %rdx.shuf = shufflevector <4 x float> %rdx, <4 x float> undef,
// <4 x i32> <i32 2, i32 3, i32 undef, i32 undef>
// %bin.rdx = fadd <4 x float> %rdx, %rdx.shuf
// %rdx.shuf7 = shufflevector <4 x float> %bin.rdx, <4 x float> undef,
// <4 x i32> <i32 1, i32 undef, i32 undef, i32 undef>
// %bin.rdx8 = fadd <4 x float> %bin.rdx, %rdx.shuf7
// %r = extractelement <4 x float> %bin.rdx8, i32 0
unsigned MaskStart = 1;
Instruction *RdxOp = RdxStart;
Remove trailing space sed -Ei 's/[[:space:]]+$//' include/**/*.{def,h,td} lib/**/*.{cpp,h} llvm-svn: 338293
2018-07-31 03:41:25 +08:00
SmallVector<int, 32> ShuffleMask(NumVecElems, 0);
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
unsigned NumVecElemsRemain = NumVecElems;
while (NumVecElemsRemain - 1) {
// Check for the right reduction operation.
if (!RdxOp)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
Optional<TTI::ReductionData> RDLevel = getReductionData(RdxOp);
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
if (!RDLevel || !RDLevel->hasSameData(*RD))
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
Value *NextRdxOp;
ShuffleVectorInst *Shuffle;
std::tie(NextRdxOp, Shuffle) =
getShuffleAndOtherOprd(RDLevel->LHS, RDLevel->RHS);
// Check the current reduction operation and the shuffle use the same value.
if (Shuffle == nullptr)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
if (Shuffle->getOperand(0) != NextRdxOp)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
// Check that shuffle masks matches.
for (unsigned j = 0; j != MaskStart; ++j)
ShuffleMask[j] = MaskStart + j;
// Fill the rest of the mask with -1 for undef.
std::fill(&ShuffleMask[MaskStart], ShuffleMask.end(), -1);
Remove "mask" operand from shufflevector. Instead, represent the mask as out-of-line data in the instruction. This should be more efficient in the places that currently use getShuffleVector(), and paves the way for further changes to add new shuffles for scalable vectors. This doesn't change the syntax in textual IR. And I don't currently plan to change the bitcode encoding in this patch, although we'll probably need to do something once we extend shufflevector for scalable types. I expect that once this is finished, we can then replace the raw "mask" with something more appropriate for scalable vectors. Not sure exactly what this looks like at the moment, but there are a few different ways we could handle it. Maybe we could try to describe specific shuffles. Or maybe we could define it in terms of a function to convert a fixed-length array into an appropriate scalable vector, using a "step", or something like that. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D72467
2020-04-01 04:08:59 +08:00
ArrayRef<int> Mask = Shuffle->getShuffleMask();
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
if (ShuffleMask != Mask)
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
return TTI::RK_None;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
RdxOp = dyn_cast<Instruction>(NextRdxOp);
NumVecElemsRemain /= 2;
MaskStart *= 2;
}
Opcode = RD->Opcode;
Ty = VecTy;
return RD->Kind;
}
[TTI] add wrapper for matching vector reduction to reduce code duplication; NFC I'm not sure what this means, but the order in which we try the matches makes a difference on at least 1 regression test...
