Commit Graph

48 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Max Kazantsev f5e72b54ac [NFC] Get rid of hard-coded value ID in test
llvm-svn: 317303
2017-11-03 07:30:45 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 6f5229d7da Revert rL311205 "[IRCE] Fix buggy behavior in Clamp"
This patch reverts rL311205 that was initially a wrong fix. The real problem
was in intersection of signed and unsigned ranges (see rL316552), and the
patch being reverted masked the problem instead of fixing it.

By now, the test against which rL311205 was made works OK even without this
code. This revert patch also contains a test case that demonstrates incorrect
behavior caused by rL311205: it is caused by incorrect choise of signed max
instead of unsigned.

llvm-svn: 317088
2017-11-01 13:21:56 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 84286ce5dd [IRCE][NFC] Rename fields of InductiveRangeCheck
Rename `Offset`, `Scale`, `Length` into `Begin`, `Step`, `End` respectively
to make naming of similar entities for Ranges and Range Checks more
consistent.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39414

llvm-svn: 316979
2017-10-31 06:19:05 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 390fc57771 [IRCE][NFC] Store Length as SCEV in RangeCheck instead of Value
llvm-svn: 316889
2017-10-30 09:35:16 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 9ac7021a25 [IRCE] Fix intersection between signed and unsigned ranges
IRCE for unsigned latch conditions was temporarily disabled by rL314881. The motivating
example contained an unsigned latch condition and a signed range check. One of the safe
iteration ranges was `[1, SINT_MAX + 1]`. Its right border was incorrectly interpreted as a negative
value in `IntersectRange` function, this lead to a miscompile under which we deleted a range check
without inserting a postloop where it was needed.

This patch brings back IRCE for unsigned latch conditions. Now we treat range intersection more
carefully. If the latch condition was unsigned, we only try to consider a range check for deletion if:
1. The range check is also unsigned, or
2. Safe iteration range of the range check lies within `[0, SINT_MAX]`.
The same is done for signed latch.

Values from `[0, SINT_MAX]` are unambiguous, these values are non-negative under any interpretation,
and all values of a range intersected with such range are also non-negative.

We also use signed/unsigned min/max functions for range intersection depending on type of the
latch condition.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38581

llvm-svn: 316552
2017-10-25 06:47:39 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 4332a943bc [IRCE] Smarter detection of empty ranges using SCEV
For a SCEV range, this patch replaces the naive emptiness check for SCEV ranges
which looks like `Begin == End` with a SCEV check. The range is guaranteed to be
empty of `Begin >= End`. We should filter such ranges out and do not try to perform
IRCE for them.

For example, we can get such range when intersecting range `[A, B)` and `[C, D)`
where `A < B < C < D`. The resulting range is `[max(A, C), min(B, D)) = [C, B)`.
This range is empty, but its `Begin` does not match with `End`.

Making IRCE for an empty range is basically safe but unprofitable because we
never actually get into the main loop where the range checks are supposed to
be eliminated. This patch uses SCEV mechanisms to treat loops with proved
`Begin >= End` as empty.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39082

llvm-svn: 316550
2017-10-25 06:10:02 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 25d8655dc2 [IRCE] Do not process empty safe ranges
IRCE should not apply when the safe iteration range is proved to be empty.
In this case we do unneeded job creating pre/post loops and then never
go to the main loop.

This patch makes IRCE not apply to empty safe ranges, adds test for this
situation and also modifies one of existing tests where it used to happen
slightly.

Reviewed By: anna
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38577

llvm-svn: 315437
2017-10-11 06:53:07 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 8aacef6cae [IRCE] Temporarily disable unsigned latch conditions by default
We have found some corner cases connected to range intersection where IRCE makes
a bad thing when the latch condition is unsigned. The fix for that will go as a follow up.
This patch temporarily disables IRCE for unsigned latch conditions until the issue is fixed.

The unsigned latch conditions were introduced to IRCE by rL310027.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38529

llvm-svn: 314881
2017-10-04 06:53:22 +00:00
Serguei Katkov 675e304ef8 Revert "Re-enable "[IRCE] Identify loops with latch comparison against current IV value""
Revert the patch causing the functional failures.
The patch owner is notified with test cases which fail.
Test case has been provided to Maxim offline.

llvm-svn: 313857
2017-09-21 04:50:41 +00:00
Max Kazantsev d7b0f74c64 Re-enable "[IRCE] Identify loops with latch comparison against current IV value"
Re-applying after the found bug was fixed.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36215

