Created a new pass ScopInfoRegionPass. As name suggests, it is a
region pass and it is there to preserve compatibility with our
existing Polly passes. ScopInfoRegionPass will return a SCoP object
for a valid region while the creation of the SCoP stays in the
ScopInfo class.
Contributed-by: Utpal Bora <cs14mtech11017@iith.ac.in>
Reviewed-by: Tobias Grosser <tobias@grosser.es>,
Johannes Doerfert <doerfert@cs.uni-saarland.de>
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20770
llvm-svn: 271259
Truncate operations are basically modulo operations, thus we can model
them that way. However, for large types we assume the operand to fit
in the new type size instead of introducing a modulo with a very large
constant.
llvm-svn: 269300
The assumption attached to an llvm.assume in the SCoP needs to be
combined with the domain of the surrounding statement but can
nevertheless be used to refine the context.
This fixes the problems mentioned in PR27067.
llvm-svn: 269060
This exposes the functionality to interpret a SCEV, or better the
piece-wise function created from the SCEV, as an unsigned value
instead of a signed one.
llvm-svn: 269044
The check for complexity compares the number of polyhedra in a set,
which are combined by disjunctions (union, "OR"),
not conjunctions (intersection, "AND").
llvm-svn: 268223
After zero-extend operations and unsigned comparisons we now allow
unsigned divisions. The handling is basically the same as for signed
division, except the interpretation of the operands. As the divisor
has to be constant in both cases we can simply interpret it as an
unsigned value without additional complexity in the representation.
For the dividend we could choose from the different representation
schemes introduced for zero-extend operations but for now we will
simply use an assumption.
llvm-svn: 268032
It does not suffice to take a global assumptions for unsigned comparisons but
we also need to adjust the invalid domain of the statements guarded by such
an assumption. To this end we allow to specialize the getPwAff call now in
order to indicate unsigned interpretation.
llvm-svn: 268025
When we materialize parameter SCEVs we did so without considering the
side effects they might have, e.g., both division and modulo are
undefined if the right hand side is zero. This is a problem because we
potentially extended the domain under which we evaluate parameters,
thus we might have introduced such undefined behaviour. To prevent
that from happening we will now guard divisions and modulo operations
in the parameters with a compare and select.
llvm-svn: 268023
Additive expressions can have constant factors too that we can extract
and thereby simplify the internal representation. For now we do
compute the gcd of all constant factors but only extract the same
(possibly negated) factor if there is one.
llvm-svn: 267445
A zero-extended value can be interpreted as a piecewise defined signed
value. If the value was non-negative it stays the same, otherwise it
is the sum of the original value and 2^n where n is the bit-width of
the original (or operand) type. Examples:
zext i8 127 to i32 -> { [127] }
zext i8 -1 to i32 -> { [256 + (-1)] } = { [255] }
zext i8 %v to i32 -> [v] -> { [v] | v >= 0; [256 + v] | v < 0 }
However, LLVM/Scalar Evolution uses zero-extend (potentially lead by a
truncate) to represent some forms of modulo computation. The left-hand side
of the condition in the code below would result in the SCEV
"zext i1 <false, +, true>for.body" which is just another description
of the C expression "i & 1 != 0" or, equivalently, "i % 2 != 0".
for (i = 0; i < N; i++)
if (i & 1 != 0 /* == i % 2 */)
/* do something */
If we do not make the modulo explicit but only use the mechanism described
above we will get the very restrictive assumption "N < 3", because for all
values of N >= 3 the SCEVAddRecExpr operand of the zero-extend would wrap.
Alternatively, we can make the modulo in the operand explicit in the
resulting piecewise function and thereby avoid the assumption on N. For the
example this would result in the following piecewise affine function:
{ [i0] -> [(1)] : 2*floor((-1 + i0)/2) = -1 + i0;
[i0] -> [(0)] : 2*floor((i0)/2) = i0 }
To this end we can first determine if the (immediate) operand of the
zero-extend can wrap and, in case it might, we will use explicit modulo
semantic to compute the result instead of emitting non-wrapping assumptions.
Note that operands with large bit-widths are less likely to be negative
because it would result in a very large access offset or loop bound after the
zero-extend. To this end one can optimistically assume the operand to be
positive and avoid the piecewise definition if the bit-width is bigger than
some threshold (here MaxZextSmallBitWidth).
We choose to go with a hybrid solution of all modeling techniques described
above. For small bit-widths (up to MaxZextSmallBitWidth) we will model the
wrapping explicitly and use a piecewise defined function. However, if the
bit-width is bigger than MaxZextSmallBitWidth we will employ overflow
assumptions and assume the "former negative" piece will not exist.
llvm-svn: 267408
The SCEVAffinator will now produce not only the isl representaiton of
a SCEV but also the domain under which it is invalid. This is used to
record possible overflows that can happen in the statement domains in
the statements invalid domain. The result is that invalid loads have
an accurate execution contexts with regards to the validity of their
statements domain. While the SCEVAffinator currently is only taking
"no-wrapping" assumptions, we can add more withouth worrying about the
execution context of loads that are optimistically hoisted.
llvm-svn: 267288
Utilizing the record option for assumptions we can simplify the wrapping
assumption generation a lot. Additionally, we can now report locations
together with wrapping assumptions, though they might not be accurate yet.
llvm-svn: 266069
In r247147 we disabled pointer expressions because the IslExprBuilder did not
fully support them. This patch reintroduces them by simply treating them as
integers. The only special handling for pointers that is left detects the
comparison of two address_of operands and uses an unsigned compare.
llvm-svn: 265894
This reverts commit 2879c53e80e05497f408f21ce470d122e9f90f94.
