This implements the most basic possible nosync inference. The choice of inference rule is taken from the comments in attributor and the discussion on the review of the change which introduced the nosync attribute (0626367202).
This is deliberately minimal. As noted in code comments, I do plan to add a more robust inference which actually scans the function IR directly, but a) I need to do some refactoring of the attributor code to use common interfaces, and b) I wanted to get something in. I also wanted to minimize the "interesting" analysis discussion since that's time intensive.
Context: This combines with existing nofree attribute inference to help prove dereferenceability in the ongoing deref-at-point semantics work.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99749
This fixes an issue introduced with my change d4648e, and reported in pr49768.
The root problem is that dominance collapses in unreachable code, and that LoopInfo explicitly only models reachable code. Since the recurrence matcher doesn't filter by reachability (and can't easily because not all consumers have domtree), we need to bailout before assuming that finding a recurrence implies we found a loop.
This marks FSIN and other operations to EXPAND for scalable
vectors, so that they are not assumed to be legal by the cost-model.
Depends on D97470
Reviewed By: dmgreen, paulwalker-arm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D97471
Let getIntrinsicInstrCost call getTypeBasedIntrinsicInstrCost for scalable vectors,
similar to how this is done for fixed-width vectors, instead of falling back
on BaseT::getIntrinsicInstrCost().
If the intrinsic cannot be costed (or is not overloaded by the target),
it will return InstructionCost::getInvalid() instead.
Depends on D97469
Reviewed By: david-arm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D97470
We previously made a change to getUserCost to return a Invalid cost
when one of the TTI costs returned '-1' (meaning 'unknown' or
'infinitely expensive'). It makes no sense to say that:
shufflevector <2 x i8> %x, <2 x i8> %y, <4 x i32> <i32 0, i32 1, i32 2, i32 3>
has an invalid cost. Perhaps the cost is not known, but the IR is valid
and can be code-generated. Invalid should only be used for IR that
cannot possibly be code-generated and where a cost is nonsensical.
With more passes now asserting that the cost must be valid, it is possible
that those assertions will fail for perfectly valid IR. An incomplete
cost-model probably shouldn't be a reason for the compiler to break.
It's better to consider these costs as 'very expensive' and ignore them
for other reasons. At some point, we should consider replacing -1 with
some other mechanism.
Reviewed By: paulwalker-arm, dmgreen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99502
The following operations have no associated cost for them
when applied to scalable vectors, and as a consequence
can trigger a crash when a call is made to
AArch64TTIImpl::getCastInstrCost():
- fptrunc
- trunc
- fpext
- fpto(u,s)i
This patch adds costs for these operations and
relevant regression tests.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98934
This can only happen if offset types that are larger than the
pointer size are involved. The previous implementation did not
assert in this case because it initialized the APInts to the
width of one of the variables -- though I strongly suspect it
did not compute correct results in this case.
Fixes https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=32621
reported by fhahn.
The current linear expression decomposition handles zext/sext by
decomposing the casted operand, and then checking NUW/NSW flags
to determine whether the extension can be distributed. This has
some disadvantages:
First, it is not possible to perform a partial decomposition. If
we have zext((x + C1) +<nuw> C2) then we will fail to decompose
the expression entirely, even though it would be safe and
profitable to decompose it to zext(x + C1) +<nuw> zext(C2)
Second, we may end up performing unnecessary decompositions,
which will later be discarded because they lack nowrap flags
necessary for extensions.
Third, correctness of the code is not entirely obvious: At a high
level, we encounter zext(x -<nuw> C) in the form of a zext on the
linear expression x + (-C) with nuw flag set. Notably, this case
must be treated as zext(x) + -zext(C) rather than zext(x) + zext(-C).
The code handles this correctly by speculatively zexting constants
to the final bitwidth, and performing additional fixup if the
actual extension turns out to be an sext. This was not immediately
obvious to me.
This patch inverts the approach: An ExtendedValue represents a
zext(sext(V)), and linear expression decomposition will try to
decompose V further, either by absorbing another sext/zext into the
ExtendedValue, or by distributing zext(sext(x op C)) over a binary
operator with appropriate nsw/nuw flags. At each step we can
determine whether distribution is legal and abort with a partial
decomposition if not. We also know which extensions we need to
apply to constants, and don't need to speculate or fixup.
