The check for complexity compares the number of polyhedra in a set,
which are combined by disjunctions (union, "OR"),
not conjunctions (intersection, "AND").
llvm-svn: 268223
After zero-extend operations and unsigned comparisons we now allow
unsigned divisions. The handling is basically the same as for signed
division, except the interpretation of the operands. As the divisor
has to be constant in both cases we can simply interpret it as an
unsigned value without additional complexity in the representation.
For the dividend we could choose from the different representation
schemes introduced for zero-extend operations but for now we will
simply use an assumption.
llvm-svn: 268032
It does not suffice to take a global assumptions for unsigned comparisons but
we also need to adjust the invalid domain of the statements guarded by such
an assumption. To this end we allow to specialize the getPwAff call now in
order to indicate unsigned interpretation.
llvm-svn: 268025
A zero-extended value can be interpreted as a piecewise defined signed
value. If the value was non-negative it stays the same, otherwise it
is the sum of the original value and 2^n where n is the bit-width of
the original (or operand) type. Examples:
zext i8 127 to i32 -> { [127] }
zext i8 -1 to i32 -> { [256 + (-1)] } = { [255] }
zext i8 %v to i32 -> [v] -> { [v] | v >= 0; [256 + v] | v < 0 }
However, LLVM/Scalar Evolution uses zero-extend (potentially lead by a
truncate) to represent some forms of modulo computation. The left-hand side
of the condition in the code below would result in the SCEV
"zext i1 <false, +, true>for.body" which is just another description
of the C expression "i & 1 != 0" or, equivalently, "i % 2 != 0".
for (i = 0; i < N; i++)
if (i & 1 != 0 /* == i % 2 */)
/* do something */
If we do not make the modulo explicit but only use the mechanism described
above we will get the very restrictive assumption "N < 3", because for all
values of N >= 3 the SCEVAddRecExpr operand of the zero-extend would wrap.
Alternatively, we can make the modulo in the operand explicit in the
resulting piecewise function and thereby avoid the assumption on N. For the
example this would result in the following piecewise affine function:
{ [i0] -> [(1)] : 2*floor((-1 + i0)/2) = -1 + i0;
[i0] -> [(0)] : 2*floor((i0)/2) = i0 }
To this end we can first determine if the (immediate) operand of the
zero-extend can wrap and, in case it might, we will use explicit modulo
semantic to compute the result instead of emitting non-wrapping assumptions.
Note that operands with large bit-widths are less likely to be negative
because it would result in a very large access offset or loop bound after the
zero-extend. To this end one can optimistically assume the operand to be
positive and avoid the piecewise definition if the bit-width is bigger than
some threshold (here MaxZextSmallBitWidth).
We choose to go with a hybrid solution of all modeling techniques described
above. For small bit-widths (up to MaxZextSmallBitWidth) we will model the
wrapping explicitly and use a piecewise defined function. However, if the
bit-width is bigger than MaxZextSmallBitWidth we will employ overflow
assumptions and assume the "former negative" piece will not exist.
llvm-svn: 267408
The SCEVAffinator will now produce not only the isl representaiton of
a SCEV but also the domain under which it is invalid. This is used to
record possible overflows that can happen in the statement domains in
the statements invalid domain. The result is that invalid loads have
an accurate execution contexts with regards to the validity of their
statements domain. While the SCEVAffinator currently is only taking
"no-wrapping" assumptions, we can add more withouth worrying about the
execution context of loads that are optimistically hoisted.
llvm-svn: 267288
Utilizing the record option for assumptions we can simplify the wrapping
assumption generation a lot. Additionally, we can now report locations
together with wrapping assumptions, though they might not be accurate yet.
llvm-svn: 266069
If ScalarEvolution cannot look through some expression but we do, it
might happen that a multiplication will arrive at the
SCEVAffinator::visitMulExpr. While we could always try to improve the
extractConstantFactor function we might still miss something, thus we
reintroduce the code to generate multiplicative piecewise-affine
functions as a fall-back.
llvm-svn: 265777
This patch applies the restrictions on the number of domain conjuncts
also to the domain parts of piecewise affine expressions we generate.
To this end the wording is change slightly. It was needed to support
complex additions featuring zext-instructions but it also fixes PR27045.
lnt profitable runs reports only little changes that might be noise:
Compile Time:
Polybench/[...]/2mm +4.34%
SingleSource/[...]/stepanov_container -2.43%
Execution Time:
External/[...]/186_crafty -2.32%
External/[...]/188_ammp -1.89%
External/[...]/473_astar -1.87%
llvm-svn: 264514
The scope will be required in the following fix. This commit separates
the large changes that do not change behaviour from the small, but
functional change.
llvm-svn: 262664
So far we separated constant factors from multiplications, however,
only when they are at the outermost level of a parameter SCEV. Now,
we also separate constant factors from the parameter SCEV if the
outermost expression is a SCEVAddRecExpr. With the changes to the
SCEVAffinator we can now improve the extractConstantFactor(...)
function at will without worrying about any other code part. Thus,
if needed we can implement a more comprehensive
extractConstantFactor(...) function that will traverse the SCEV
instead of looking only at the outermost level.
Four test cases were affected. One did not change much and the other
three were simplified.
llvm-svn: 260859
If we encounter a <nsw> tagged AddRec for a loop we know the trip count of
that loop has to be bounded or the semantics is undefined anyway. Hence, we
only need to add unbounded assumptions if no such AddRec is known.
llvm-svn: 248128
This will allow to generate non-wrap assumptions for integer expressions
that are part of the SCoP. We compare the common isl representation of
the expression with one computed with modulo semantic. For all parameter
combinations they are not equal we can have integer overflows.
The nsw flags are respected when the modulo representation is computed,
nuw and nw flags are ignored for now.
In order to not increase compile time to much, the non-wrap assumptions
are collected in a separate boundary context instead of the assumed
context. This helps compile time as the boundary context can become
complex and it is therefor not advised to use it in other operations
except runtime check generation. However, the assumed context is e.g.,
used to tighten dependences. While the boundary context might help to
tighten the assumed context it is doubtful that it will help in practice
(it does not effect lnt much) as the boundary (or no-wrap assumptions)
only restrict the very end of the possible value range of parameters.
PET uses a different approach to compute the no-wrap context, though lnt runs
have shown that this version performs slightly better for us.
llvm-svn: 247732
Due to the new domain generation, the SCoP keeps track of the domain
for all blocks, thus the SCEVAffinator can now work with blocks to avoid
duplication of the domains.
llvm-svn: 247731
Use ISL to compute the loop trip count when scalar evolution is unable to do
so.
Contributed-by: Matthew Simpson <mssimpso@codeaurora.org>
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9444
llvm-svn: 246142
While the compile time is not affected by this patch much it will
allow us to look at all translated expressions after the SCoP is build
in a convenient way. Additionally, bigger SCoPs or SCoPs with
repeating complicated expressions might benefit from the cache later
on.
Reviewers: grosser, Meinersbur
Subscribers: #polly
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11975
llvm-svn: 244734
This change has three major advantages:
- The ScopInfo becomes smaller.
- It allows to use the SCEVAffinator from outside the ScopInfo.
- A member object allows state which in turn allows e.g., caching.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9099
llvm-svn: 244730
Michael Kruse