llvm-svn: 312783
2017-09-08 10:15:05 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 57db44838d diff --git a/lib/Transforms/Scalar/InductiveRangeCheckElimination.cpp b/lib/Transforms/Scalar/InductiveRangeCheckElimination.cpp
index f72a808..9fa49fd 100644
--- a/lib/Transforms/Scalar/InductiveRangeCheckElimination.cpp
+++ b/lib/Transforms/Scalar/InductiveRangeCheckElimination.cpp
@@ -450,20 +450,10 @@ struct LoopStructure {
   // equivalent to:
   //
   // intN_ty inc = IndVarIncreasing ? 1 : -1;
-  // pred_ty predicate = IndVarIncreasing
-  //                         ? IsSignedPredicate ? ICMP_SLT : ICMP_ULT
-  //                         : IsSignedPredicate ? ICMP_SGT : ICMP_UGT;
+  // pred_ty predicate = IndVarIncreasing ? ICMP_SLT : ICMP_SGT;
   //
-  //
-  // for (intN_ty iv = IndVarStart; predicate(IndVarBase, LoopExitAt);
-  //      iv = IndVarNext)
+  // for (intN_ty iv = IndVarStart; predicate(iv, LoopExitAt); iv = IndVarBase)
   //   ... body ...
-  //
-  // Here IndVarBase is either current or next value of the induction variable.
-  // in the former case, IsIndVarNext = false and IndVarBase points to the
-  // Phi node of the induction variable. Otherwise, IsIndVarNext = true and
-  // IndVarBase points to IV increment instruction.
-  //
 
   Value *IndVarBase;
   Value *IndVarStart;
@@ -471,13 +461,12 @@ struct LoopStructure {
   Value *LoopExitAt;
   bool IndVarIncreasing;
   bool IsSignedPredicate;
-  bool IsIndVarNext;
 
   LoopStructure()
       : Tag(""), Header(nullptr), Latch(nullptr), LatchBr(nullptr),
         LatchExit(nullptr), LatchBrExitIdx(-1), IndVarBase(nullptr),
         IndVarStart(nullptr), IndVarStep(nullptr), LoopExitAt(nullptr),
-        IndVarIncreasing(false), IsSignedPredicate(true), IsIndVarNext(false) {}
+        IndVarIncreasing(false), IsSignedPredicate(true) {}
 
   template <typename M> LoopStructure map(M Map) const {
     LoopStructure Result;
@@ -493,7 +482,6 @@ struct LoopStructure {
     Result.LoopExitAt = Map(LoopExitAt);
     Result.IndVarIncreasing = IndVarIncreasing;
     Result.IsSignedPredicate = IsSignedPredicate;
-    Result.IsIndVarNext = IsIndVarNext;
     return Result;
   }
 
@@ -841,42 +829,21 @@ LoopStructure::parseLoopStructure(ScalarEvolution &SE,
     return false;
   };
 
-  // `ICI` can either be a comparison against IV or a comparison of IV.next.
-  // Depending on the interpretation, we calculate the start value differently.
+  // `ICI` is interpreted as taking the backedge if the *next* value of the
+  // induction variable satisfies some constraint.
 
-  // Pair {IndVarBase; IsIndVarNext} semantically designates whether the latch
-  // comparisons happens against the IV before or after its value is
-  // incremented. Two valid combinations for them are:
-  //
-  // 1) { phi [ iv.start, preheader ], [ iv.next, latch ]; false },
-  // 2) { iv.next; true }.
-  //
-  // The latch comparison happens against IndVarBase which can be either current
-  // or next value of the induction variable.
   const SCEVAddRecExpr *IndVarBase = cast<SCEVAddRecExpr>(LeftSCEV);
   bool IsIncreasing = false;
   bool IsSignedPredicate = true;
-  bool IsIndVarNext = false;
   ConstantInt *StepCI;
   if (!IsInductionVar(IndVarBase, IsIncreasing, StepCI)) {
     FailureReason = "LHS in icmp not induction variable";
     return None;
   }
 
-  const SCEV *IndVarStart = nullptr;
-  // TODO: Currently we only handle comparison against IV, but we can extend
-  // this analysis to be able to deal with comparison against sext(iv) and such.
-  if (isa<PHINode>(LeftValue) &&
-      cast<PHINode>(LeftValue)->getParent() == Header)
-    // The comparison is made against current IV value.
-    IndVarStart = IndVarBase->getStart();
-  else {
-    // Assume that the comparison is made against next IV value.
-    const SCEV *StartNext = IndVarBase->getStart();
-    const SCEV *Addend = SE.getNegativeSCEV(IndVarBase->getStepRecurrence(SE));
-    IndVarStart = SE.getAddExpr(StartNext, Addend);
-    IsIndVarNext = true;
-  }
+  const SCEV *StartNext = IndVarBase->getStart();
+  const SCEV *Addend = SE.getNegativeSCEV(IndVarBase->getStepRecurrence(SE));
+  const SCEV *IndVarStart = SE.getAddExpr(StartNext, Addend);
   const SCEV *Step = SE.getSCEV(StepCI);
 
   ConstantInt *One = ConstantInt::get(IndVarTy, 1);
@@ -1060,7 +1027,6 @@ LoopStructure::parseLoopStructure(ScalarEvolution &SE,
   Result.IndVarIncreasing = IsIncreasing;
   Result.LoopExitAt = RightValue;
   Result.IsSignedPredicate = IsSignedPredicate;
-  Result.IsIndVarNext = IsIndVarNext;
 
   FailureReason = nullptr;
 
@@ -1350,9 +1316,8 @@ LoopConstrainer::RewrittenRangeInfo LoopConstrainer::changeIterationSpaceEnd(
                                       BranchToContinuation);
 