While explicit sext instructions were handled correctly, the
implicit sext that occurs if the offset is smaller than the
pointer size blindly assumed that sext(X * Scale + Offset) is the
same as sext(X) * Scale + Offset, which is obviously not correct.
Fix this by extracting the code that handles linear expression
extension and reusing it for the implicit sext as well.
A number of variables need to be correctly initialized on entry
to GetLinearExpression() for the implementation to behave reasonably.
The fact that SExtBits can currenlty be non-zero on entry is a bug,
as demonstrated by the added test: For implicit sexts by the GEP,
we do currently skip legality checks.
Nowrap flags between mul and shl differ in that mul nsw allows
multiplication of 1 * INT_MIN, while shl nsw does not. This means
that it is always fine to transfer shl nowrap flags to muls, but
not necessarily the other way around. In this case the NUW/NSW
results refer to mul/add operations, so it's fine to retain the
flags from the shl.
Handle (x << s) != (y << s) where x != y and the shifts are
non-wrapping. Once again, this establishes parity with the
corresponing mul fold that already exists. The shift case is
more powerful because we don't need to guard against multiplies
by zero.
This handles the pattern X != X << C for non-zero X and C and a
non-overflowing shift. This establishes parity with the corresponing
fold for multiplies.
This is mainly for clarity: It doesn't make sense to do any
negative/positive checks when dealing with a nuw add/mul. These
only make sense to nsw add/mul.
This patch adds a few test cases where currently NoAlias is returned,
but the pointers can alias if the multiply overflows while computing
a GEP index value.
loop:
%cmp.0 = phi i32 [ 3, %entry ], [ %inc, %loop ]
%pos.0 = phi i32 [ 1, %entry ], [ %cmp.0, %loop ]
...
%inc = add i32 %cmp.0, 1
br label %loop
On above example, %pos.0 uses previous iteration's %cmp.0 with backedge
according to PHI's instruction's defintion. If the %inc is not same among
iterations, we can say the two PHIs are not same.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98422
All of these are scoped allocations which remain dereferenceable during the lifetime of the callee.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99310
getMinRVVVectorSizeInBits() asserts if the V extension isn't
enabled. So check that gather/scatter is legal first since it
already contains a check for V extension being enabled. It
also already checks getMinRVVVectorSizeInBits for fixed length
vectors so we don't need a check in getGatherScatterOpCost.
This implements a subset of the initial set of inference rules proposed in the llvm-dev thread "RFC: Decomposing deref(N) into deref(N) + nofree". The nolias one got moved to a separate review as there was some concerns raised which require further discussion.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99135
SCEV currently tries to prove implications of x pred y by also
trying to imply ~y pred ~x. This is expensive in terms of
compile-time (in fact, the majority of isImpliedCond compile-time
is spent here) and generally not fruitful. The issue is that this
also swaps the operands and thus breaks canonical ordering. If
originally we were trying to prove an implication like
X > C1 -> Y > C2, then we'll now try to prove X > C1 -> C3 > ~Y,
which will not work.
The only real case where we can get some use out of this transform
is if the original conditions were in the form X > C1 -> Y < C2, were
then swapped to X > C1 -> C2 > Y and are then swapped again here to
X > C1 -> ~Y > C3.
As such, handle this at a higher level, where we are doing the
swapping in the first place. There's four different ways that we
can line up a predicate and a swapped predicate, so we use some
heuristics to pick some profitable way.
Because we now try this transform at a higher level
(isImpliedCondOperands rather than isImpliedCondOperandsHelper),
we can also prove additional facts. Of the added tests, one was
proven previously while the other wasn't.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90926
This fixes a regression reported on D99022: If a call has operand
bundles, then the inaccessiblememonly attribute on the function
will be ignored, as operand bundles can affect modref behavior in
the general case. However, for assume operand bundles in particular
this is not the case.
Adjust getModRefBehavior() to always report inaccessiblememonly
for assumes, regardless of presence of operand bundles.
