Current implementation of parseLoopStructure interprets the latch comparison as a
comarison against `iv.next`. If the actual comparison is made against the `iv` current value
then the loop may be rejected, because this misinterpretation leads to incorrect evaluation
of the latch start value.
This patch teaches the IRCE to distinguish this kind of loops and perform the optimization
for them. Now we use `IndVarBase` variable which can be either next or current value of the
induction variable (previously we used `IndVarNext` which was always the value on next iteration).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36215
llvm-svn: 312221
Clamp function was too optimistic when choosing signed or unsigned min/max function for calculations.
In fact, `!IsSignedPredicate` guarantees us that `Smallest` and `Greatest` can be compared safely using unsigned
predicates, but we did not check this for `S` which can in theory be negative.
This patch makes Clamp use signed min/max for cases when it fails to prove `S` being non-negative,
and it adds a test where such situation may lead to incorrect conditions calculation.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36873
llvm-svn: 311205
In some particular cases eq/ne conditions can be turned into equivalent
slt/sgt conditions. This patch teaches parseLoopStructure to handle some
of these cases.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35010
llvm-svn: 308264
When iterating through loop
for (int i = INT_MAX; i > 0; i--)
We fail to generate the pre-loop for it. It happens because we use the
overflown value in a comparison predicate when identifying whether or not
we need it.
In old logic, we used SLE predicate against Greatest value which exceeds all
seen values of the IV and might be overflown. Now we use the GreatestSeen
value of this IV with SLT predicate.
Also added a test that ensures that a pre-loop is generated for such loops.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35347
llvm-svn: 308001
Summary:
We were canonizalizing the pre loop (into loop-simplify form) before
the post loop blocks were added into parent loop. This is incorrect when IRCE is
done on a subloop. The post-loop blocks are created, but not yet added to the
parent loop. So, loop-simplification on the pre-loop incorrectly updates
LoopInfo.
This patch corrects the ordering so that pre and post loop blocks are added to
parent loop (if any), and then the loops are canonicalized to LCSSA and
LoopSimplifyForm.
Reviewers: reames, sanjoy, apilipenko
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33846
llvm-svn: 304800
Currently IRCE relies on the loops it transforms to be (semantically) of
the form:
for (i = START; i < END; i++)
...
or
for (i = START; i > END; i--)
...
However, we were not verifying the presence of the START < END entry
check (i.e. check before the first iteration). We were only verifying
that the backedge was guarded by (i + 1) < END.
Usually this would work "fine" since (especially in Java) most loops do
actually have the START < END check, but of course that is not
guaranteed.
llvm-svn: 294375
Summary:
This patch will add loop metadata on the pre and post loops generated by IRCE.
Currently, we have metadata for disabling optimizations such as vectorization,
unrolling, loop distribution and LICM versioning (and confirmed that these
optimizations check for the metadata before proceeding with the transformation).
The pre and post loops generated by IRCE need not go through loop opts (since
these are slow paths).
Added two test cases as well.
Reviewers: sanjoy, reames
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26806
llvm-svn: 289588
IRCE has the ability to further version pre-loops and post-loops that it
created, but this isn't useful at all. This change teaches IRCE to
leave behind some metadata in the loops it creates (by cloning the main
loop) so that these new loops are not re-processed by IRCE.
Today this bug is hidden by another bug -- IRCE does not update LoopInfo
properly so the loop pass manager does not re-invoke IRCE on the loops
it split out. However, once the latter is fixed the bug addressed in
this change causes IRCE to infinite-loop in some cases (e.g. it splits
out a pre-loop, a pre-pre-loop from that, a pre-pre-pre-loop from that
and so on).
llvm-svn: 278617
The (negative) test case is supposed to check that IRCE does not muck
with range checks it cannot handle, not that it does the right thing in
the absence of profiling information.
llvm-svn: 278612
Loops containing `indirectbr` may not be in simplified form, even after
running LoopSimplify. Reject then gracefully, instead of tripping an
assert.
llvm-svn: 278611
Fixes PR28764. Right now there is no way to test this, but (as
mentioned on the PR) with Michael Zolotukhin's yet to be checked in
LoopSimplify verfier, 8 of the llvm-lit tests for IRCE crash.
llvm-svn: 277891
If `-irce-skip-profitability-checks` is passed in, IRCE will kick in in
all cases where it is legal for it to kick in. This flag is intended to
help diagnose and analyse performance issues.
llvm-svn: 276372
After this change, we do the expected thing for cases like
```
Check0Passed = /* range check IRCE can optimize */
Check1Passed = /* range check IRCE can optimize */
if (!(Check0Passed && Check1Passed))
throw_Exception();
```
llvm-svn: 270804
This changes IRCE to optimize uses, and not branches. This change is
NFCI since the uses we do inspect are in practice only ever going to be
the condition use in conditional branches; but this flexibility will
later allow us to analyze more complex expressions than just a direct
branch on a range check.
llvm-svn: 270500
Current SCEV expansion will expand SCEV as a sequence of operations
and doesn't utilize the value already existed. This will introduce
redundent computation which may not be cleaned up throughly by
following optimizations.
