ISL 0.16 will change how sets are printed which breaks 117 unit tests
that text-compare printed sets. This patch re-formats most of these unit
tests using a script and small manual editing on top of that. When
actually updating ISL, most work is done by just re-running the script
to adapt to the changed output.
Some tests that compare IR and tests with single CHECK-lines that can be
easily updated manually are not included here.
The re-format script will also be committed afterwards. The per-test
formatter invocation command lines options will not be added in the near
future because it is ad hoc and would overwrite the manual edits.
Ideally it also shouldn't be required anymore because ISL's set printing
has become more stable in 0.16.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16095
llvm-svn: 257851
These flags are now always passed to all tests and need to be disabled if
not needed. Disabling these flags, rather than passing them to almost all
tests, significantly simplfies our RUN: lines.
llvm-svn: 249422
Scops that only read seem generally uninteresting and scops that only write are
most likely initializations where there is also little to optimize. To not
waste compile time we bail early.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7735
llvm-svn: 229820
Isl now specifically marks modulo operations that are compared against zero.
They can be implemented with the C/LLVM remainder operation.
We also update a couple of test cases where the output of isl has slightly
changed.
llvm-svn: 223607
In case a GEP instruction references into a fixed size array e.g., an access
A[i][j] into an array A[100x100], LLVM-IR does not guarantee that the subscripts
always compute values that are within array bounds. We now derive the set of
parameter values for which all accesses are within bounds and add the assumption
that the scop is only every executed with this set of parameter values.
Example:
void foo(float A[][20], long n, long m {
for (long i = 0; i < n; i++)
for (long j = 0; j < m; j++)
A[i][j] = ...
This loop yields out-of-bound accesses if m is at least 20 and at the same time
at least one iteration of the outer loop is executed. Hence, we assume:
n <= 0 or m <= 20.
Doing so simplifies the dependence analysis problem, allows us to perform
more optimizations and generate better code.
TODO: The location where the GEP instruction is executed is not necessarily the
location where the memory is actually accessed. As a result scanning for GEP[s]
is imprecise. Even though this is not a correctness problem, this imprecision
may result in missed optimizations or non-optimal run-time checks.
In polybench where this mismatch between parametric loop bounds and fixed size
arrays is common, we see with this patch significant reductions in compile time
(up to 50%) and execution time (up to 70%). We see two significant compile time
regressions (fdtd-2d, jacobi-2d-imper), and one execution time regression
(trmm). Both regressions arise due to additional optimizations that have been
enabled by this patch. They can be addressed in subsequent commits.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D6369
llvm-svn: 222754
Michael Kruse