Commit Graph

6 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Philip Reames 20cbb6cdf8 [LoopPred] Selectively disable to preserve test cases
I'm about to enable the new loop predication transform by default.  It has the effect of completely destroying many read only loops - which happen to be a super common idiom in our test cases.  So as to preserve test coverage of other transforms, disable the new transform where it would cause sharp test coverage regressions.

(This is semantically part of the enabling commit.  It's committed separate to ease revert if the actual flag flip gets reverted.)
2019-11-06 15:41:57 -08:00
Philip Reames 8cbcd2f484 [IndVars] Eliminate loop exits with equivalent exit counts
We can end up with two loop exits whose exit counts are equivalent, but whose textual representation is different and non-obvious. For the sub-case where we have a series of exits which dominate one another (common), eliminate any exits which would iterate *after* a previous exit on the exiting iteration.

As noted in the TODO being removed, I'd always thought this was a good idea, but I've now seen this in a real workload as well.

Interestingly, in review, Nikita pointed out there's let another oppurtunity to leverage SCEV's reasoning.  If we kept track of the min of dominanting exits so far, we could discharge exits with EC >= MDE.  This is less powerful than the existing transform (since later exits aren't considered), but potentially more powerful for any case where SCEV can prove a >= b, but neither a == b or a > b.  I don't have an example to illustrate that oppurtunity, but won't be suprised if we find one and return to handle that case as well.  

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69009

llvm-svn: 375379
2019-10-20 23:38:02 +00:00
Philip Reames f8e7b53657 [IndVars, RLEV] Support rewriting exit values in loops without known exits (prep work)
This is a prepatory patch for future work on support exit value rewriting in loops with a mixture of computable and non-computable exit counts.  The intention is to be "mostly NFC" - i.e. not enable any interesting new transforms - but in practice, there are some small output changes.

The test differences are caused by cases wherewhere getSCEVAtScope can simplify a single entry phi without needing any knowledge of the loop.

llvm-svn: 367485
2019-07-31 21:15:21 +00:00
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
Max Kazantsev 2cbba56337 [IndVars] Fix usage of SCEVExpander to not mess with SCEVConstant. PR38674
This patch removes the function `expandSCEVIfNeeded` which behaves not as
it was intended. This function tries to make a lookup for exact existing expansion
and only goes to normal expansion via `expandCodeFor` if this lookup hasn't found
anything. As a result of this, if some instruction above the loop has a `SCEVConstant`
SCEV, this logic will return this instruction when asked for this `SCEVConstant` rather
than return a constant value. This is both non-profitable and in some cases leads to
breach of LCSSA form (as in PR38674).

Whether or not it is possible to break LCSSA with this algorithm and with some
non-constant SCEVs is still in question, this is still being investigated. I wasn't
able to construct such a test so far, so maybe this situation is impossible. If it is,
it will go as a separate fix.

Rather than do it, it is always correct to just invoke `expandCodeFor` unconditionally:
it behaves smarter about insertion points, and as side effect of this it will choose a
constant value for SCEVConstants. For other SCEVs it may end up finding a better insertion
point. So it should not be worse in any case.

NOTE: So far the only known case for which this transform may break LCSSA is mapping
of SCEVConstant to an instruction. However there is a suspicion that the entire algorithm
can compromise LCSSA form for other cases as well (yet not proved).

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51286
Reviewed By: etherzhhb

llvm-svn: 341345
2018-09-04 05:01:35 +00:00