     NewPHI->addIncoming(PN->getIncomingValueForBlock(Preheader), Preheader);
-    auto *FixupValue =
-        LS.IsIndVarNext ? PN->getIncomingValueForBlock(LS.Latch) : PN;
-    NewPHI->addIncoming(FixupValue, RRI.ExitSelector);
+    NewPHI->addIncoming(PN->getIncomingValueForBlock(LS.Latch),
+                        RRI.ExitSelector);
     RRI.PHIValuesAtPseudoExit.push_back(NewPHI);
   }
 
@@ -1735,10 +1700,7 @@ bool InductiveRangeCheckElimination::runOnLoop(Loop *L, LPPassManager &LPM) {
   }
   LoopStructure LS = MaybeLoopStructure.getValue();
   const SCEVAddRecExpr *IndVar =
-      cast<SCEVAddRecExpr>(SE.getSCEV(LS.IndVarBase));
-  if (LS.IsIndVarNext)
-    IndVar = cast<SCEVAddRecExpr>(SE.getMinusSCEV(IndVar,
-                                                  SE.getSCEV(LS.IndVarStep)));
+      cast<SCEVAddRecExpr>(SE.getMinusSCEV(SE.getSCEV(LS.IndVarBase), SE.getSCEV(LS.IndVarStep)));
 
