Summary:
LSV was using two vector sets (heads and tails) to track pairs of adjiacent position to vectorize.
A recent optimization is trying to obtain the longest chain to vectorize and assumes the positions
in heads(H) and tails(T) match, which is not the case is there are multiple tails for the same head.
e.g.:
i1: store a[0]
i2: store a[1]
i3: store a[1]
Leads to:
H: i1
T: i2 i3
Instead of:
H: i1 i1
T: i2 i3
So the positions for instructions that follow i3 will have different indexes in H/T.
This patch resolves PR29148.
This issue also surfaced the fact that if the chain is too long, and TLI
returns a "not-fast" answer, the whole chain will be abandoned for
vectorization, even though a smaller one would be beneficial.
Added a testcase and FIXME for this.
Reviewers: tstellarAMD, arsenm, jlebar
Subscribers: mzolotukhin, wdng, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24057
llvm-svn: 280179
Summary:
TargetBaseAlign is no longer required since LSV checks if target allows misaligned accesses.
A constant defining a base alignment is still needed for stack accesses where alignment can be adjusted.
Previous patch (D22936) was reverted because tests were failing. This patch also fixes the cause of those failures:
- x86 failing tests either did not have the right target, or the right alignment.
- NVPTX failing tests did not have the right alignment.
- AMDGPU failing test (merge-stores) should allow vectorization with the given alignment but the target info
considers <3xi32> a non-standard type and gives up early. This patch removes the condition and only checks
for a maximum size allowed and relies on the next condition checking for %4 for correctness.
This should be revisited to include 3xi32 as a MVT type (on arsenm's non-immediate todo list).
Note that checking the sizeInBits for a MVT is undefined (leads to an assertion failure),
so we need to create an EVT, hence the interface change in allowsMisaligned to include the Context.
Reviewers: arsenm, jlebar, tstellarAMD
Subscribers: jholewinski, arsenm, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23068
llvm-svn: 277735
Summary:
This helps keep us honest -- there were a number of ways we could screw
up and still have passed this test.
Reviewers: asbirlea
Subscribers: llvm-commits, arsenm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D22531
llvm-svn: 276053
Summary:
LSV used to abort vectorizing a chain for interleaved load/store accesses that alias.
Allow a valid prefix of the chain to be vectorized, mark just the prefix and retry vectorizing the remaining chain.
Reviewers: llvm-commits, jlebar, arsenm
Subscribers: mzolotukhin
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D22119
llvm-svn: 275317
Summary:
Aiming to correct the ordering of loads/stores. This patch changes the
insert point for loads to the position of the first load.
It updates the ordering method for loads to insert before, rather than after.
Before this patch the following sequence:
"load a[1], store a[1], store a[0], load a[2]"
Would incorrectly vectorize to "store a[0,1], load a[1,2]".
The correctness check was assuming the insertion point for loads is at
the position of the first load, when in practice it was at the last
load. An alternative fix would have been to invert the correctness check.
The current fix changes insert position but also requires reordering of
instructions before the vectorized load.
Updated testcases to reflect the changes.
Reviewers: tstellarAMD, llvm-commits, jlebar, arsenm
Subscribers: mzolotukhin
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D22071
llvm-svn: 275117
Summary:
GetBoundryInstruction returns the last instruction as the instruction which follows or end(). Otherwise the last instruction in the boundry set is not being tested by isVectorizable().
Partially solve reordering of instructions. More extensive solution to follow.
Reviewers: tstellarAMD, llvm-commits, jlebar
Subscribers: escha, arsenm, mzolotukhin
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21934
llvm-svn: 274389
Alina Sbirlea