This pass hoists duplicated computations in the program. The primary goal of
gvn-hoist is to reduce the size of functions before inline heuristics to reduce
the total cost of function inlining.
Pass written by Sebastian Pop, Aditya Kumar, Xiaoyu Hu, and Brian Rzycki.
Important algorithmic contributions by Daniel Berlin under the form of reviews.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19338
llvm-svn: 274305
This is indeed a much cleaner approach (thanks to Daniel Berlin
for pointing out), and also David/Sean for review.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21454
llvm-svn: 273032
Daniel Berlin expressed some real concerns about the port and proposed
and alternative approach. I'll revert this for now while working on a
new patch, which I hope to put up for review shortly. Sorry for the churn.
llvm-svn: 272925
Nearly all the changes to this pass have been done while maintaining and
updating other parts of LLVM. LLVM has had another pass, SROA, which
has superseded ScalarReplAggregates for quite some time.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21316
llvm-svn: 272737
The need for all these Lookup* functions is just because of calls to
getAnalysis inside methods (i.e. not at the top level) of the
runOnFunction method. They should be straightforward to clean up when
the old PM is gone.
llvm-svn: 272615
Summary:
Implement guard widening in LLVM. Description from GuardWidening.cpp:
The semantics of the `@llvm.experimental.guard` intrinsic lets LLVM
transform it so that it fails more often that it did before the
transform. This optimization is called "widening" and can be used hoist
and common runtime checks in situations like these:
```
%cmp0 = 7 u< Length
call @llvm.experimental.guard(i1 %cmp0) [ "deopt"(...) ]
call @unknown_side_effects()
%cmp1 = 9 u< Length
call @llvm.experimental.guard(i1 %cmp1) [ "deopt"(...) ]
...
```
to
```
%cmp0 = 9 u< Length
call @llvm.experimental.guard(i1 %cmp0) [ "deopt"(...) ]
call @unknown_side_effects()
...
```
If `%cmp0` is false, `@llvm.experimental.guard` will "deoptimize" back
to a generic implementation of the same function, which will have the
correct semantics from that point onward. It is always _legal_ to
deoptimize (so replacing `%cmp0` with false is "correct"), though it may
not always be profitable to do so.
NB! This pass is a work in progress. It hasn't been tuned to be
"production ready" yet. It is known to have quadriatic running time and
will not scale to large numbers of guards
Reviewers: reames, atrick, bogner, apilipenko, nlewycky
Subscribers: mcrosier, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20143
llvm-svn: 269997
Summary:
As discussed on llvm-dev[1].
This change adds the basic boilerplate code around having this intrinsic
in LLVM:
- Changes in Intrinsics.td, and the IR Verifier
- A lowering pass to lower @llvm.experimental.guard to normal
control flow
- Inliner support
[1]: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-February/095523.html
Reviewers: reames, atrick, chandlerc, rnk, JosephTremoulet, echristo
Subscribers: mcrosier, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18527
llvm-svn: 264976
tests to run GVN in both modes.
This is mostly the boring refactoring just like SROA and other complex
transformation passes. There is some trickiness in that GVN's
ValueNumber class requires hand holding to get to compile cleanly. I'm
open to suggestions about a better pattern there, but I tried several
before settling on this. I was trying to balance my desire to sink as
much implementation detail into the source file as possible without
introducing overly many layers of abstraction.
Much like with SROA, the design of this system is made somewhat more
cumbersome by the need to support both pass managers without duplicating
the significant state and logic of the pass. The same compromise is
struck here.
I've also left a FIXME in a doxygen comment as the GVN pass seems to
have pretty woeful documentation within it. I'd like to submit this with
the FIXME and let those more deeply familiar backfill the information
here now that we have a nice place in an interface to put that kind of
documentaiton.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18019
llvm-svn: 263208
Summary:
Since this is an IR pass it's nice to be able to write tests without
llc. This is the counterpart of the llc test under
CodeGen/PowerPC/loop-data-prefetch.ll.
Reviewers: hfinkel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17464
llvm-svn: 261578
Summary:
When alias analysis is uncertain about the aliasing between any two accesses,
it will return MayAlias. This uncertainty from alias analysis restricts LICM
from proceeding further. In cases where alias analysis is uncertain we might
use loop versioning as an alternative.