   Optional<InductiveRangeCheck::Range> SafeIterRange;
   Instruction *ExprInsertPt = Preheader->getTerminator();
diff --git a/test/Transforms/IRCE/latch-comparison-against-current-value.ll b/test/Transforms/IRCE/latch-comparison-against-current-value.ll
deleted file mode 100644
index afea0e6..0000000
--- a/test/Transforms/IRCE/latch-comparison-against-current-value.ll
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,182 +0,0 @@
-; RUN: opt -verify-loop-info -irce-print-changed-loops -irce -S < %s 2>&1 | FileCheck %s
-
-; Check that IRCE is able to deal with loops where the latch comparison is
-; done against current value of the IV, not the IV.next.
-
-; CHECK: irce: in function test_01: constrained Loop at depth 1 containing: %loop<header><exiting>,%in.bounds<latch><exiting>
-; CHECK: irce: in function test_02: constrained Loop at depth 1 containing: %loop<header><exiting>,%in.bounds<latch><exiting>
-; CHECK-NOT: irce: in function test_03: constrained Loop at depth 1 containing: %loop<header><exiting>,%in.bounds<latch><exiting>
-; CHECK-NOT: irce: in function test_04: constrained Loop at depth 1 containing: %loop<header><exiting>,%in.bounds<latch><exiting>
-
-; SLT condition for increasing loop from 0 to 100.
-define void @test_01(i32* %arr, i32* %a_len_ptr) #0 {
-
-; CHECK:      test_01
-; CHECK:        entry:
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %exit.mainloop.at = load i32, i32* %a_len_ptr, !range !0
-; CHECK-NEXT:     [[COND2:%[^ ]+]] = icmp slt i32 0, %exit.mainloop.at
-; CHECK-NEXT:     br i1 [[COND2]], label %loop.preheader, label %main.pseudo.exit
-; CHECK:        loop:
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %idx = phi i32 [ %idx.next, %in.bounds ], [ 0, %loop.preheader ]
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %idx.next = add nuw nsw i32 %idx, 1
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %abc = icmp slt i32 %idx, %exit.mainloop.at
-; CHECK-NEXT:     br i1 true, label %in.bounds, label %out.of.bounds.loopexit1
-; CHECK:        in.bounds:
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %addr = getelementptr i32, i32* %arr, i32 %idx
-; CHECK-NEXT:     store i32 0, i32* %addr
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %next = icmp slt i32 %idx, 100
-; CHECK-NEXT:     [[COND3:%[^ ]+]] = icmp slt i32 %idx, %exit.mainloop.at
-; CHECK-NEXT:     br i1 [[COND3]], label %loop, label %main.exit.selector
-; CHECK:        main.exit.selector:
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %idx.lcssa = phi i32 [ %idx, %in.bounds ]
-; CHECK-NEXT:     [[COND4:%[^ ]+]] = icmp slt i32 %idx.lcssa, 100
-; CHECK-NEXT:     br i1 [[COND4]], label %main.pseudo.exit, label %exit
-; CHECK-NOT: loop.preloop:
-; CHECK:        loop.postloop:
-; CHECK-NEXT:    %idx.postloop = phi i32 [ %idx.copy, %postloop ], [ %idx.next.postloop, %in.bounds.postloop ]
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %idx.next.postloop = add nuw nsw i32 %idx.postloop, 1
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %abc.postloop = icmp slt i32 %idx.postloop, %exit.mainloop.at
-; CHECK-NEXT:     br i1 %abc.postloop, label %in.bounds.postloop, label %out.of.bounds.loopexit
-
-entry:
-  %len = load i32, i32* %a_len_ptr, !range !0
-  br label %loop
-
-loop:
-  %idx = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %idx.next, %in.bounds ]
-  %idx.next = add nsw nuw i32 %idx, 1
-  %abc = icmp slt i32 %idx, %len
-  br i1 %abc, label %in.bounds, label %out.of.bounds
-
-in.bounds:
-  %addr = getelementptr i32, i32* %arr, i32 %idx
-  store i32 0, i32* %addr
-  %next = icmp slt i32 %idx, 100
-  br i1 %next, label %loop, label %exit
-
-out.of.bounds:
-  ret void
-
-exit:
-  ret void
-}
-
-; ULT condition for increasing loop from 0 to 100.
-define void @test_02(i32* %arr, i32* %a_len_ptr) #0 {
-
-; CHECK:      test_02
-; CHECK:        entry:
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %exit.mainloop.at = load i32, i32* %a_len_ptr, !range !0
-; CHECK-NEXT:     [[COND2:%[^ ]+]] = icmp ult i32 0, %exit.mainloop.at
-; CHECK-NEXT:     br i1 [[COND2]], label %loop.preheader, label %main.pseudo.exit
-; CHECK:        loop:
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %idx = phi i32 [ %idx.next, %in.bounds ], [ 0, %loop.preheader ]
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %idx.next = add nuw nsw i32 %idx, 1
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %abc = icmp ult i32 %idx, %exit.mainloop.at
-; CHECK-NEXT:     br i1 true, label %in.bounds, label %out.of.bounds.loopexit1
-; CHECK:        in.bounds:
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %addr = getelementptr i32, i32* %arr, i32 %idx
-; CHECK-NEXT:     store i32 0, i32* %addr
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %next = icmp ult i32 %idx, 100
-; CHECK-NEXT:     [[COND3:%[^ ]+]] = icmp ult i32 %idx, %exit.mainloop.at
-; CHECK-NEXT:     br i1 [[COND3]], label %loop, label %main.exit.selector
-; CHECK:        main.exit.selector:
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %idx.lcssa = phi i32 [ %idx, %in.bounds ]
-; CHECK-NEXT:     [[COND4:%[^ ]+]] = icmp ult i32 %idx.lcssa, 100
-; CHECK-NEXT:     br i1 [[COND4]], label %main.pseudo.exit, label %exit
-; CHECK-NOT: loop.preloop:
-; CHECK:        loop.postloop:
-; CHECK-NEXT:    %idx.postloop = phi i32 [ %idx.copy, %postloop ], [ %idx.next.postloop, %in.bounds.postloop ]
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %idx.next.postloop = add nuw nsw i32 %idx.postloop, 1
-; CHECK-NEXT:     %abc.postloop = icmp ult i32 %idx.postloop, %exit.mainloop.at
-; CHECK-NEXT:     br i1 %abc.postloop, label %in.bounds.postloop, label %out.of.bounds.loopexit
-
-entry:
-  %len = load i32, i32* %a_len_ptr, !range !0
-  br label %loop
-
-loop:
-  %idx = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %idx.next, %in.bounds ]
-  %idx.next = add nsw nuw i32 %idx, 1
-  %abc = icmp ult i32 %idx, %len
-  br i1 %abc, label %in.bounds, label %out.of.bounds
-
-in.bounds:
-  %addr = getelementptr i32, i32* %arr, i32 %idx
-  store i32 0, i32* %addr
-  %next = icmp ult i32 %idx, 100
-  br i1 %next, label %loop, label %exit
-
-out.of.bounds:
-  ret void
-
-exit:
-  ret void
-}
-
-; Same as test_01, but comparison happens against IV extended to a wider type.
-; This test ensures that IRCE rejects it and does not falsely assume that it was
-; a comparison against iv.next.
-; TODO: We can actually extend the recognition to cover this case.
-define void @test_03(i32* %arr, i64* %a_len_ptr) #0 {
-
-; CHECK:      test_03
-
-entry:
-  %len = load i64, i64* %a_len_ptr, !range !1
-  br label %loop
-
-loop:
-  %idx = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %idx.next, %in.bounds ]
-  %idx.next = add nsw nuw i32 %idx, 1
-  %idx.ext = sext i32 %idx to i64
-  %abc = icmp slt i64 %idx.ext, %len
-  br i1 %abc, label %in.bounds, label %out.of.bounds
-
-in.bounds:
-  %addr = getelementptr i32, i32* %arr, i32 %idx
-  store i32 0, i32* %addr
-  %next = icmp slt i32 %idx, 100
-  br i1 %next, label %loop, label %exit
-
-out.of.bounds:
-  ret void
-
-exit:
-  ret void
-}
-
-; Same as test_02, but comparison happens against IV extended to a wider type.
-; This test ensures that IRCE rejects it and does not falsely assume that it was
-; a comparison against iv.next.
-; TODO: We can actually extend the recognition to cover this case.
-define void @test_04(i32* %arr, i64* %a_len_ptr) #0 {
-
-; CHECK:      test_04
-
-entry:
-  %len = load i64, i64* %a_len_ptr, !range !1
-  br label %loop
-
-loop:
-  %idx = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %idx.next, %in.bounds ]
-  %idx.next = add nsw nuw i32 %idx, 1
-  %idx.ext = sext i32 %idx to i64
-  %abc = icmp ult i64 %idx.ext, %len
-  br i1 %abc, label %in.bounds, label %out.of.bounds
-
-in.bounds:
-  %addr = getelementptr i32, i32* %arr, i32 %idx
-  store i32 0, i32* %addr
-  %next = icmp ult i32 %idx, 100
-  br i1 %next, label %loop, label %exit
-
-out.of.bounds:
-  ret void
-
-exit:
-  ret void
-}
-
-!0 = !{i32 0, i32 50}
-!1 = !{i64 0, i64 50}

llvm-svn: 312775
2017-09-08 04:26:41 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 0a9c1ef2eb [IRCE] Identify loops with latch comparison against current IV value
Current implementation of parseLoopStructure interprets the latch comparison as a
comarison against `iv.next`. If the actual comparison is made against the `iv` current value
then the loop may be rejected, because this misinterpretation leads to incorrect evaluation
of the latch start value.