2020-09-24 01:46:26 +08:00
TTI::ReductionKind
TTI::matchVectorReduction(const ExtractElementInst *Root, unsigned &Opcode,
VectorType *&Ty, bool &IsPairwise) {
TTI::ReductionKind RdxKind = matchVectorSplittingReduction(Root, Opcode, Ty);
if (RdxKind != TTI::ReductionKind::RK_None) {
IsPairwise = false;
return RdxKind;
}
IsPairwise = true;
return matchPairwiseReduction(Root, Opcode, Ty);
}
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
int TargetTransformInfo::getInstructionThroughput(const Instruction *I) const {
[NFC][CostModel] Add TargetCostKind to relevant APIs Make the kind of cost explicit throughout the cost model which, apart from making the cost clear, will allow the generic parts to calculate better costs. It will also allow some backends to approximate and correlate the different costs if they wish. Another benefit is that it will also help simplify the cost model around immediate and intrinsic costs, where we currently have multiple APIs. RFC thread: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-April/141263.html Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79002
2020-04-28 21:11:27 +08:00
TTI::TargetCostKind CostKind = TTI::TCK_RecipThroughput;
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
switch (I->getOpcode()) {
case Instruction::GetElementPtr:
case Instruction::Ret:
case Instruction::PHI:
[CostModel] Unify getCFInstrCost Have TTI::getInstructionThroughput call getUserCost for Br, Ret and PHI. This now means that eveything in getInstructionThroughput is handled by getUserCost. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79849
2020-06-16 15:33:28 +08:00
case Instruction::Br:
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
case Instruction::Add:
case Instruction::FAdd:
case Instruction::Sub:
case Instruction::FSub:
case Instruction::Mul:
case Instruction::FMul:
case Instruction::UDiv:
case Instruction::SDiv:
case Instruction::FDiv:
case Instruction::URem:
case Instruction::SRem:
case Instruction::FRem:
case Instruction::Shl:
case Instruction::LShr:
case Instruction::AShr:
case Instruction::And:
case Instruction::Or:
[CostModel] Unify getArithmeticInstrCost Add the remaining arithmetic opcodes into the generic implementation of getUserCost and then call this from getInstructionThroughput. Most of the backends have been modified to return the base implementation for cost kinds other RecipThroughput. The outlier here is AMDGPU which already uses getArithmeticInstrCost for all the cost kinds. This change means that most of the opcodes can be removed from that backends implementation of getUserCost. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80992
2020-06-05 15:42:03 +08:00
case Instruction::Xor:
[NFCI][CostModel] Unify FNeg cost Enable TTIImpl::getUserCost to handle FNeg so that getInstructionThroughput can call that instead. This means we can remove the code in the AMDGPU backend too. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81635
2020-06-11 16:59:12 +08:00
case Instruction::FNeg:
[NFCI][CostModel] Unify getCmpSelInstrCost Add cases for icmp, fcmp and select into the switch statement of the generic getUserCost implementation with getInstructionThroughput then calling into it. The BasicTTI and backend implementations have be set to return a default value (1) when a cost other than throughput is being queried. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80550
2020-05-26 21:28:34 +08:00
case Instruction::Select:
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
case Instruction::ICmp:
[NFCI][CostModel] Unify getCmpSelInstrCost Add cases for icmp, fcmp and select into the switch statement of the generic getUserCost implementation with getInstructionThroughput then calling into it. The BasicTTI and backend implementations have be set to return a default value (1) when a cost other than throughput is being queried. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80550
2020-05-26 21:28:34 +08:00
case Instruction::FCmp:
[CostModel] Unify getMemoryOpCost Use getMemoryOpCost from the generic implementation of getUserCost and have getInstructionThroughput return the result of that for loads and stores. This also means that the X86 implementation of getUserCost can be removed with the functionality folded into its getMemoryOpCost. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80984
2020-06-05 17:09:56 +08:00
case Instruction::Store:
case Instruction::Load:
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
case Instruction::ZExt:
case Instruction::SExt:
case Instruction::FPToUI:
case Instruction::FPToSI:
case Instruction::FPExt:
case Instruction::PtrToInt:
case Instruction::IntToPtr:
case Instruction::SIToFP:
case Instruction::UIToFP:
case Instruction::Trunc:
case Instruction::FPTrunc:
case Instruction::BitCast:
[CostModel] Unify getCastInstrCost Add the remaining cast instruction opcodes to the base implementation of getUserCost and directly return the result. This allows getInstructionThroughput to return getUserCost for the casts. This has required changes to PPC and SystemZ because they implement getUserCost and/or getCastInstrCost with adjustments for vector operations. Adjusts have also been made in the remaining backends that implement the method so that they still produce a cost of zero or one for cost kinds other than throughput. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79848
2020-05-26 18:27:57 +08:00
case Instruction::AddrSpaceCast:
[CostModel] Unify ExtractElement cost. Move the cost modelling, with the reduction pattern matching, from getInstructionThroughput into generic TTIImpl::getUserCost. The modelling in the AMDGPU backend can now be removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81643
2020-06-15 15:27:14 +08:00
case Instruction::ExtractElement:
[CostModel] Unify Shuffle and InsertElement Costs Extract the existing code from getInstructionThroughput into TTImpl::getUserCost. The duplicated code in the AMDGPU backend has also been removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81448
2020-06-09 16:04:53 +08:00
case Instruction::InsertElement:
[CostModel] Model all `extractvalue`s as free. Summary: As disscussed in https://reviews.llvm.org/D65148#1606412, `extractvalue` don't actually generate any code, so we should treat them as free. Reviewers: craig.topper, RKSimon, jnspaulsson, greened, asb, t.p.northover, jmolloy, dmgreen Reviewed By: jmolloy Subscribers: javed.absar, hiraditya, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66098 llvm-svn: 370339
2019-08-29 19:50:30 +08:00
case Instruction::ExtractValue:
[CostModel] Unify Shuffle and InsertElement Costs Extract the existing code from getInstructionThroughput into TTImpl::getUserCost. The duplicated code in the AMDGPU backend has also been removed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81448
2020-06-09 16:04:53 +08:00
case Instruction::ShuffleVector:
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
case Instruction::Call:
[CostModel] getUserCost for intrinsic throughput Last part of recommitting 'Unify Intrinsic Costs' 259eb619ff6dcd5b6111d1686e18559b9ca004d4. This patch now uses getUserCost from getInstructionThroughput. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80012
2020-05-26 19:17:26 +08:00
return getUserCost(I, CostKind);
[TargetTransformInfo] Add a new public interface getInstructionCost Current TargetTransformInfo can support throughput cost model and code size model, but sometimes we also need instruction latency cost model in different optimizations. Hal suggested we need a single public interface to query the different cost of an instruction. So I proposed following interface: enum TargetCostKind { TCK_RecipThroughput, ///< Reciprocal throughput. TCK_Latency, ///< The latency of instruction. TCK_CodeSize ///< Instruction code size. }; int getInstructionCost(const Instruction *I, enum TargetCostKind kind) const; All clients should mainly use this function to query the cost of an instruction, parameter <kind> specifies the desired cost model. This patch also provides a simple default implementation of getInstructionLatency. The default getInstructionLatency provides latency numbers for only small number of instruction classes, those latency numbers are only reasonable for modern OOO processors. It can be extended in following ways: Add more detail into this function. Add getXXXLatency function and call it from here. Implement target specific getInstructionLatency function. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37170 llvm-svn: 312832
2017-09-09 06:29:17 +08:00
default:
// We don't have any information on this instruction.
return -1;
}
}
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
TargetTransformInfo::Concept::~Concept() {}
Commoning of target specific load/store intrinsics in Early CSE. Phabricator revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7121 Patch by Sanjin Sijaric <ssijaric@codeaurora.org>! llvm-svn: 227149
2015-01-27 06:51:15 +08:00
[PM] Port TTI to the new pass manager, introducing a TargetIRAnalysis to produce it. This adds a function to the TargetMachine that produces this analysis via a callback for each function. This in turn faves the way to produce a *different* TTI per-function with the correct subtarget cached. I've also done the necessary wiring in the opt tool to thread the target machine down and make it available to the pass registry so that we can construct this analysis from a target machine when available. llvm-svn: 227721
2015-02-01 18:11:22 +08:00
TargetIRAnalysis::TargetIRAnalysis() : TTICallback(&getDefaultTTI) {}
TargetIRAnalysis::TargetIRAnalysis(
constify the Function parameter to the TTI creation callback and propagate to all callers/users/etc. llvm-svn: 247864
2015-09-17 07:38:13 +08:00
std::function<Result(const Function &)> TTICallback)
Apply clang-tidy's misc-move-constructor-init throughout LLVM. No functionality change intended, maybe a tiny performance improvement. llvm-svn: 270997
2016-05-27 22:27:24 +08:00
: TTICallback(std::move(TTICallback)) {}
[PM] Port TTI to the new pass manager, introducing a TargetIRAnalysis to produce it. This adds a function to the TargetMachine that produces this analysis via a callback for each function. This in turn faves the way to produce a *different* TTI per-function with the correct subtarget cached. I've also done the necessary wiring in the opt tool to thread the target machine down and make it available to the pass registry so that we can construct this analysis from a target machine when available. llvm-svn: 227721
2015-02-01 18:11:22 +08:00