This patch adds a new llvm.experimental.stepvector intrinsic,
which takes no arguments and returns a linear integer sequence of
values of the form <0, 1, ...>. It is primarily intended for
scalable vectors, although it will work for fixed width vectors
too. It is intended that later patches will make use of this
new intrinsic when vectorising induction variables, currently only
supported for fixed width. I've added a new CreateStepVector
method to the IRBuilder, which will generate a call to this
intrinsic for scalable vectors and fall back on creating a
ConstantVector for fixed width.
For scalable vectors this intrinsic is lowered to a new ISD node
called STEP_VECTOR, which takes a single constant integer argument
as the step. During lowering this argument is set to a value of 1.
The reason for this additional argument at the codegen level is
because in future patches we will introduce various generic DAG
combines such as
mul step_vector(1), 2 -> step_vector(2)
add step_vector(1), step_vector(1) -> step_vector(2)
shl step_vector(1), 1 -> step_vector(2)
etc.
that encourage a canonical format for all targets. This hopefully
means all other targets supporting scalable vectors can benefit
from this too.
I've added cost model tests for both fixed width and scalable
vectors:
llvm/test/Analysis/CostModel/AArch64/neon-stepvector.ll
llvm/test/Analysis/CostModel/AArch64/sve-stepvector.ll
as well as codegen lowering tests for fixed width and scalable
vectors:
llvm/test/CodeGen/AArch64/neon-stepvector.ll
llvm/test/CodeGen/AArch64/sve-stepvector.ll
See this thread for discussion of the intrinsic:
https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2021-January/147943.html
This patch exploits the knowledge that we may be running many fewer than bitwidth iterations of the loop, and may be able to disallow the overflow case. This patch specifically implements only the shl case, but this can be generalized to ashr and lshr without difficulty.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98222
X != X * C is true if:
* C is not 0 or 1
* X is not 0
* mul is nsw or nuw
Proof: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/uwF29z
This is motivated by one of the cases in D98422.
The scalarization overhead was set deliberately high for MVE, whilst the
codegen was new. It helps protect us against the negative ramifications
of mixing scalar and vector instructions. This decreases that,
especially for floating point where the cost of extracting/inserting
lane elements can be low. For integer the cost is still fairly high due
to the cross-register-bank copy, but is no longer n^2 in the length of
the vector.
In general, this will decrease the cost of scalarizing floats and long
integer vectors. i64 increase in cost, having a high cost before and
after this patch. For floats this allows up to start doing things like
vectorizing fdiv instructions, even if they are scalarized.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98245
The generic cost of logical or/and reductions should be cost of bitcast
<ReduxWidth x i1> to iReduxWidth + cmp eq|ne iReduxWidth.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D97961
By definition of Implication operator, `false -> true` and `false -> false`. It means that
`false` implies any predicate, no matter true or false. We don't need to go any further
trying to prove the statement we need and just always say that `false` implies it in this case.
In practice it means that we are trying to prove something guarded by `false` condition,
which means that this code is unreachable, and we can safely prove any fact or perform any
transform in this code.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98706
Reviewed By: lebedev.ri
This uses the shuffle mask cost from D98206 to give a better cost of MVE
VREV instructions. This helps especially in VectorCombine where the cost
of shuffles is used to reorder bitcasts, which this helps keep the phase
ordering test for fp16 reductions producing optimal code. The isVREVMask
has been moved to a header file to allow it to be used across target
transform and isel lowering.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98210
BasicAA stores a reference to LoopInfo inside. This imposes an implicit
requirement of keeping it up to date whenever we modify the IR (in particular,
whenever we modify terminators of blocks that belong to loops). Failing
to do so leads to incorrect state of the LoopInfo.
Because general AA does not require loop info updates and provides to API to
update it properly, the users of AA reasonably assume that there is no need to
update the loop info. It may be a reason of bugs, as example in PR43276 shows.
This patch drops dependence of BasicAA on LoopInfo to avoid this problem.
This may potentially pessimize the result of queries to BasicAA.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98627
Reviewed By: nikic
Philip Reames