This patch teaches the IRCE to distinguish this kind of loops and perform the optimization
for them. Now we use `IndVarBase` variable which can be either next or current value of the
induction variable (previously we used `IndVarNext` which was always the value on next iteration).

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36215

llvm-svn: 312221
2017-08-31 07:04:20 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 0aaf8c16ac [IRCE] Fix buggy behavior in Clamp
Clamp function was too optimistic when choosing signed or unsigned min/max function for calculations.
In fact, `!IsSignedPredicate` guarantees us that `Smallest` and `Greatest` can be compared safely using unsigned
predicates, but we did not check this for `S` which can in theory be negative.

This patch makes Clamp use signed min/max for cases when it fails to prove `S` being non-negative,
and it adds a test where such situation may lead to incorrect conditions calculation.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36873

llvm-svn: 311205
2017-08-18 22:50:29 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 2f6ae28152 [IRCE] Handle loops with step different from 1/-1
This patch generalizes IRCE to handle IV steps that are not equal to 1 or -1.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35539

llvm-svn: 310032
2017-08-04 07:01:04 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 07da1ab23a [IRCE] Recognize loops with unsigned latch conditions
This patch enables recognition of loops with ult/ugt latch conditions.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35302

llvm-svn: 310027
2017-08-04 05:40:20 +00:00
Max Kazantsev d18b019193 [NFC] Remove obsolete profiling data from eq_ne test
llvm-svn: 309670
2017-08-01 10:13:29 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 2c627a97fd [IRCE] Recognize loops with ne/eq latch conditions
In some particular cases eq/ne conditions can be turned into equivalent
slt/sgt conditions. This patch teaches parseLoopStructure to handle some
of these cases.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35010

llvm-svn: 308264
2017-07-18 04:53:48 +00:00
Max Kazantsev f80ffa1a78 [IRCE] Fix corner case with Start = INT_MAX
When iterating through loop

  for (int i = INT_MAX; i > 0; i--)

We fail to generate the pre-loop for it. It happens because we use the
overflown value in a comparison predicate when identifying whether or not
we need it.

In old logic, we used SLE predicate against Greatest value which exceeds all
seen values of the IV and might be overflown. Now we use the GreatestSeen
value of this IV with SLT predicate.

Also added a test that ensures that a pre-loop is generated for such loops.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35347

llvm-svn: 308001
2017-07-14 06:35:03 +00:00
Anna Thomas 7218032019 [IRCE] Canonicalize pre/post loops after the blocks are added into parent loop
Summary:
We were canonizalizing the pre loop (into loop-simplify form) before
the post loop blocks were added into parent loop. This is incorrect when IRCE is
done on a subloop. The post-loop blocks are created, but not yet added to the
parent loop. So, loop-simplification on the pre-loop incorrectly updates
LoopInfo.

This patch corrects the ordering so that pre and post loop blocks are added to
parent loop (if any), and then the loops are canonicalized to LCSSA and
LoopSimplifyForm.

Reviewers: reames, sanjoy, apilipenko

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33846

llvm-svn: 304800
2017-06-06 14:54:01 +00:00
Sanjoy Das ec892139bd [IRCE] Add a missing invariant check
Currently IRCE relies on the loops it transforms to be (semantically) of
the form:

  for (i = START; i < END; i++)
    ...

or

  for (i = START; i > END; i--)
    ...

However, we were not verifying the presence of the START < END entry
check (i.e. check before the first iteration).  We were only verifying
that the backedge was guarded by (i + 1) < END.

Usually this would work "fine" since (especially in Java) most loops do
actually have the START < END check, but of course that is not
guaranteed.

llvm-svn: 294375
2017-02-07 23:59:07 +00:00
Anna Thomas 65ca8e91cc [IRCE] Avoid loop optimizations on pre and post loops
Summary:
This patch will add loop metadata on the pre and post loops generated by IRCE.
Currently, we have metadata for disabling optimizations such as vectorization,
unrolling, loop distribution and LICM versioning (and confirmed that these
optimizations check for the metadata before proceeding with the transformation).

The pre and post loops generated by IRCE need not go through loop opts (since
these are slow paths).

Added two test cases as well.

Reviewers: sanjoy, reames

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26806

llvm-svn: 289588
2016-12-13 21:05:21 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 2143447c73 [IRCE] Create llvm::Loop instances for cloned out loops
llvm-svn: 278618
2016-08-14 01:04:46 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 7a18a238c6 [IRCE] Don't iterate on loops that were cloned out
IRCE has the ability to further version pre-loops and post-loops that it
created, but this isn't useful at all.  This change teaches IRCE to
leave behind some metadata in the loops it creates (by cloning the main
loop) so that these new loops are not re-processed by IRCE.

