Chandler mentioned at the last social that the need for BFI in the new pass manager was causing a slight hiccup for this pass. Given this code has been checked in, but off for over a year, it makes sense to just remove it for now.
Note that there's nothing wrong with the general idea - it's actually a quite good one - and once we have the infrastructure in place to implement this without the full recompuation on every loop, we absolutely should.
llvm-svn: 294715
Now that the call graph supports efficient replacement of a function and
spurious reference edges, we can port ArgumentPromotion to the new pass
manager very easily.
The old PM-specific bits are sunk into callbacks that the new PM simply
doesn't use. Unlike the old PM, the new PM simply does argument
promotion and afterward does the update to LCG reflecting the promoted
function.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29580
llvm-svn: 294667
This fold already existed for vectors but only when 'C1' was a splat
constant (but 'C2' could be any constant).
There were no tests for any vector constants, so I'm adding a test
that shows non-splat constants for both operands.
llvm-svn: 294650
Summary:
This patch allows JumpThreading also thread through guards.
Virtually, guard(cond) is equivalent to the following construction:
if (cond) { do something } else {deoptimize}
Yet it is not explicitly converted into IFs before lowering.
This patch enables early threading through guards in simple cases.
Currently it covers the following situation:
if (cond1) {
// code A
} else {
// code B
}
// code C
guard(cond2)
// code D
If there is implication cond1 => cond2 or !cond1 => cond2, we can transform
this construction into the following:
if (cond1) {
// code A
// code C
} else {
// code B
// code C
guard(cond2)
}
// code D
Thus, removing the guard from one of execution branches.
Patch by Max Kazantsev!
Reviewers: reames, apilipenko, igor-laevsky, anna, sanjoy
Reviewed By: sanjoy
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29620
llvm-svn: 294617
It turns out that some of our negative tests were not in fact providing the
test coverage we expected: they were passing because the vtables were failing
an early check that they were constant. Fix this by changing the globals in
these tests to constants.
llvm-svn: 294550
This module will contain nothing but vtable definitions and (soon)
available_externally function definitions, so there is no point in keeping
debug info in the module.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28913
llvm-svn: 294511
Making the cost model selecting between Interleave, GatherScatter or Scalar vectorization form of memory instruction.
The right decision should be done for non-consecutive memory access instrcuctions that may have more than one vectorization solution.
This patch includes the following changes:
- Cost Model calculates the cost of Load/Store vector form and choose the better option between Widening, Interleave, GatherScactter and Scalarization. Cost Model keeps the widening decision.
- Arrays of Uniform and Scalar values are moved from Legality to Cost Model.
- Cost Model collects Uniforms and Scalars per VF. The collection is based on CM decision map of Loadis/Stores vectorization form.
- Vectorization of memory instruction is performed according to the CM decision.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27919
llvm-svn: 294503
This test is under 'ArgumentPromotion' but there are no arguments that
get promoted in the test case, so there seems to be no point. Also,
there are no assertions about the output at all, so this seems like
something we should just delete given the low value.
llvm-svn: 294428
renaming things to at least have somewhat spelled out names, and even
have meaningful names where I could guess at what they should be.
Also add FileCheck assertions that we're actually doing what we set out
to do for some of the tests, for example not promoting a type that would
result in infinite promotion.
llvm-svn: 294426
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 adds a utility to build extended SSA (see "ABCD: eliminating
array bounds checks on demand"), and an intrinsic to support it. This
is then used to get functionality equivalent to propagateEquality in
GVN, in NewGVN (without having to replace instructions as we go). It
would work similarly in SCCP or other passes. This has been talked
about a few times, so i built a real implementation and tried to
productionize it.
Copies are inserted for operands used in assumes and conditional
branches that are based on comparisons (see below for more)
Every use affected by the predicate is renamed to the appropriate
intrinsic result.
E.g.
%cmp = icmp eq i32 %x, 50
br i1 %cmp, label %true, label %false
true:
ret i32 %x
false:
ret i32 1
will become
%cmp = icmp eq i32, %x, 50
br i1 %cmp, label %true, label %false
true:
; Has predicate info
; branch predicate info { TrueEdge: 1 Comparison: %cmp = icmp eq i32 %x, 50 }
%x.0 = call @llvm.ssa_copy.i32(i32 %x)
ret i32 %x.0
false:
ret i23 1
(you can use -print-predicateinfo to get an annotated-with-predicateinfo dump)
This enables us to easily determine what operations are affected by a
given predicate, and how operations affected by a chain of
predicates.