This patch introduces an ExprValueMap which is a map from SCEV to the
set of equal values with the same SCEV. When a SCEV is expanded, the
set of values is checked and reused whenever possible before generating
a sequence of operations.
The original commit triggered regressions in Polly tests. The regressions
exposed two problems which have been fixed in current version.
1. Polly will generate a new function based on the old one. To generate an
instruction for the new function, it builds SCEV for the old instruction,
applies some tranformation on the SCEV generated, then expands the transformed
SCEV and insert the expanded value into new function. Because SCEV expansion
may reuse value cached in ExprValueMap, the value in old function may be
inserted into new function, which is wrong.
In SCEVExpander::expand, there is a logic to check the cached value to
be used should dominate the insertion point. However, for the above
case, the check always passes. That is because the insertion point is
in a new function, which is unreachable from the old function. However
for unreachable node, DominatorTreeBase::dominates thinks it will be
dominated by any other node.
The fix is to simply add a check that the cached value to be used in
expansion should be in the same function as the insertion point instruction.
2. When the SCEV is of scConstant type, expanding it directly is cheaper than
reusing a normal value cached. Although in the cached value set in ExprValueMap,
there is a Constant type value, but it is not easy to find it out -- the cached
Value set is not sorted according to the potential cost. Existing reuse logic
in SCEVExpander::expand simply chooses the first legal element from the cached
value set.
The fix is that when the SCEV is of scConstant type, don't try the reuse
logic. simply expand it.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12090
llvm-svn: 259736
Current SCEV expansion will expand SCEV as a sequence of operations
and doesn't utilize the value already existed. This will introduce
redundent computation which may not be cleaned up throughly by
following optimizations.
This patch introduces an ExprValueMap which is a map from SCEV to the
set of equal values with the same SCEV. When a SCEV is expanded, the
set of values is checked and reused whenever possible before generating
a sequence of operations.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12090
llvm-svn: 259662
Re-commit the test cases added in r232444. These now use
-irce-print-changed-loops and -irce-print-range-checks so they run
correctly on a without asserts build of llvm.
llvm-svn: 232452
I accidentally checked in two tests that used -debug-only -- these fail
on a release LLVM build. Temporarily delete these from the repo to keep
the bots green while I fix this locally.
llvm-svn: 232446
This change to IRCE gets it to recognize "half" range checks. Half
range checks are range checks that only either check if the index is
`slt` some positive integer ("length") or if the index is `sge` `0`.
The range solver does not try to be clever / aggressive about solving
half-range checks -- it transforms "I < L" to "0 <= I < L" and "0 <= I"
to "0 <= I < INT_SMAX". This is safe, but not always optimal.
llvm-svn: 232444
Essentially the same as the GEP change in r230786.
A similar migration script can be used to update test cases, though a few more
test case improvements/changes were required this time around: (r229269-r229278)
import fileinput
import sys
import re
pat = re.compile(r"((?:=|:|^)\s*load (?:atomic )?(?:volatile )?(.*?))(| addrspace\(\d+\) *)\*($| *(?:%|@|null|undef|blockaddress|getelementptr|addrspacecast|bitcast|inttoptr|\[\[[a-zA-Z]|\{\{).*$)")
for line in sys.stdin:
sys.stdout.write(re.sub(pat, r"\1, \2\3*\4", line))
Reviewers: rafael, dexonsmith, grosser
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7649
llvm-svn: 230794
One of several parallel first steps to remove the target type of pointers,
replacing them with a single opaque pointer type.
This adds an explicit type parameter to the gep instruction so that when the
first parameter becomes an opaque pointer type, the type to gep through is
still available to the instructions.
* This doesn't modify gep operators, only instructions (operators will be
handled separately)
* Textual IR changes only. Bitcode (including upgrade) and changing the
in-memory representation will be in separate changes.
* geps of vectors are transformed as:
getelementptr <4 x float*> %x, ...
->getelementptr float, <4 x float*> %x, ...
Then, once the opaque pointer type is introduced, this will ultimately look
like:
getelementptr float, <4 x ptr> %x
with the unambiguous interpretation that it is a vector of pointers to float.
* address spaces remain on the pointer, not the type:
getelementptr float addrspace(1)* %x
->getelementptr float, float addrspace(1)* %x
Then, eventually:
getelementptr float, ptr addrspace(1) %x
Importantly, the massive amount of test case churn has been automated by
same crappy python code. I had to manually update a few test cases that
wouldn't fit the script's model (r228970,r229196,r229197,r229198). The
python script just massages stdin and writes the result to stdout, I
then wrapped that in a shell script to handle replacing files, then
using the usual find+xargs to migrate all the files.
