This patch adds a new function pass ScopInfoWrapperPass so that the
polyhedral description of a region, the SCoP, can be constructed and
used in a function pass.
Patch by Utpal Bora <cs14mtech11017@iith.ac.in>
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20962
llvm-svn: 273856
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
If the GEP instructions give us enough insights, model scalar accesses as
multi-dimensional (and generate the relevant run-time checks to ensure
correctness). This will allow us to simplify the dependence computation in
a subsequent commit.
llvm-svn: 247906
This will allow to generate non-wrap assumptions for integer expressions
that are part of the SCoP. We compare the common isl representation of
the expression with one computed with modulo semantic. For all parameter
combinations they are not equal we can have integer overflows.
The nsw flags are respected when the modulo representation is computed,
nuw and nw flags are ignored for now.
In order to not increase compile time to much, the non-wrap assumptions
are collected in a separate boundary context instead of the assumed
context. This helps compile time as the boundary context can become
complex and it is therefor not advised to use it in other operations
except runtime check generation. However, the assumed context is e.g.,
used to tighten dependences. While the boundary context might help to
tighten the assumed context it is doubtful that it will help in practice
(it does not effect lnt much) as the boundary (or no-wrap assumptions)
only restrict the very end of the possible value range of parameters.
PET uses a different approach to compute the no-wrap context, though lnt runs
have shown that this version performs slightly better for us.
llvm-svn: 247732
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
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
Johannes Doerfert