[PM] Remove support for omitting the AnalysisManager argument to new pass manager passes' `run` methods. This removes a bunch of SFINAE goop from the pass manager and just requires pass authors to accept `AnalysisManager<IRUnitT> &` as a dead argument. This is a small price to pay for the simplicity of the system as a whole, despite the noise that changing it causes at this stage. This will also helpfull allow us to make the signature of the run methods much more flexible for different kinds af passes to support things like intelligently updating the pass's progression over IR units. While this touches many, many, files, the changes are really boring. Mostly made with the help of my trusty perl one liners. Thanks to Sean and Hal for bouncing ideas for this with me in IRC. llvm-svn: 272978
2016-06-17 08:11:01 +08:00
TargetIRAnalysis::Result TargetIRAnalysis::run(const Function &F,
Consistently use FunctionAnalysisManager Besides a general consistently benefit, the extra layer of indirection allows the mechanical part of https://reviews.llvm.org/D23256 that requires touching every transformation and analysis to be factored out cleanly. Thanks to David for the suggestion. llvm-svn: 278077
2016-08-09 08:28:15 +08:00
FunctionAnalysisManager &) {
[PM] Port TTI to the new pass manager, introducing a TargetIRAnalysis to produce it. This adds a function to the TargetMachine that produces this analysis via a callback for each function. This in turn faves the way to produce a *different* TTI per-function with the correct subtarget cached. I've also done the necessary wiring in the opt tool to thread the target machine down and make it available to the pass registry so that we can construct this analysis from a target machine when available. llvm-svn: 227721
2015-02-01 18:11:22 +08:00
return TTICallback(F);
}
[PM] Change the static object whose address is used to uniquely identify analyses to have a common type which is enforced rather than using a char object and a `void *` type when used as an identifier. This has a number of advantages. First, it at least helps some of the confusion raised in Justin Lebar's code review of why `void *` was being used everywhere by having a stronger type that connects to documentation about this. However, perhaps more importantly, it addresses a serious issue where the alignment of these pointer-like identifiers was unknown. This made it hard to use them in pointer-like data structures. We were already dodging this in dangerous ways to create the "all analyses" entry. In a subsequent patch I attempted to use these with TinyPtrVector and things fell apart in a very bad way. And it isn't just a compile time or type system issue. Worse than that, the actual alignment of these pointer-like opaque identifiers wasn't guaranteed to be a useful alignment as they were just characters. This change introduces a type to use as the "key" object whose address forms the opaque identifier. This both forces the objects to have proper alignment, and provides type checking that we get it right everywhere. It also makes the types somewhat less mysterious than `void *`. We could go one step further and introduce a truly opaque pointer-like type to return from the `ID()` static function rather than returning `AnalysisKey *`, but that didn't seem to be a clear win so this is just the initial change to get to a reliably typed and aligned object serving is a key for all the analyses. Thanks to Richard Smith and Justin Lebar for helping pick plausible names and avoid making this refactoring many times. =] And thanks to Sean for the super fast review! While here, I've tried to move away from the "PassID" nomenclature entirely as it wasn't really helping and is overloaded with old pass manager constructs. Now we have IDs for analyses, and key objects whose address can be used as IDs. Where possible and clear I've shortened this to just "ID". In a few places I kept "AnalysisID" to make it clear what was being identified. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27031 llvm-svn: 287783
2016-11-24 01:53:26 +08:00
AnalysisKey TargetIRAnalysis::Key;
[PM] Appease mingw32's auto-import DLL build with minimal tweaks, with fix for clang. char AnalysisBase::ID should be declared as extern and defined in one module. llvm-svn: 262188
2016-02-29 01:17:00 +08:00
constify the Function parameter to the TTI creation callback and propagate to all callers/users/etc. llvm-svn: 247864
2015-09-17 07:38:13 +08:00
TargetIRAnalysis::Result TargetIRAnalysis::getDefaultTTI(const Function &F) {
Make TargetTransformInfo keeping a reference to the Module DataLayout DataLayout is no longer optional. It was initialized with or without a DataLayout, and the DataLayout when supplied could have been the one from the TargetMachine. Summary: This change is part of a series of commits dedicated to have a single DataLayout during compilation by using always the one owned by the module. Reviewers: echristo Subscribers: jholewinski, llvm-commits, rafael, yaron.keren Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11021 From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com> llvm-svn: 241774
2015-07-09 10:08:42 +08:00
return Result(F.getParent()->getDataLayout());
[PM] Port TTI to the new pass manager, introducing a TargetIRAnalysis to produce it. This adds a function to the TargetMachine that produces this analysis via a callback for each function. This in turn faves the way to produce a *different* TTI per-function with the correct subtarget cached. I've also done the necessary wiring in the opt tool to thread the target machine down and make it available to the pass registry so that we can construct this analysis from a target machine when available. llvm-svn: 227721
2015-02-01 18:11:22 +08:00
}
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
// Register the basic pass.