Loop Versioning will create a version of the loop with aggressive aliasing
assumptions in addition to the original with conservative (default) aliasing
assumptions. The version of the loop making aggressive aliasing assumptions
will have all the memory accesses marked as no-alias. These two versions of
loop will be preceded by a memory runtime check. This runtime check consists
of bound checks for all unique memory accessed in loop, and it ensures the
lack of memory aliasing. The result of the runtime check determines which of
the loop versions is executed: If the runtime check detects any memory
aliasing, then the original loop is executed. Otherwise, the version with
aggressive aliasing assumptions is used.
The pass is off by default and can be enabled with command line option
-enable-loop-versioning-licm.
Reviewers: hfinkel, anemet, chatur01, reames
Subscribers: MatzeB, grosser, joker.eph, sanjoy, javed.absar, sbaranga,
llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9151
llvm-svn: 259986
Summary:
LoopVersioning is a transform utility that transform passes can use to
run-time disambiguate may-aliasing accesses. I'd like to also expose as
pass to allow it to be unit-tested.
I am planning to add support for non-aliasing annotation in
LoopVersioning and I'd like to be able to write tests directly using
this pass.
(After that feature is done, the pass could also be used to look for
optimization opportunities that are hidden behind incomplete alias
information at compile time.)
The pass drives LoopVersioning in its default way which is to fully
disambiguate may-aliasing accesses no matter how many checks are
required.
Reviewers: hfinkel, ashutosh.nema, sbaranga
Subscribers: zzheng, mssimpso, llvm-commits, sanjoy
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16612
llvm-svn: 259610
Loop transformations can sometimes fail because the loop, while in
valid rotated LCSSA form, is not in a canonical CFG form. This is
an extremely simple pass that just merges obviously redundant
blocks, which can be used to fix some known failure cases. In the
future, it may be enhanced with more cases (and have code shared with
SimplifyCFG).
This allows us to run LoopSimplifyCFG -> LoopRotate -> LoopUnroll,
so that SimplifyCFG cleans up the loop before Rotate tries to run.
Not currently used in the pass manager, since this pass doesn't do
anything unless you can hook it up in an LPM with other loop passes.
It'll be added once Chandler cleans up things to allow this.
Tested in a custom pipeline out of tree to confirm it works in
practice (in addition to the included trivial test).
llvm-svn: 259256
Summary:
The goal of this pass is to perform store-to-load forwarding across the
backedge of a loop. E.g.:
for (i)
A[i + 1] = A[i] + B[i]
=>
T = A[0]
for (i)
T = T + B[i]
A[i + 1] = T
The pass relies on loop dependence analysis via LoopAccessAnalisys to
find opportunities of loop-carried dependences with a distance of one
between a store and a load. Since it's using LoopAccessAnalysis, it was
easy to also add support for versioning away may-aliasing intervening
stores that would otherwise prevent this transformation.
This optimization is also performed by Load-PRE in GVN without the
option of multi-versioning. As was discussed with Daniel Berlin in
http://reviews.llvm.org/D9548, this is inferior to a more loop-aware
solution applied here. Hopefully, we will be able to remove some
complexity from GVN/MemorySSA as a consequence.
In the long run, we may want to extend this pass (or create a new one if
there is little overlap) to also eliminate loop-indepedent redundant
loads and store that *require* versioning due to may-aliasing
intervening stores/loads. I have some motivating cases for store
elimination. My plan right now is to wait for MemorySSA to come online
first rather than using memdep for this.
The main motiviation for this pass is the 456.hmmer loop in SPECint2006
where after distributing the original loop and vectorizing the top part,
we are left with the critical path exposed in the bottom loop. Being
able to promote the memory dependence into a register depedence (even
though the HW does perform store-to-load fowarding as well) results in a
major gain (~20%). This gain also transfers over to x86: it's
around 8-10%.
Right now the pass is off by default and can be enabled
with -enable-loop-load-elim. On the LNT testsuite, there are two
performance changes (negative number -> improvement):
1. -28% in Polybench/linear-algebra/solvers/dynprog: the length of the
critical paths is reduced
2. +2% in Polybench/stencils/adi: Unfortunately, I couldn't reproduce this
outside of LNT
The pass is scheduled after the loop vectorizer (which is after loop
distribution). The rational is to try to reuse LAA state, rather than
recomputing it. The order between LV and LLE is not critical because
normally LV does not touch scalar st->ld forwarding cases where
vectorizing would inhibit the CPU's st->ld forwarding to kick in.