Additionally, it adds SDiv and SRem instructions to the set of values
discovered by the findValues function even if we add the operands to
be able to recompute the SCEVs. In subfunctions we do not want to
recompute SDiv and SRem instructions but pass them instead as they
might have been created through the IslExprBuilder and are more
complicated than simple SDiv/SRem instructions in the code.
llvm-svn: 265873
If ScalarEvolution cannot look through some expression but we do, it
might happen that a multiplication will arrive at the
SCEVAffinator::visitMulExpr. While we could always try to improve the
extractConstantFactor function we might still miss something, thus we
reintroduce the code to generate multiplicative piecewise-affine
functions as a fall-back.
llvm-svn: 265777
The findValues() function did not look through div & srem instructions
that were part of the argument SCEV. However, in different other
places we already look through it. This mismatch caused us to preload
values in the wrong order.
llvm-svn: 265775
This patch applies the restrictions on the number of domain conjuncts
also to the domain parts of piecewise affine expressions we generate.
To this end the wording is change slightly. It was needed to support
complex additions featuring zext-instructions but it also fixes PR27045.
lnt profitable runs reports only little changes that might be noise:
Compile Time:
Polybench/[...]/2mm +4.34%
SingleSource/[...]/stepanov_container -2.43%
Execution Time:
External/[...]/186_crafty -2.32%
External/[...]/188_ammp -1.89%
External/[...]/473_astar -1.87%
llvm-svn: 264514
Index calculations can use the last value that come out of a loop.
Ideally, ScalarEvolution can compute that exit value directly without
depending on the loop induction variable, but not in all cases.
This changes isAffine to not consider such loop exit values as affine to
avoid that SCEVExpander adds uses of the original loop induction
variable.
This fix is analogous to r262404 that applies to general uses of loop
exit values instead of index expressions and loop bouds as in this
patch.
This reduces the number of LNT test-suite fails with
-polly-position=before-vectorizer -polly-unprofitable
from 10 to 8.
llvm-svn: 262665
The scope will be required in the following fix. This commit separates
the large changes that do not change behaviour from the small, but
functional change.
llvm-svn: 262664
The LNT test suite with -polly-process-unprofitable
-polly-position=before-vectorizer currenty fails 59 tests. With this
barrier added, only 16 keep failing. This is probably because Polly's
code generation currently does not correctly preserve all analyses it
promised to preserve. Temporarily add this barrier until further
investigation.
llvm-svn: 262488
Polly recognizes affine loops that ScalarEvolution does not, in
particular those with loop conditions that depend on hoisted invariant
loads. Check for SCEVAddRec dependencies on such loops and do not
consider their exit values as synthesizable because SCEVExpander would
generate them as expressions that depend on the original induction
variables. These are not available in generated code.
llvm-svn: 262404
So far we separated constant factors from multiplications, however,
only when they are at the outermost level of a parameter SCEV. Now,
we also separate constant factors from the parameter SCEV if the
outermost expression is a SCEVAddRecExpr. With the changes to the
SCEVAffinator we can now improve the extractConstantFactor(...)
function at will without worrying about any other code part. Thus,
if needed we can implement a more comprehensive
extractConstantFactor(...) function that will traverse the SCEV
instead of looking only at the outermost level.
Four test cases were affected. One did not change much and the other
three were simplified.
llvm-svn: 260859
The previously implemented approach is to follow value definitions and
create write accesses ("push defs") while searching for uses. This
requires the same relatively validity- and requirement conditions to be
replicated at multiple locations (PHI instructions, other instructions,
uses by PHIs).
We replace this by iterating over the uses in a SCoP ("pull in
requirements"), and add writes only when at least one read has been
added. It turns out to be simpler code because each use is only iterated
over once and writes are added for the first access that reads it. We
need another iteration to identify escaping values (uses not in the
SCoP), which also makes the difference between such accesses more
obvious. As a side-effect, the order of scalar MemoryAccess can change.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15706
llvm-svn: 259987
MemAccInst wraps the common members of LoadInst and StoreInst. Also use
of this class in:
- ScopInfo::buildMemoryAccess
- BlockGenerator::generateLocationAccessed
- ScopInfo::addArrayAccess
- Scop::buildAliasGroups
- Replace every use of polly::getPointerOperand
Reviewers: jdoerfert, grosser
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16530
llvm-svn: 258947
Use it to print "null" if a MemoryAccess's access relation is not
available instead of printing nothing.
Suggested-by: Johannes Doerfert
llvm-svn: 255466
Re-run canonicalization passes after Polly's code generation.
The set of passes currently added here are nearly all the passes between
--polly-position=early and --polly-position=before-vectorizer, i.e. all
passes that would usually run after Polly.
In order to run these only if Polly actually modified the code, we add a
function attribute "polly-optimzed" to a function that contains
generated code. The cleanup pass is skipped if the function does not
have this attribute.
There is no support by the (legacy) PassManager to run passes only under
some conditions. One could have wrapped all transformation passes to run
only when CodeGeneration changed the code, but the analyses would run
anyway. This patch creates an independent pass manager. The
disadvantages are that all analyses have to re-run even if preserved and
it does not honor compiler switches like the PassManagerBuilder does.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D14333
llvm-svn: 254150
If an llvm.assume dominates the SCoP entry block and the assumed condition
can be expressed as an affine inequality we will now add it to the context.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D14413
llvm-svn: 252851
Johannes Doerfert