Commit Graph

7 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Eric Christopher cee313d288 Revert "Temporarily Revert "Add basic loop fusion pass.""
The reversion apparently deleted the test/Transforms directory.

Will be re-reverting again.

llvm-svn: 358552
2019-04-17 04:52:47 +00:00
Eric Christopher a863435128 Temporarily Revert "Add basic loop fusion pass."
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).

This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.

llvm-svn: 358546
2019-04-17 02:12:23 +00:00
Chad Rosier 45735b8e40 [LoopUnroll] Make LoopPeeling respect the AllowPeeling preference.
The SimpleLoopUnrollPass isn't suppose to perform loop peeling.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45334

llvm-svn: 329395
2018-04-06 13:57:21 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 751579cac0 [LoopPeeling] Get rid of Phis that become invariant after N steps
This patch is a generalization of the improvement introduced in rL296898.
Previously, we were able to peel one iteration of a loop to get rid of a Phi that becomes
an invariant on the 2nd iteration. In more general case, if a Phi becomes invariant after
N iterations, we can peel N times and turn it into invariant.
In order to do this, we for every Phi in loop's header we define the Invariant Depth value
which is calculated as follows:

Given %x = phi <Inputs from above the loop>, ..., [%y, %back.edge].

If %y is a loop invariant, then Depth(%x) = 1.
If %y is a Phi from the loop header, Depth(%x) = Depth(%y) + 1.
Otherwise, Depth(%x) is infinite.
Notice that if we peel a loop, all Phis with Depth = 1 become invariants,
and all other Phis with finite depth decrease the depth by 1.
Thus, peeling N first iterations allows us to turn all Phis with Depth <= N
into invariants.

Reviewers: reames, apilipenko, mkuper, skatkov, anna, sanjoy

Reviewed By: sanjoy

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31613

llvm-svn: 300446
2017-04-17 09:52:02 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 8ed6b66d85 [LoopPeeling] Fix condition for phi-eliminating peeling
When peeling loops basing on phis becoming invariants, we make a wrong loop size check.
UP.Threshold should be compared against the total numbers of instructions after the transformation,
which is equal to 2 * LoopSize in case of peeling one iteration.
We should also check that the maximum allowed number of peeled iterations is not zero.

Reviewers: sanjoy, anna, reames, mkuper

Reviewed By: mkuper

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31753

llvm-svn: 300441
2017-04-17 05:38:28 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 30c3538e2e [LoopUnrolling] Fix loop size check for peeling
Summary:
We should check if loop size allows us to peel at least one iteration
before we do so.

Patch by Max Kazantsev!

Reviewers: sanjoy, mkuper, efriedma

Reviewed By: mkuper

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30632

llvm-svn: 297122
2017-03-07 06:03:15 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 664c925a57 [LoopUnrolling] Peel loops with invariant backedge Phi input
Summary:
If a loop contains a Phi node which has an invariant input from back
edge, it is profitable to peel such loops (rather than unroll them) to
use the advantage that this Phi is always invariant starting from 2nd
iteration. After the 1st iteration is peeled, other optimizations can
potentially simplify calculations with this invariant.

Patch by Max Kazantsev!

Reviewers: sanjoy, apilipenko, igor-laevsky, anna, mkuper, reames

Reviewed By: mkuper

Subscribers: mkuper, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30161

llvm-svn: 296898
2017-03-03 18:19:15 +00:00