Today this bug is hidden by another bug -- IRCE does not update LoopInfo
properly so the loop pass manager does not re-invoke IRCE on the loops
it split out.  However, once the latter is fixed the bug addressed in
this change causes IRCE to infinite-loop in some cases (e.g. it splits
out a pre-loop, a pre-pre-loop from that, a pre-pre-pre-loop from that
and so on).

llvm-svn: 278617
2016-08-14 01:04:36 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 1b1272f515 [IRCE] Fix test case; NFC
The (negative) test case is supposed to check that IRCE does not muck
with range checks it cannot handle, not that it does the right thing in
the absence of profiling information.

llvm-svn: 278612
2016-08-13 23:36:40 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 2a2f14d7ab [IRCE] Be resilient in the face of non-simplified loops
Loops containing `indirectbr` may not be in simplified form, even after
running LoopSimplify.  Reject then gracefully, instead of tripping an
assert.

llvm-svn: 278611
2016-08-13 23:36:35 +00:00
Sanjoy Das cf181867a6 [IRCE] Preserve loop-simplify form
Fixes PR28764.  Right now there is no way to test this, but (as
mentioned on the PR) with Michael Zolotukhin's yet to be checked in
LoopSimplify verfier, 8 of the llvm-lit tests for IRCE crash.

llvm-svn: 277891
2016-08-06 00:01:56 +00:00
Sanjoy Das f45e03e201 [IRCE] Preserve DomTree and LCSSA
This changes IRCE to "preserve" LCSSA and DomTree by recomputing them.
It still does not preserve LoopSimplify.

llvm-svn: 277505
2016-08-02 19:31:54 +00:00
Sanjoy Das aae623f4c2 [IRCE] Don't misuse CHECK-LABEL; NFC
llvm-svn: 276373
2016-07-22 00:41:02 +00:00
Sanjoy Das bb969791b4 [IRCE] Add an option to skip profitability checks
If `-irce-skip-profitability-checks` is passed in, IRCE will kick in in
all cases where it is legal for it to kick in.  This flag is intended to
help diagnose and analyse performance issues.

llvm-svn: 276372
2016-07-22 00:40:56 +00:00
Sanjoy Das a099268e85 [IRCE] Optimize conjunctions of range checks
After this change, we do the expected thing for cases like

```
Check0Passed = /* range check IRCE can optimize */
Check1Passed = /* range check IRCE can optimize */
if (!(Check0Passed && Check1Passed))
  throw_Exception();
```

llvm-svn: 270804
2016-05-26 00:09:02 +00:00
Sanjoy Das aa83c47bab [IRCE] Optimize "uses" not branches; NFCI
This changes IRCE to optimize uses, and not branches.  This change is
NFCI since the uses we do inspect are in practice only ever going to be
the condition use in conditional branches; but this flexibility will
later allow us to analyze more complex expressions than just a direct
branch on a range check.

llvm-svn: 270500
2016-05-23 22:16:45 +00:00
Wei Mi a49559befb [SCEV] Try to reuse existing value during SCEV expansion
Current SCEV expansion will expand SCEV as a sequence of operations
and doesn't utilize the value already existed. This will introduce
redundent computation which may not be cleaned up throughly by
following optimizations.

This patch introduces an ExprValueMap which is a map from SCEV to the
set of equal values with the same SCEV. When a SCEV is expanded, the
set of values is checked and reused whenever possible before generating
a sequence of operations.

The original commit triggered regressions in Polly tests. The regressions
exposed two problems which have been fixed in current version.

1. Polly will generate a new function based on the old one. To generate an
instruction for the new function, it builds SCEV for the old instruction,
applies some tranformation on the SCEV generated, then expands the transformed
SCEV and insert the expanded value into new function. Because SCEV expansion
may reuse value cached in ExprValueMap, the value in old function may be
inserted into new function, which is wrong.
   In SCEVExpander::expand, there is a logic to check the cached value to
be used should dominate the insertion point. However, for the above
case, the check always passes. That is because the insertion point is
in a new function, which is unreachable from the old function. However
for unreachable node, DominatorTreeBase::dominates thinks it will be
dominated by any other node.
   The fix is to simply add a check that the cached value to be used in
expansion should be in the same function as the insertion point instruction.

2. When the SCEV is of scConstant type, expanding it directly is cheaper than
reusing a normal value cached. Although in the cached value set in ExprValueMap,
there is a Constant type value, but it is not easy to find it out -- the cached
Value set is not sorted according to the potential cost. Existing reuse logic
in SCEVExpander::expand simply chooses the first legal element from the cached
value set.
   The fix is that when the SCEV is of scConstant type, don't try the reuse
logic. simply expand it.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12090

llvm-svn: 259736
2016-02-04 01:27:38 +00:00
Wei Mi 97de385868 Revert r259662, which caused regressions on polly tests.
llvm-svn: 259675
2016-02-03 18:05:57 +00:00
Wei Mi ed133978a0 [SCEV] Try to reuse existing value during SCEV expansion
Current SCEV expansion will expand SCEV as a sequence of operations
and doesn't utilize the value already existed. This will introduce
redundent computation which may not be cleaned up throughly by
following optimizations.

