r272715 broke libcxx because it did not correctly handle cases where the
last iteration of one IV is the second-to-last iteration of another.
Original commit message:
Vectorizing loops with "escaping" IVs has been disabled since r190790, due to
PR17179. This re-enables it, with support for external use of both
"post-increment" (last iteration) and "pre-increment" (second-to-last iteration)
IVs.
llvm-svn: 272742
Vectorizing loops with "escaping" IVs has been disabled since r190790, due to
PR17179. This re-enables it, with support for external use of both
"post-increment" (last iteration) and "pre-increment" (second-to-last iteration)
IVs.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21048
llvm-svn: 272715
This patch and a relatec clang patch solve the problem of having to explicitly enable analysis when specifying a loop hint pragma to get the diagnostics. Passing AlwasyPrint as the pass name (see below) causes the front-end to print the diagnostic if the user has specified '-Rpass-analysis' without an '=<target-pass>’. Users of loop hints can pass that compiler option without having to specify the pass and they will get diagnostics for only those loops with loop hints.
llvm-svn: 244555
Essentially the same as the GEP change in r230786.
A similar migration script can be used to update test cases, though a few more
test case improvements/changes were required this time around: (r229269-r229278)
import fileinput
import sys
import re
pat = re.compile(r"((?:=|:|^)\s*load (?:atomic )?(?:volatile )?(.*?))(| addrspace\(\d+\) *)\*($| *(?:%|@|null|undef|blockaddress|getelementptr|addrspacecast|bitcast|inttoptr|\[\[[a-zA-Z]|\{\{).*$)")
for line in sys.stdin:
sys.stdout.write(re.sub(pat, r"\1, \2\3*\4", line))
Reviewers: rafael, dexonsmith, grosser
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7649
llvm-svn: 230794
"Unroll" is not the appropriate name for this variable. Clang already uses
the term "interleave" in pragmas and metadata for this.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5066
llvm-svn: 217528
We would have to compute the pre increment value, either by computing it on
every loop iteration or by splitting the edge out of the loop and inserting a
computation for it there.
For now, just give up vectorizing such loops.
Fixes PR17179.
llvm-svn: 190790
We check that instructions in the loop don't have outside users (except if
they are reduction values). Unfortunately, we skipped this check for
if-convertable PHIs.
Fixes PR16184.
llvm-svn: 183035
Michael Kuperstein