INITIALIZE_PASS(TargetTransformInfoWrapperPass, "tti",
"Target Transform Information", false, true)
char TargetTransformInfoWrapperPass::ID = 0;
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
void TargetTransformInfoWrapperPass::anchor() {}
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
TargetTransformInfoWrapperPass::TargetTransformInfoWrapperPass()
[multiversion] Implement the old pass manager's TTI wrapper pass in terms of the new pass manager's TargetIRAnalysis. Yep, this is one of the nicer bits of the new pass manager's design. Passes can in many cases operate in a vacuum and so we can just nest things when convenient. This is particularly convenient here as I can now consolidate all of the TargetMachine logic on this analysis. The most important change here is that this pushes the function we need TTI for all the way into the TargetMachine, and re-creates the TTI object for each function rather than re-using it for each function. We're now prepared to teach the targets to produce function-specific TTI objects with specific subtargets cached, etc. One piece of feedback I'd love here is whether its worth renaming any of this stuff. None of the names really seem that awesome to me at this point, but TargetTransformInfoWrapperPass is particularly ... odd. TargetIRAnalysisWrapper might make more sense. I would want to do that rename separately anyways, but let me know what you think. llvm-svn: 227731
2015-02-01 20:26:09 +08:00
: ImmutablePass(ID) {
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
initializeTargetTransformInfoWrapperPassPass(
*PassRegistry::getPassRegistry());
}
TargetTransformInfoWrapperPass::TargetTransformInfoWrapperPass(
[multiversion] Implement the old pass manager's TTI wrapper pass in terms of the new pass manager's TargetIRAnalysis. Yep, this is one of the nicer bits of the new pass manager's design. Passes can in many cases operate in a vacuum and so we can just nest things when convenient. This is particularly convenient here as I can now consolidate all of the TargetMachine logic on this analysis. The most important change here is that this pushes the function we need TTI for all the way into the TargetMachine, and re-creates the TTI object for each function rather than re-using it for each function. We're now prepared to teach the targets to produce function-specific TTI objects with specific subtargets cached, etc. One piece of feedback I'd love here is whether its worth renaming any of this stuff. None of the names really seem that awesome to me at this point, but TargetTransformInfoWrapperPass is particularly ... odd. TargetIRAnalysisWrapper might make more sense. I would want to do that rename separately anyways, but let me know what you think. llvm-svn: 227731
2015-02-01 20:26:09 +08:00
TargetIRAnalysis TIRA)
: ImmutablePass(ID), TIRA(std::move(TIRA)) {
[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an extremely complex analysis group. The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR. I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes, including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form. There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque, confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it. Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation. The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here. The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even cache it. Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future work below. The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere, a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;] Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts of this. The follow up work should include at least: 1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline. 2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function. This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager. 3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2. 4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to type erase. 5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is easier to understand and less verbose to forward. 6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing the TTI in each target. Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting it sorted out very quickly. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293 llvm-svn: 227669
2015-01-31 11:43:40 +08:00
initializeTargetTransformInfoWrapperPassPass(
*PassRegistry::getPassRegistry());
}
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
constify the Function parameter to the TTI creation callback and propagate to all callers/users/etc. llvm-svn: 247864
2015-09-17 07:38:13 +08:00
TargetTransformInfo &TargetTransformInfoWrapperPass::getTTI(const Function &F) {
Consistently use FunctionAnalysisManager Besides a general consistently benefit, the extra layer of indirection allows the mechanical part of https://reviews.llvm.org/D23256 that requires touching every transformation and analysis to be factored out cleanly. Thanks to David for the suggestion. llvm-svn: 278077
2016-08-09 08:28:15 +08:00
FunctionAnalysisManager DummyFAM;