This patch introduces an ExprValueMap which is a map from SCEV to the
set of equal values with the same SCEV. When a SCEV is expanded, the
set of values is checked and reused whenever possible before generating
a sequence of operations.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12090

llvm-svn: 259662
2016-02-03 17:05:12 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 337d46b36f [IRCE] Fix a regression introduced in r232444.
IRCE should not try to eliminate range checks that check an induction
variable against a loop-varying length.

llvm-svn: 233101
2015-03-24 19:29:18 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 1ac93a5d89 [IRCE] Re-commit tests cases.
Re-commit the test cases added in r232444.  These now use
-irce-print-changed-loops and -irce-print-range-checks so they run
correctly on a without asserts build of llvm.

llvm-svn: 232452
2015-03-17 01:40:24 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 95d041215a [IRCE] Delete two tests.
I accidentally checked in two tests that used -debug-only -- these fail
on a release LLVM build.  Temporarily delete these from the repo to keep
the bots green while I fix this locally.

llvm-svn: 232446
2015-03-17 00:54:50 +00:00
Sanjoy Das e2cde6f195 [IRCE] Support half-range checks.
This change to IRCE gets it to recognize "half" range checks.  Half
range checks are range checks that only either check if the index is
`slt` some positive integer ("length") or if the index is `sge` `0`.

The range solver does not try to be clever / aggressive about solving
half-range checks -- it transforms "I < L" to "0 <= I < L" and "0 <= I"
to "0 <= I < INT_SMAX".  This is safe, but not always optimal.

llvm-svn: 232444
2015-03-17 00:42:13 +00:00
David Blaikie a79ac14fa6 [opaque pointer type] Add textual IR support for explicit type parameter to load instruction
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
2015-02-27 21:17:42 +00:00
David Blaikie 79e6c74981 [opaque pointer type] Add textual IR support for explicit type parameter to getelementptr instruction
One of several parallel first steps to remove the target type of pointers,
replacing them with a single opaque pointer type.

This adds an explicit type parameter to the gep instruction so that when the
first parameter becomes an opaque pointer type, the type to gep through is
still available to the instructions.

* This doesn't modify gep operators, only instructions (operators will be
  handled separately)

* Textual IR changes only. Bitcode (including upgrade) and changing the
  in-memory representation will be in separate changes.

* geps of vectors are transformed as:
    getelementptr <4 x float*> %x, ...
  ->getelementptr float, <4 x float*> %x, ...
  Then, once the opaque pointer type is introduced, this will ultimately look
  like:
    getelementptr float, <4 x ptr> %x
  with the unambiguous interpretation that it is a vector of pointers to float.

* address spaces remain on the pointer, not the type:
    getelementptr float addrspace(1)* %x
  ->getelementptr float, float addrspace(1)* %x
  Then, eventually:
    getelementptr float, ptr addrspace(1) %x

Importantly, the massive amount of test case churn has been automated by
same crappy python code. I had to manually update a few test cases that
wouldn't fit the script's model (r228970,r229196,r229197,r229198). The
python script just massages stdin and writes the result to stdout, I
then wrapped that in a shell script to handle replacing files, then
using the usual find+xargs to migrate all the files.

update.py:
import fileinput
import sys
import re

ibrep = re.compile(r"(^.*?[^%\w]getelementptr inbounds )(((?:<\d* x )?)(.*?)(| addrspace\(\d\)) *\*(|>)(?:$| *(?:%|@|null|undef|blockaddress|getelementptr|addrspacecast|bitcast|inttoptr|\[\[[a-zA-Z]|\{\{).*$))")
normrep = re.compile(       r"(^.*?[^%\w]getelementptr )(((?:<\d* x )?)(.*?)(| addrspace\(\d\)) *\*(|>)(?:$| *(?:%|@|null|undef|blockaddress|getelementptr|addrspacecast|bitcast|inttoptr|\[\[[a-zA-Z]|\{\{).*$))")

def conv(match, line):
  if not match:
    return line
  line = match.groups()[0]
  if len(match.groups()[5]) == 0:
    line += match.groups()[2]
  line += match.groups()[3]
  line += ", "
  line += match.groups()[1]
  line += "\n"
  return line

for line in sys.stdin:
  if line.find("getelementptr ") == line.find("getelementptr inbounds"):
    if line.find("getelementptr inbounds") != line.find("getelementptr inbounds ("):
      line = conv(re.match(ibrep, line), line)
  elif line.find("getelementptr ") != line.find("getelementptr ("):
    line = conv(re.match(normrep, line), line)
  sys.stdout.write(line)

apply.sh:
for name in "$@"
do
  python3 `dirname "$0"`/update.py < "$name" > "$name.tmp" && mv "$name.tmp" "$name"
  rm -f "$name.tmp"
done

The actual commands:
From llvm/src:
find test/ -name *.ll | xargs ./apply.sh
From llvm/src/tools/clang:
find test/ -name *.mm -o -name *.m -o -name *.cpp -o -name *.c | xargs -I '{}' ../../apply.sh "{}"
From llvm/src/tools/polly:
find test/ -name *.ll | xargs ./apply.sh

After that, check-all (with llvm, clang, clang-tools-extra, lld,
compiler-rt, and polly all checked out).