update.py:
import fileinput
import sys
import re
ibrep = re.compile(r"(^.*?[^%\w]getelementptr inbounds )(((?:<\d* x )?)(.*?)(| addrspace\(\d\)) *\*(|>)(?:$| *(?:%|@|null|undef|blockaddress|getelementptr|addrspacecast|bitcast|inttoptr|\[\[[a-zA-Z]|\{\{).*$))")
normrep = re.compile( r"(^.*?[^%\w]getelementptr )(((?:<\d* x )?)(.*?)(| addrspace\(\d\)) *\*(|>)(?:$| *(?:%|@|null|undef|blockaddress|getelementptr|addrspacecast|bitcast|inttoptr|\[\[[a-zA-Z]|\{\{).*$))")
def conv(match, line):
if not match:
return line
line = match.groups()[0]
if len(match.groups()[5]) == 0:
line += match.groups()[2]
line += match.groups()[3]
line += ", "
line += match.groups()[1]
line += "\n"
return line
for line in sys.stdin:
if line.find("getelementptr ") == line.find("getelementptr inbounds"):
if line.find("getelementptr inbounds") != line.find("getelementptr inbounds ("):
line = conv(re.match(ibrep, line), line)
elif line.find("getelementptr ") != line.find("getelementptr ("):
line = conv(re.match(normrep, line), line)
sys.stdout.write(line)
apply.sh:
for name in "$@"
do
python3 `dirname "$0"`/update.py < "$name" > "$name.tmp" && mv "$name.tmp" "$name"
rm -f "$name.tmp"
done
The actual commands:
From llvm/src:
find test/ -name *.ll | xargs ./apply.sh
From llvm/src/tools/clang:
find test/ -name *.mm -o -name *.m -o -name *.cpp -o -name *.c | xargs -I '{}' ../../apply.sh "{}"
From llvm/src/tools/polly:
find test/ -name *.ll | xargs ./apply.sh
After that, check-all (with llvm, clang, clang-tools-extra, lld,
compiler-rt, and polly all checked out).
The extra 'rm' in the apply.sh script is due to a few files in clang's test
suite using interesting unicode stuff that my python script was throwing
exceptions on. None of those files needed to be migrated, so it seemed
sufficient to ignore those cases.
Reviewers: rafael, dexonsmith, grosser
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7636
llvm-svn: 230786
calculations. Semantically non-functional change.
This gets rid of some of the SCEV -> Value -> SCEV round tripping and
the Construct(SMin|SMax)Of and MaybeSimplify helper routines.
llvm-svn: 230150
Splitting a loop to make range checks redundant is profitable only if
the range check "never" fails. Make this fact a part of recognizing a
range check -- a branch is a range check only if it is expected to
pass (via branch_weights metadata).
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7192
llvm-svn: 227249
There are places where the inductive range check elimination pass
depends on two llvm::Values or llvm::SCEVs to be of the same
llvm::Type when they do not need to be. This patch relaxes those
restrictions (by bailing out of the optimization if the types
mismatch), and adds test cases to trigger those paths.
These issues were found by bootstrapping clang with IRCE running in
the -O3 pass ordering.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7082
llvm-svn: 226793
IRCE eliminates range checks of the form
0 <= A * I + B < Length
by splitting a loop's iteration space into three segments in a way
that the check is completely redundant in the middle segment. As an
example, IRCE will convert
len = < known positive >
for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
if (0 <= i && i < len) {
do_something();
} else {
throw_out_of_bounds();
}
}
to
len = < known positive >
limit = smin(n, len)
// no first segment
for (i = 0; i < limit; i++) {
if (0 <= i && i < len) { // this check is fully redundant
do_something();
} else {
throw_out_of_bounds();
}
}
for (i = limit; i < n; i++) {
if (0 <= i && i < len) {
do_something();
} else {
throw_out_of_bounds();
}
}
IRCE can deal with multiple range checks in the same loop (it takes
the intersection of the ranges that will make each of them redundant
individually).
Currently IRCE does not do any profitability analysis. That is a
TODO.
Please note that the status of this pass is *experimental*, and it is
not part of any default pass pipeline. Having said that, I will love
to get feedback and general input from people interested in trying
this out.
This pass was originally r226201. It was reverted because it used C++
features not supported by MSVC 2012.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6693
llvm-svn: 226238
The change used C++11 features not supported by MSVC 2012. I will fix
the change to use things supported MSVC 2012 and recommit shortly.
llvm-svn: 226216
IRCE eliminates range checks of the form
0 <= A * I + B < Length
by splitting a loop's iteration space into three segments in a way
that the check is completely redundant in the middle segment. As an
example, IRCE will convert
len = < known positive >
for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
if (0 <= i && i < len) {
do_something();
} else {
throw_out_of_bounds();
}
}
to
len = < known positive >
limit = smin(n, len)
// no first segment
for (i = 0; i < limit; i++) {
if (0 <= i && i < len) { // this check is fully redundant
do_something();
} else {
throw_out_of_bounds();
}
}
for (i = limit; i < n; i++) {
if (0 <= i && i < len) {
do_something();
} else {
throw_out_of_bounds();
}
}
IRCE can deal with multiple range checks in the same loop (it takes
the intersection of the ranges that will make each of them redundant
individually).
Currently IRCE does not do any profitability analysis. That is a
TODO.
Please note that the status of this pass is *experimental*, and it is
not part of any default pass pipeline. Having said that, I will love
to get feedback and general input from people interested in trying
this out.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6693
llvm-svn: 226201
Max Kazantsev