LoopLoadElimination requires LAA to provide the full set of dependences
(including forward dependences). LAA is known to omit loop-independent
dependences in certain situations. The big comment before
removeDependencesFromMultipleStores explains why this should not occur
for the cases that we're interested in.
Reviewers: dberlin, hfinkel
Subscribers: junbuml, dberlin, mssimpso, rengolin, sanjoy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13259
llvm-svn: 252017
In some ways this is a very boring port to the new pass manager as there
are no interesting analyses or dependencies or other oddities.
However, this does introduce the first good example of a transformation
pass with non-trivial state porting to the new pass manager. I've tried
to carve out patterns here to replicate elsewhere, and would appreciate
comments on whether folks like these patterns:
- A common need in the new pass manager is to effectively lift the pass
class and some of its state into a public header file. Prior to this,
LLVM used anonymous namespaces to provide "module private" types and
utilities, but that doesn't scale to cases where a public header file
is needed and the new pass manager will exacerbate that. The pattern
I've adopted here is to use the namespace-cased-name of the core pass
(what would be a module if we had them) as a module-private namespace.
Then utility and other code can be declared and defined in this
namespace. At some point in the future, we could even have
(conditionally compiled) code that used modules features when
available to do the same basic thing.
- I've split the actual pass run method in two in order to expose
a private method usable by the old pass manager to wrap the new class
with a minimum of duplicated code. I actually looked at a bunch of
ways to automate or generate these, but they are all quite terrible
IMO. The fundamental need is to extract the set of analyses which need
to cross this interface boundary, and that will end up being too
unpredictable to effectively encapsulate IMO. This is also
a relatively small amount of boiler plate that will live a relatively
short time, so I'm not too worried about the fact that it is boiler
plate.
The rest of the patch is totally boring but results in a massive diff
(sorry). It just moves code around and removes or adds qualifiers to
reflect the new name and nesting structure.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12773
llvm-svn: 247501
with the new pass manager, and no longer relying on analysis groups.
This builds essentially a ground-up new AA infrastructure stack for
LLVM. The core ideas are the same that are used throughout the new pass
manager: type erased polymorphism and direct composition. The design is
as follows:
- FunctionAAResults is a type-erasing alias analysis results aggregation
interface to walk a single query across a range of results from
different alias analyses. Currently this is function-specific as we
always assume that aliasing queries are *within* a function.
- AAResultBase is a CRTP utility providing stub implementations of
various parts of the alias analysis result concept, notably in several
cases in terms of other more general parts of the interface. This can
be used to implement only a narrow part of the interface rather than
the entire interface. This isn't really ideal, this logic should be
hoisted into FunctionAAResults as currently it will cause
a significant amount of redundant work, but it faithfully models the
behavior of the prior infrastructure.
- All the alias analysis passes are ported to be wrapper passes for the
legacy PM and new-style analysis passes for the new PM with a shared
result object. In some cases (most notably CFL), this is an extremely
naive approach that we should revisit when we can specialize for the
new pass manager.
- BasicAA has been restructured to reflect that it is much more
fundamentally a function analysis because it uses dominator trees and
loop info that need to be constructed for each function.
All of the references to getting alias analysis results have been
updated to use the new aggregation interface. All the preservation and
other pass management code has been updated accordingly.
The way the FunctionAAResultsWrapperPass works is to detect the
available alias analyses when run, and add them to the results object.
This means that we should be able to continue to respect when various
passes are added to the pipeline, for example adding CFL or adding TBAA
passes should just cause their results to be available and to get folded
into this. The exception to this rule is BasicAA which really needs to
be a function pass due to using dominator trees and loop info. As
a consequence, the FunctionAAResultsWrapperPass directly depends on
BasicAA and always includes it in the aggregation.
This has significant implications for preserving analyses. Generally,
most passes shouldn't bother preserving FunctionAAResultsWrapperPass
because rebuilding the results just updates the set of known AA passes.
The exception to this rule are LoopPass instances which need to preserve
all the function analyses that the loop pass manager will end up
needing. This means preserving both BasicAAWrapperPass and the
aggregating FunctionAAResultsWrapperPass.
