Commit Graph

7 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Siddharth Bhat bcbfdade41 [Polly] [DependenceInfo] change WAR, WAW generation to correct semantics
= Change of WAR, WAW generation: =

- `buildFlow(Sink, MustSource, MaySource, Sink)` treates any flow of the form
    `sink <- may source <- must source` as a *may* dependence.

- we used to call:
```lang=cpp, name=old-flow-call.cpp
Flow = buildFlow(MustWrite, MustWrite, Read, Schedule);
WAW = isl_union_flow_get_must_dependence(Flow);
WAR = isl_union_flow_get_may_dependence(Flow);
```

- This caused some WAW dependences to be treated as WAR dependences.
- Incorrect semantics.

- Now, we call WAR and WAW correctly.

== Correct WAW: ==
```lang=cpp, name=new-waw-call.cpp
   Flow = buildFlow(Write, MustWrite, MayWrite, Schedule);
   WAW = isl_union_flow_get_may_dependence(Flow);
   isl_union_flow_free(Flow);
```

== Correct WAR: ==
```lang=cpp, name=new-war-call.cpp
    Flow = buildFlow(Write, Read, MustaWrite, Schedule);
    WAR = isl_union_flow_get_must_dependence(Flow);
    isl_union_flow_free(Flow);
```

- We want the "shortest" WAR possible (exact dependences).
- We mark all the *must-writes* as may-source, reads as must-souce.
- Then, we ask for *must* dependence.
- This removes all the reads that flow through a *must-write*
  before reaching a sink.
- Note that we only block ealier writes with *must-writes*. This is
  intuitively correct, as we do not want may-writes to block
  must-writes.
- Leaves us with direct (R -> W).

- This affects reduction generation since RED is built using WAW and WAR.

= New StrictWAW for Reductions: =

- We used to call:
```lang=cpp,name=old-waw-war-call.cpp
      Flow = buildFlow(MustWrite, MustWrite, Read, Schedule);
      WAW = isl_union_flow_get_must_dependence(Flow);
      WAR = isl_union_flow_get_may_dependence(Flow);
```

- This *is* the right model of WAW we need for reductions, just not in general.
- Reductions need to track only *strict* WAW, without any interfering reductions.

= Explanation: Why the new WAR dependences in tests are correct: =

- We no longer set WAR = WAR - WAW
- Hence, we will have WAR dependences that were originally removed.
- These may look incorrect, but in fact make sense.

== Code: ==
```lang=llvm, name=new-war-dependence.ll
  ;    void manyreductions(long *A) {
  ;      for (long i = 0; i < 1024; i++)
  ;        for (long j = 0; j < 1024; j++)
  ; S0:          *A += 42;
  ;
  ;      for (long i = 0; i < 1024; i++)
  ;        for (long j = 0; j < 1024; j++)
  ; S1:          *A += 42;
  ;
```
=== WAR dependence: ===
  {  S0[1023, 1023] -> S1[0, 0] }

- Between `S0[1023, 1023]` and `S1[0, 0]`, we will have the dependences:

```lang=cpp, name=dependence-incorrect, counterexample
        S0[1023, 1023]:
    *-- tmp = *A (load0)--*
WAR 2   add = tmp + 42    |
    *-> *A = add (store0) |
                         WAR 1
        S1[0, 0]:         |
        tmp = *A (load1)  |
        add = tmp + 42    |
        A = add (store1)<-*
```

- One may assume that WAR2 *hides* WAR1 (since store0 happens before
  store1). However, within a statement, Polly has no idea about the
  ordering of loads and stores.

- Hence, according to Polly, the code may have looked like this:
```lang=cpp, name=dependence-correct
    S0[1023, 1023]:
    A = add (store0)
    tmp = A (load0) ---*
    add = A + 42       |
                     WAR 1
    S1[0, 0]:          |
    tmp = A (load1)    |
    add = A + 42       |
    A = add (store1) <-*
```

- So, Polly  generates (correct) WAR dependences. It does not make sense
  to remove these dependences, since they are correct with respect to
  Polly's model.

    Reviewers: grosser, Meinersbur

    tags: #polly

    Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31386

llvm-svn: 299429
2017-04-04 13:08:23 +00:00
Michael Kruse 959a8dc39f Update to ISL 0.16.1
llvm-svn: 257898
2016-01-15 15:54:45 +00:00
Michael Kruse 5a9a65e43f Prepare unit tests for update to ISL 0.16
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
2016-01-15 00:48:42 +00:00
Tobias Grosser f4ee371e60 tests: Drop -polly-detect-unprofitable and -polly-no-early-exit
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
2015-10-06 15:36:44 +00:00
Johannes Doerfert 96425c2574 Traverse the SCoP to compute non-loop-carried domain conditions
In order to compute domain conditions for conditionals we will now
  traverse the region in the ScopInfo once and build the domains for
  each block in the region. The SCoP statements can then use these
  constraints when they build their domain.

  The reason behind this change is twofold:
    1) This removes a big chunk of preprocessing logic from the
       TempScopInfo, namely the Conditionals we used to build there.
       Additionally to moving this logic it is also simplified. Instead
       of walking the dominance tree up for each basic block in the
       region (as we did before), we now traverse the region only
       once in order to collect the domain conditions.
    2) This is the first step towards the isl based domain creation.
       The second step will traverse the region similar to this step,
       however it will propagate back edge conditions. Once both are in
       place this conditional handling will allow multiple exit loops
       additional logic.

Reviewers: grosser

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12428

llvm-svn: 246398
2015-08-30 21:13:53 +00:00
Tobias Grosser 808cd69a92 Use schedule trees to represent execution order of statements
Instead of flat schedules, we now use so-called schedule trees to represent the
execution order of the statements in a SCoP. Schedule trees make it a lot easier
to analyze, understand and modify properties of a schedule, as specific nodes
in the tree can be choosen and possibly replaced.

This patch does not yet fully move our DependenceInfo pass to schedule trees,
as some additional performance analysis is needed here. (In general schedule
trees should be faster in compile-time, as the more structured representation
is generally easier to analyze and work with). We also can not yet perform the
reduction analysis on schedule trees.

For more information regarding schedule trees, please see Section 6 of
https://lirias.kuleuven.be/handle/123456789/497238

llvm-svn: 242130
2015-07-14 09:33:13 +00:00
Johannes Doerfert f6557f98a2 Rename the Dependences pass to DependenceInfo [NFC]
We rename the Dependences pass to DependenceInfo as a first step to a
  caching pass policy. The new DependenceInfo pass will later provide
  "Dependences" for a SCoP.

  To keep consistency the test folder is renamed too.

llvm-svn: 231308
2015-03-04 22:43:40 +00:00