The extra 'rm' in the apply.sh script is due to a few files in clang's test
suite using interesting unicode stuff that my python script was throwing
exceptions on. None of those files needed to be migrated, so it seemed
sufficient to ignore those cases.

Reviewers: rafael, dexonsmith, grosser

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7636

llvm-svn: 230786
2015-02-27 19:29:02 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 54ad996ca2 IRCE: add a test case for r230619.
llvm-svn: 230680
2015-02-26 20:14:32 +00:00
Sanjoy Das e75ed92630 IRCE: generalize to handle loops with decreasing induction variables.
IRCE can now split the iteration space for loops like:

   for (i = n; i >= 0; i--)
     a[i + k] = 42; // bounds check on access

llvm-svn: 230618
2015-02-26 08:19:31 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 7fc60da2f5 IRCE: use SCEVs instead of llvm::Value's for intermediate
calculations.  Semantically non-functional change.

This gets rid of some of the SCEV -> Value -> SCEV round tripping and
the Construct(SMin|SMax)Of and MaybeSimplify helper routines.

llvm-svn: 230150
2015-02-21 22:07:32 +00:00
Sanjoy Das dcf2651043 Teach IRCE to look at branch weights when recognizing range checks
Splitting a loop to make range checks redundant is profitable only if
the range check "never" fails. Make this fact a part of recognizing a
range check -- a branch is a range check only if it is expected to
pass (via branch_weights metadata).

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7192

llvm-svn: 227249
2015-01-27 21:38:12 +00:00
Sanjoy Das d1fb13ce4c Fix crashes in IRCE caused by mismatched types
There are places where the inductive range check elimination pass
depends on two llvm::Values or llvm::SCEVs to be of the same
llvm::Type when they do not need to be. This patch relaxes those
restrictions (by bailing out of the optimization if the types
mismatch), and adds test cases to trigger those paths.

These issues were found by bootstrapping clang with IRCE running in
the -O3 pass ordering.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7082

llvm-svn: 226793
2015-01-22 08:29:18 +00:00
Sanjoy Das a1837a342d Add a new pass "inductive range check elimination"
IRCE eliminates range checks of the form

  0 <= A * I + B < Length

by splitting a loop's iteration space into three segments in a way
that the check is completely redundant in the middle segment.  As an
example, IRCE will convert

  len = < known positive >
  for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
    if (0 <= i && i < len) {
      do_something();
    } else {
      throw_out_of_bounds();
    }
  }

to

  len = < known positive >
  limit = smin(n, len)
  // no first segment
  for (i = 0; i < limit; i++) {
    if (0 <= i && i < len) { // this check is fully redundant
      do_something();
    } else {
      throw_out_of_bounds();
    }
  }
  for (i = limit; i < n; i++) {
    if (0 <= i && i < len) {
      do_something();
    } else {
      throw_out_of_bounds();
    }
  }


IRCE can deal with multiple range checks in the same loop (it takes
the intersection of the ranges that will make each of them redundant
individually).

Currently IRCE does not do any profitability analysis.  That is a
TODO.

Please note that the status of this pass is *experimental*, and it is
not part of any default pass pipeline.  Having said that, I will love
to get feedback and general input from people interested in trying
this out.

This pass was originally r226201.  It was reverted because it used C++
features not supported by MSVC 2012.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6693

llvm-svn: 226238
2015-01-16 01:03:22 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 7f62ac8e4d Revert r226201 (Add a new pass "inductive range check elimination")
The change used C++11 features not supported by MSVC 2012.  I will fix
the change to use things supported MSVC 2012 and recommit shortly.

llvm-svn: 226216
2015-01-15 22:18:10 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 7059e2959d Add a new pass "inductive range check elimination"
IRCE eliminates range checks of the form

  0 <= A * I + B < Length

by splitting a loop's iteration space into three segments in a way
that the check is completely redundant in the middle segment.  As an
example, IRCE will convert

  len = < known positive >
  for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
    if (0 <= i && i < len) {
      do_something();
    } else {
      throw_out_of_bounds();
    }
  }

to

  len = < known positive >
  limit = smin(n, len)
  // no first segment
  for (i = 0; i < limit; i++) {
    if (0 <= i && i < len) { // this check is fully redundant
      do_something();
    } else {
      throw_out_of_bounds();
    }
  }
  for (i = limit; i < n; i++) {
    if (0 <= i && i < len) {
      do_something();
    } else {
      throw_out_of_bounds();
    }
  }


IRCE can deal with multiple range checks in the same loop (it takes
the intersection of the ranges that will make each of them redundant
individually).

Currently IRCE does not do any profitability analysis.  That is a
TODO.

Please note that the status of this pass is *experimental*, and it is
not part of any default pass pipeline.  Having said that, I will love
to get feedback and general input from people interested in trying
this out.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6693

llvm-svn: 226201
2015-01-15 20:45:46 +00:00