Now, when preserving an alias analysis, you do so by directly preserving
that analysis. This is only necessary for non-immutable-pass-provided
alias analyses though, and there are only three of interest: BasicAA,
GlobalsAA (formerly GlobalsModRef), and SCEVAA. Usually BasicAA is
preserved when needed because it (like DominatorTree and LoopInfo) is
marked as a CFG-only pass. I've expanded GlobalsAA into the preserved
set everywhere we previously were preserving all of AliasAnalysis, and
I've added SCEVAA in the intersection of that with where we preserve
SCEV itself.
One significant challenge to all of this is that the CGSCC passes were
actually using the alias analysis implementations by taking advantage of
a pretty amazing set of loop holes in the old pass manager's analysis
management code which allowed analysis groups to slide through in many
cases. Moving away from analysis groups makes this problem much more
obvious. To fix it, I've leveraged the flexibility the design of the new
PM components provides to just directly construct the relevant alias
analyses for the relevant functions in the IPO passes that need them.
This is a bit hacky, but should go away with the new pass manager, and
is already in many ways cleaner than the prior state.
Another significant challenge is that various facilities of the old
alias analysis infrastructure just don't fit any more. The most
significant of these is the alias analysis 'counter' pass. That pass
relied on the ability to snoop on AA queries at different points in the
analysis group chain. Instead, I'm planning to build printing
functionality directly into the aggregation layer. I've not included
that in this patch merely to keep it smaller.
Note that all of this needs a nearly complete rewrite of the AA
documentation. I'm planning to do that, but I'd like to make sure the
new design settles, and to flesh out a bit more of what it looks like in
the new pass manager first.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12080
llvm-svn: 247167
Eventually, we will need sample profiles to be incorporated into the
inliner's cost models. To do this, we need the sample profile pass to
be a module pass.
This patch makes no functional changes beyond the mechanical adjustments
needed to run SampleProfile as a module pass.
llvm-svn: 245940
This is the first mechanical step in preparation for making this and all
the other alias analysis passes available to the new pass manager. I'm
factoring out all the totally boring changes I can so I'm moving code
around here with no other changes. I've even minimized the formatting
churn.
I'll reformat and freshen comments on the interface now that its located
in the right place so that the substantive changes don't triger this.
llvm-svn: 244197
Summary:
This is a pass for speculative execution of instructions for simple if-then (triangle) control flow. It's aimed at GPUs, but could perhaps be used in other contexts. Enabling this pass gives us a 1.0% geomean improvement on Google benchmark suites, with one benchmark improving 33%.
Credit goes to Jingyue Wu for writing an earlier version of this pass.
Patched by Bjarke Roune.
Test Plan:
This patch adds a set of tests in test/Transforms/SpeculativeExecution/spec.ll
The pass is controlled by a flag which defaults to having the pass not run.
Reviewers: eliben, dberlin, meheff, jingyue, hfinkel
Reviewed By: jingyue, hfinkel
Subscribers: majnemer, jholewinski, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9360
llvm-svn: 237459
Summary:
This implements the initial version as was proposed earlier this year
(http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2015-January/080462.html).
Since then Loop Access Analysis was split out from the Loop Vectorizer
and was made into a separate analysis pass. Loop Distribution becomes
the second user of this analysis.
The pass is off by default and can be enabled
with -enable-loop-distribution. There is currently no notion of
profitability; if there is a loop with dependence cycles, the pass will
try to split them off from other memory operations into a separate loop.
I decided to remove the control-dependence calculation from this first
version. This and the issues with the PDT are actively discussed so it
probably makes sense to treat it separately. Right now I just mark all
terminator instruction required which keeps identical CFGs for each
distributed loop. This seems to be working pretty well for 456.hmmer
where even though there is an empty if-then block in the distributed
loop initially, it gets completely removed.
The pass keeps DominatorTree and LoopInfo updated. I've tested this
with -loop-distribute-verify with the testsuite where we distribute ~90
loops. SimplifyLoop is violated in some cases and I have a FIXME
covering this.
Reviewers: hfinkel, nadav, aschwaighofer
Reviewed By: aschwaighofer
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D8831
llvm-svn: 237358
Summary:
This transformation reassociates a n-ary add so that the add can partially reuse
existing instructions. For example, this pass can simplify
void foo(int a, int b) {
bar(a + b);
bar((a + 2) + b);
}
to
void foo(int a, int b) {
int t = a + b;
bar(t);
bar(t + 2);
}
saving one add instruction.