Reviewers: davide, sanjoy
Subscribers: mgorny, llvm-commits, Prazek
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29519
Update for review comments
Fix a bug Nuno noticed where we are giving information about and/or on edges where the info is not useful and easy to use wrong
Update for review comments
llvm-svn: 294351
This patch removes unneeded instructions from the existing ARM/AArch64
interleaved access cost model tests. I'll be adding a similar set of tests in a
follow-on patch to increase coverage.
llvm-svn: 294336
This reverts commit r294250. It caused PR31891.
Add a test case that shows that inlinable calls retain location
information with an accurate scope.
llvm-svn: 294317
Summary: Checking CS.getCalledFunction() == nullptr does not necessary indicate indirect call. We also need to check if CS.getCalledValue() is not a constant.
Reviewers: davidxl
Reviewed By: davidxl
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29570
llvm-svn: 294260
This breaks when one of the extra values is also a scalar that
participates in the same vectorization tree which we'll end up
reducing.
llvm-svn: 294245
In ValueMapper we create new operands for MDNodes and
rely on MDNode::replaceWithUniqued to create a new MDNode
with the specified operands. However this doesn't always
actually happen correctly for DISubprograms because when we
uniquify the new node, we only odr-compare it with existing nodes
(MDNodeSubsetEqualImpl<DISubprogram>::isDeclarationOfODRMember). Although
the TemplateParameters field can refer to a distinct DICompileUnit via
DITemplateTypeParameter::type -> DICompositeType::scope -> DISubprogram::unit,
it is not currently included in the odr comparison. As a result, we can end
up getting our original DISubprogram back, which means we will have a cloned
module referring to the DICompileUnit in the original module, which causes
a verification error.
The fix I implemented was to consider TemplateParameters to be one of the
odr-equal properties. But I'm a little uncomfortable with this. In general it
seems unsound to rely on distinct MDNodes never being reachable from nodes
which we only check odr-equality of. My only long term suggestion would be
to separate odr-uniquing from full uniquing.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29240
llvm-svn: 294240
Summary: When type casting of the return value is needed, promoteIndirectCall will return the type casting instruction instead of the direct call. This patch changed to return the direct call instruction instead.
Reviewers: davidxl
Reviewed By: davidxl
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29569
llvm-svn: 294205
tests.
This also removes the use of instcombine as we can max the patterns
produced by argument promotion directly with the more powerful tools in
FileCheck.
llvm-svn: 294174
This patch is based on the llvm-dev discussion here:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-January/109631.html
Folding to i1 should always be desirable because that's better for value tracking
and we have special folds for i1 types.
I checked for other users of shouldChangeType() where this might have an effect,
but we already handle the i1 case differently than other types in all of those cases.
Side note: the default datalayout includes i1, so it seems we only find this gap in
shouldChangeType + phi folding for the case when there is (1) an explicit datalayout
without i1, (2) casting to i1 from a legal type, and (3) a phi with exactly 2 incoming
casted operands (as Björn mentioned).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29336
llvm-svn: 294066
The code comments didn't match the code logic, and we didn't actually distinguish the fake unary (not/neg/fneg)
operators from arguments. Adding another level to the weighting scheme provides more structure and can help
simplify the pattern matching in InstCombine and other places.
I fixed regressions that would have shown up from this change in:
rL290067
rL290127
But that doesn't mean there are no pattern-matching logic holes left; some combines may just be missing regression tests.
Should fix:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=28296
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27933
llvm-svn: 294049
This generalizes memory access sorting to use differences between SCEVs,
instead of relying on constant offsets. That allows us to properly do
SLP vectorization of non-sequentially ordered loads within loops bodies.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29425
llvm-svn: 294027
Currently LLVM supports vectorization of horizontal reduction
instructions with initial value set to 0. Patch supports vectorization
of reduction with non-zero initial values. Also it supports a
vectorization of instructions with some extra arguments, like:
float f(float x[], int a, int b) {
float p = a % b;
p += x[0] + 3;
for (int i = 1; i < 32; i++)
p += x[i];
return p;
}
Patch allows vectorization of this kind of horizontal reductions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28961
llvm-svn: 293994
Exit loop analysis early if suitable private access found.
Do not account for GEPs which are invariant to loop induction variable.
Do not account for Allocas which are too big to fit into register file anyway.
Add option for tuning: -amdgpu-unroll-threshold-private.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29473
llvm-svn: 293991
Summary: While scanning predecessors to find an available loaded value, if the predecessor has a single predecessor, we can continue scanning through the single predecessor.
Reviewers: mcrosier, rengolin, reames, davidxl, haicheng
Reviewed By: rengolin
Subscribers: zzheng, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29200
llvm-svn: 293896
Philip Reames