The delinearization is needed only to remove the non linearity induced by
expressions involving multiplications of parameters and induction variables.
There is no problem in dealing with constant times parameters, or constant times
an induction variable.
For this reason, the current patch discards all constant terms and multipliers
before running the delinearization algorithm on the terms. The only thing
remaining in the term expressions are parameters and multiply expressions of
parameters: these simplified term expressions are passed to the array shape
recognizer that will not recognize constant dimensions anymore: these will be
recognized as different strides in parametric subscripts.
The only important special case of a constant dimension is the size of elements.
Instead of relying on the delinearization to infer the size of an element,
compute the element size from the base address type. This is a much more precise
way of computing the element size than before, as we would have mixed together
the size of an element with the strides of the innermost dimension.
llvm-svn: 209691
To compute the dimensions of the array in a unique way, we split the
delinearization analysis in three steps:
- find parametric terms in all memory access functions
- compute the array dimensions from the set of terms
- compute the delinearized access functions for each dimension
The first step is executed on all the memory access functions such that we
gather all the patterns in which an array is accessed. The second step reduces
all this information in a unique description of the sizes of the array. The
third step is delinearizing each memory access function following the common
description of the shape of the array computed in step 2.
This rewrite of the delinearization pass also solves a problem we had with the
previous implementation: because the previous algorithm was by induction on the
structure of the SCEV, it would not correctly recognize the shape of the array
when the memory access was not following the nesting of the loops: for example,
see polly/test/ScopInfo/multidim_only_ivs_3d_reverse.ll
; void foo(long n, long m, long o, double A[n][m][o]) {
;
; for (long i = 0; i < n; i++)
; for (long j = 0; j < m; j++)
; for (long k = 0; k < o; k++)
; A[i][k][j] = 1.0;
Starting with this patch we no longer delinearize access functions that do not
contain parameters, for example in test/Analysis/DependenceAnalysis/GCD.ll
;; for (long int i = 0; i < 100; i++)
;; for (long int j = 0; j < 100; j++) {
;; A[2*i - 4*j] = i;
;; *B++ = A[6*i + 8*j];
these accesses will not be delinearized as the upper bound of the loops are
constants, and their access functions do not contain SCEVUnknown parameters.
llvm-svn: 208232
If the Src and Dst are the same instruction,
no loop-independent dependence is possible,
so we force the PossiblyLoopIndependent flag to false.
The test case results are updated appropriately.
llvm-svn: 168678
analysis. Better is to look for cases with useful GEPs and use them
when possible. When a pair of useful GEPs is not available, use the
raw SCEVs directly. This approach supports better analysis of pointer
dereferencing.
In parallel, all the test cases are updated appropriately.
Cases where we have a store to *B++ can now be analyzed!
llvm-svn: 168474
Patch from Preston Briggs <preston.briggs@gmail.com>.
This is an updated version of the dependence-analysis patch, including an MIV
test based on Banerjee's inequalities.
It's a fairly complete implementation of the paper
Practical Dependence Testing
Gina Goff, Ken Kennedy, and Chau-Wen Tseng
PLDI 1991
It cannot yet propagate constraints between coupled RDIV subscripts (discussed
in Section 5.3.2 of the paper).
It's organized as a FunctionPass with a single entry point that supports testing
for dependence between two instructions in a function. If there's no dependence,
it returns null. If there's a dependence, it returns a pointer to a Dependence
which can be queried about details (what kind of dependence, is it loop
independent, direction and distance vector entries, etc). I haven't included
every imaginable feature, but there's a good selection that should be adequate
for supporting many loop transformations. Of course, it can be extended as
necessary.
Included in the patch file are many test cases, commented with C code showing
the loops and array references.
llvm-svn: 165708
Sebastian Pop