Fixes PR22357 (https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=22357).
Test Plan: nary-add.ll
Reviewers: broune, dberlin, hfinkel, meheff, sanjoy, atrick
Reviewed By: sanjoy, atrick
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D8950
llvm-svn: 234855
This re-adds float2int to the tree, after fixing PR23038. It turns
out the argument to APSInt() is true-if-unsigned, rather than
true-if-signed :(. Added testcase and explanatory comment.
llvm-svn: 233370
This caused PR23008, compiles failing with: "Use still stuck around after Def is
destroyed: %.sroa.speculated"
Also reverting follow-up r233064.
llvm-svn: 233105
It is possible to have code that converts from integer to float, performs operations then converts back, and the result is provably the same as if integers were used.
This can come from different sources, but the most obvious is a helper function that uses floats but the arguments given at an inlined callsites are integers.
This pass considers all integers requiring a bitwidth less than or equal to the bitwidth of the mantissa of a floating point type (23 for floats, 52 for doubles) as exactly representable in floating point.
To reduce the risk of harming efficient code, the pass only attempts to perform complete removal of inttofp/fptoint operations, not just move them around.
llvm-svn: 233062
Remove `DebugInfoVerifierLegacyPass` and the `-verify-di` pass.
Instead, call into the `DebugInfoVerifier` from inside
`VerifierLegacyPass::finalizeModule()`. This better matches the logic
in `verifyModule()` (used by the new PassManager), avoids requiring two
separate passes to verify the IR, and makes the API for "add a pass to
verify the IR" simple.
Note: the `-verify-debug-info` flag still works (for now, at least;
eventually it might make sense to just remove it).
llvm-svn: 232772
This pass interchanges loops to provide a more cache-friendly memory access.
For e.g. given a loop like -
for(int i=0;i<N;i++)
for(int j=0;j<N;j++)
A[j][i] = A[j][i]+B[j][i];
is interchanged to -
for(int j=0;j<N;j++)
for(int i=0;i<N;i++)
A[j][i] = A[j][i]+B[j][i];
This pass is currently disabled by default.
To give a brief introduction it consists of 3 stages-
LoopInterchangeLegality : Checks the legality of loop interchange based on Dependency matrix.
LoopInterchangeProfitability: A very basic heuristic has been added to check for profitibility. This will evolve over time.
LoopInterchangeTransform : Which does the actual transform.
LNT Performance tests shows improvement in Polybench/linear-algebra/kernels/mvt and Polybench/linear-algebra/kernels/gemver becnmarks.
TODO:
1) Add support for reductions and lcssa phi.
2) Improve profitability model.
3) Improve loop selection algorithm to select best loop for interchange. Currently the innermost loop is selected for interchange.
4) Improve compile time regression found in llvm lnt due to this pass.
5) Fix issues in Dependency Analysis module.
A special thanks to Hal for reviewing this code.
Review: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7499
llvm-svn: 231458
This patch consists of a single pass whose only purpose is to visit previous inserted gc.statepoints which do not have gc.relocates inserted yet, and insert them. This can be used either immediately after IR generation to perform 'early safepoint insertion' or late in the pass order to perform 'late insertion'.
This patch is setting the stage for work to continue in tree. In particular, there are known naming and style violations in the current patch. I'll try to get those resolved over the next week or so. As I touch each area to make style changes, I need to make sure we have adequate testing in place. As part of the cleanup, I will be cleaning up a collection of test cases we have out of tree and submitting them upstream. The tests included in this change are very basic and mostly to provide examples of usage.
The pass has several main subproblems it needs to address:
- First, it has identify any live pointers. In the current code, the use of address spaces to distinguish pointers to GC managed objects is hard coded, but this will become parametrizable in the near future. Note that the current change doesn't actually contain a useful liveness analysis. It was seperated into a followup change as the code wasn't ready to be shared. Instead, the current implementation just considers any dominating def of appropriate pointer type to be live.
- Second, it has to identify base pointers for each live pointer. This is a fairly straight forward data flow algorithm.
- Third, the information in the previous steps is used to actually introduce rewrites. Rather than trying to do this by hand, we simply re-purpose the code behind Mem2Reg to do this for us.
llvm-svn: 229945
Vitaly Buka