[PM] Remove support for omitting the AnalysisManager argument to new pass manager passes' `run` methods. This removes a bunch of SFINAE goop from the pass manager and just requires pass authors to accept `AnalysisManager<IRUnitT> &` as a dead argument. This is a small price to pay for the simplicity of the system as a whole, despite the noise that changing it causes at this stage. This will also helpfull allow us to make the signature of the run methods much more flexible for different kinds af passes to support things like intelligently updating the pass's progression over IR units. While this touches many, many, files, the changes are really boring. Mostly made with the help of my trusty perl one liners. Thanks to Sean and Hal for bouncing ideas for this with me in IRC. llvm-svn: 272978
2016-06-17 08:11:01 +08:00
TTI = TIRA.run(F, DummyFAM);
[multiversion] Implement the old pass manager's TTI wrapper pass in terms of the new pass manager's TargetIRAnalysis. Yep, this is one of the nicer bits of the new pass manager's design. Passes can in many cases operate in a vacuum and so we can just nest things when convenient. This is particularly convenient here as I can now consolidate all of the TargetMachine logic on this analysis. The most important change here is that this pushes the function we need TTI for all the way into the TargetMachine, and re-creates the TTI object for each function rather than re-using it for each function. We're now prepared to teach the targets to produce function-specific TTI objects with specific subtargets cached, etc. One piece of feedback I'd love here is whether its worth renaming any of this stuff. None of the names really seem that awesome to me at this point, but TargetTransformInfoWrapperPass is particularly ... odd. TargetIRAnalysisWrapper might make more sense. I would want to do that rename separately anyways, but let me know what you think. llvm-svn: 227731
2015-02-01 20:26:09 +08:00
return *TTI;
}
[PM] Switch the TargetMachine interface from accepting a pass manager base which it adds a single analysis pass to, to instead return the type erased TargetTransformInfo object constructed for that TargetMachine. This removes all of the pass variants for TTI. There is now a single TTI *pass* in the Analysis layer. All of the Analysis <-> Target communication is through the TTI's type erased interface itself. While the diff is large here, it is nothing more that code motion to make types available in a header file for use in a different source file within each target. I've tried to keep all the doxygen comments and file boilerplate in line with this move, but let me know if I missed anything. With this in place, the next step to making TTI work with the new pass manager is to introduce a really simple new-style analysis that produces a TTI object via a callback into this routine on the target machine. Once we have that, we'll have the building blocks necessary to accept a function argument as well. llvm-svn: 227685
2015-01-31 19:17:59 +08:00
ImmutablePass *
[multiversion] Implement the old pass manager's TTI wrapper pass in terms of the new pass manager's TargetIRAnalysis. Yep, this is one of the nicer bits of the new pass manager's design. Passes can in many cases operate in a vacuum and so we can just nest things when convenient. This is particularly convenient here as I can now consolidate all of the TargetMachine logic on this analysis. The most important change here is that this pushes the function we need TTI for all the way into the TargetMachine, and re-creates the TTI object for each function rather than re-using it for each function. We're now prepared to teach the targets to produce function-specific TTI objects with specific subtargets cached, etc. One piece of feedback I'd love here is whether its worth renaming any of this stuff. None of the names really seem that awesome to me at this point, but TargetTransformInfoWrapperPass is particularly ... odd. TargetIRAnalysisWrapper might make more sense. I would want to do that rename separately anyways, but let me know what you think. llvm-svn: 227731
2015-02-01 20:26:09 +08:00
llvm::createTargetTransformInfoWrapperPass(TargetIRAnalysis TIRA) {
return new TargetTransformInfoWrapperPass(std::move(TIRA));
Convert the TargetTransformInfo from an immutable pass with dynamic interfaces which could be extracted from it, and must be provided on construction, to a chained analysis group. The end goal here is that TTI works much like AA -- there is a baseline "no-op" and target independent pass which is in the group, and each target can expose a target-specific pass in the group. These passes will naturally chain allowing each target-specific pass to delegate to the generic pass as needed. In particular, this will allow a much simpler interface for passes that would like to use TTI -- they can have a hard dependency on TTI and it will just be satisfied by the stub implementation when that is all that is available. This patch is a WIP however. In particular, the "stub" pass is actually the one and only pass, and everything there is implemented by delegating to the target-provided interfaces. As a consequence the tools still have to explicitly construct the pass. Switching targets to provide custom passes and sinking the stub behavior into the NoTTI pass is the next step. llvm-svn: 171621
2013-01-05 19:43:11 +08:00
}