optimizeEndCF removes EXEC restoring instruction case this instruction is the only one except the branch to the single successor and that successor contains EXEC mask restoring instruction that was lowered from END_CF belonging to IF_ELSE.
As a result of such optimization we get the basic block with the only one instruction that is a branch to the single successor.
In case the control flow can reach such an empty block from S_CBRANCH_EXEZ/EXECNZ it might happen that spill/reload instructions that were inserted later by register allocator are placed under exec == 0 condition and never execute.
Removing empty block solves the problem.
This change require further work to re-implement LIS updates. Recently, LIS is always nullptr in this pass. To enable it we need another patch to fix many places across the codegen.
Reviewed By: rampitec
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86634
We can only collapse adjacent SI_END_CF if outer statement
belongs to a simple SI_IF, otherwise correct mask is not in the
register we expect, but is an argument of an S_XOR instruction.
Even if SI_IF is simple it might be lowered using S_XOR because
lowering is dependent on a basic block layout. It is not
considered simple if instruction consuming its output is
not an SI_END_CF. Since that SI_END_CF might have already been
lowered to an S_OR isSimpleIf() check may return false.
This situation is an opportunity for a further optimization
of SI_IF lowering, but that is a separate optimization. In the
meanwhile move SI_END_CF post the lowering when we already know
how the rest of the CFG was lowered since a non-simple SI_IF
case still needs to be handled.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77610
Only collapse inner endcf if the outer one belongs to SI_IF.
If it does belong to SI_ELSE then mask being restored in fact
a partial inverse of what we need.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D76154
There are some functional regressions and I suspect our
scopes are not as perfectly enclosed as I expected.
Disable it for now.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D76148
This is to replace the optimization from the SIOptimizeExecMaskingPreRA.
We have less opportunities in the control flow lowering because many
VGPR copies are still in place and will be removed later, but we know
for sure an instruction is SI_END_CF and not just an arbitrary S_OR_B64
with EXEC.
The subsequent change needs to convert s_and_saveexec into s_and and
address new TODO lines in tests, then code block guarded by the
-amdgpu-remove-redundant-endcf option in the pre-RA exec mask optimizer
will be removed.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D76033
The assumption is that conditional regions are perfectly nested
and a mask restored at the exit from the inner block will be
completely covered by a mask restored in the outer.
It turns out with our current structurizer this is not always
the case.
Disable the optimization for now, but I want to keep it around
for a while to either try after further structurizer changes or
to move it into control flow lowering where we have more info
and reuse the test.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75958
Summary:
Extend cachepolicy operand in the new VMEM buffer intrinsics
to supply information whether the buffer data is swizzled.
Also, propagate this information to MIR.
Intrinsics updated:
int_amdgcn_raw_buffer_load
int_amdgcn_raw_buffer_load_format
int_amdgcn_raw_buffer_store
int_amdgcn_raw_buffer_store_format
int_amdgcn_raw_tbuffer_load
int_amdgcn_raw_tbuffer_store
int_amdgcn_struct_buffer_load
int_amdgcn_struct_buffer_load_format
int_amdgcn_struct_buffer_store
int_amdgcn_struct_buffer_store_format
int_amdgcn_struct_tbuffer_load
int_amdgcn_struct_tbuffer_store
Furthermore, disable merging of VMEM buffer instructions
in SI Load/Store optimizer, if the "swizzled" bit on the instruction
is on.
The default value of the bit is 0, meaning that data in buffer
is linear and buffer instructions can be merged.
There is no difference in the generated code with this commit.
However, in the future it will be expected that front-ends
use buffer intrinsics with correct "swizzled" bit set.
Reviewers: arsenm, nhaehnle, tpr
Reviewed By: nhaehnle
Subscribers: arsenm, kzhuravl, jvesely, wdng, nhaehnle, yaxunl, dstuttard, tpr, t-tye, arphaman, jfb, Petar.Avramovic, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68200
llvm-svn: 373491
This reverts commit 7a6ef3004655dd86d722199c471ae78c28e31bb4.
We discovered some internal test failures, so reverting for now.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61213
llvm-svn: 359363
Relying on no spill or other code being inserted before this was
precarious. It relied on code diligently checking isBasicBlockPrologue
which is likely to be forgotten.
Ideally this could be done earlier, but this doesn't work because of
phis. Any other instruction can't be placed before them, so we have to
accept the position being incorrect during SSA.
This avoids regressions in the fast register allocator rewrite from
inverting the direction.
llvm-svn: 357634
Also includes one example of how this transform is unsound. This isn't
verifying the copies are used in the control flow intrinisic patterns.
Also add option to disable exec mask opt pass. Since this pass is
unsound, it may be useful to turn it off until it is fixed.
llvm-svn: 357091
alex-t