Summary:
This adds support for placing predicateinfo such that it affects critical edges.
This fixes the issues mentioned by Nuno on the mailing list.
Depends on D29519
Reviewers: davide, nlopes
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29606
llvm-svn: 294921
I can't prove that we can select this instruction or the AVX/SSE version, but I'm adding it for consistency for now so I can continue matching the load folding tables.
llvm-svn: 294907
The target shuffle match function arguments were using the term 'Ops' but the function names referred to them as 'Inputs' - use 'Inputs' consistently.
llvm-svn: 294900
Initial 256-bit vector support - 512-bit support requires extra checks for AVX512BW support (PMOVZXBW) that will be handled in a future patch.
llvm-svn: 294896
proven larger than the loop-count
This fixes PR31098: Try to resolve statically data-dependences whose
compile-time-unknown distance can be proven larger than the loop-count,
instead of resorting to runtime dependence checking (which are not always
possible).
For vectorization it is sufficient to prove that the dependence distance
is >= VF; But in some cases we can prune unknown dependence distances early,
and even before selecting the VF, and without a runtime test, by comparing
the distance against the loop iteration count. Since the vectorized code
will be executed only if LoopCount >= VF, proving distance >= LoopCount
also guarantees that distance >= VF. This check is also equivalent to the
Strong SIV Test.
Reviewers: mkuper, anemet, sanjoy
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28044
llvm-svn: 294892
default pipeline.
A clang with this patch built with ASan and asserts can build all of the
test-suite as well, so it seems to not uncover any latent problems.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29853
llvm-svn: 294888
All the invalidation issues and bugs in this seem to be fixed, it has
survived a full build of the test suite plus SPEC with asserts and ASan
enabled on the Clang binary used.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29815
llvm-svn: 294887
I don't know if anything other than x86 vectors is affected by this change, but this may allow
us to remove target-specific intrinsics for blendv* (vector selects). The simplification arises
from the fact that blendv* instructions only use the sign-bit when deciding which vector element
to choose for the destination vector. The mechanism to fold VSELECT into SHRUNKBLEND nodes already
exists in x86 lowering; this demanded bits change just enables the transform to fire more often.
The original motivation starts with a bug for DSE of masked stores that seems completely unrelated,
but I've explained the likely steps in this series here:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=11210
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29687
llvm-svn: 294863
Removes duplicate constant extraction code in getTargetShuffleMaskIndices.
getTargetConstantBitsFromNode - adds support for VZEXT_MOVL(SCALAR_TO_VECTOR) and fail if the caller doesn't support undef bits.
llvm-svn: 294856
it is dead or unreachable, as it should be.
This also makes the leader of INITIAL undef, enabling us to handle
irreducibility properly.
Summary:
This lets us verify, more than we do now, that we didn't screw up
value numbering.
Reviewers: davide
Subscribers: Prazek, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29842
llvm-svn: 294844
Seems the execution dependency pass likes to use FP instructions when most of the consuming code is integer if a vextractf128 instruction produced the register. Without AVX2 we don't have the corresponding integer instruction available.
This patch suppresses the domain on these instructions to GenericDomain if AVX2 is not supported so that they are ignored by domain fixing. If AVX2 is supported we'll report the correct domain and allow them to switch between integer and fp.
Overall I think this produces better results in the modified test cases.
llvm-svn: 294824
Summary:
The patch adds instructions number generated by a solution
to LSR cost under "-lsr-insns-cost" option.
Reviewers: qcolombet, hfinkel
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D28307
From: Evgeny Stupachenko <evstupac@gmail.com>
llvm-svn: 294821
There are no vldN/vstN f16 variants, even with +fullfp16.
We could use the i16 variants, but, in practice, even with +fullfp16,
the f16 sequence leading to the i16 shuffle usually gets scalarized.
We'd need to improve our support for f16 codegen before getting there.
Teach the cost model to consider f16 interleaved operations as
expensive. Otherwise, we are all but guaranteed to end up with
a large block of scalarized vector code.
llvm-svn: 294819
There are no vldN/vstN f16 variants, even with +fullfp16.
We could use the i16 variants, but, in practice, even with +fullfp16,
the f16 sequence leading to the i16 shuffle usually gets scalarized.
We'd need to improve our support for f16 codegen before getting there.
Reject f16 interleaved accesses. If we try to emit the f16 intrinsics,
we'll just end up with a selection failure.
llvm-svn: 294818
The recommit includes some changes of testcases. No functional change to the patch.
In RateRegister of existing LSR, if a formula contains a Reg which is a SCEVAddRecExpr,
and this SCEVAddRecExpr's loop is an outerloop, the formula will be marked as Loser
and dropped.
Suppose we have an IR that %for.body is outerloop and %for.body2 is innerloop. LSR only
handle inner loop now so only %for.body2 will be handled.
Using the logic above, formula like
reg(%array) + reg({1,+, %size}<%for.body>) + 1*reg({0,+,1}<%for.body2>) will be dropped
no matter what because reg({1,+, %size}<%for.body>) is a SCEVAddRecExpr type reg related
with outerloop. Only formula like
reg(%array) + 1*reg({{1,+, %size}<%for.body>,+,1}<nuw><nsw><%for.body2>) will be kept
because the SCEVAddRecExpr related with outerloop is folded into the initial value of the
SCEVAddRecExpr related with current loop.
But in some cases, we do need to share the basic induction variable
reg{0 ,+, 1}<%for.body2> among LSR Uses to reduce the final total number of induction
variables used by LSR, so we don't want to drop the formula like
reg(%array) + reg({1,+, %size}<%for.body>) + 1*reg({0,+,1}<%for.body2>) unconditionally.
From the existing comment, it tries to avoid considering multiple level loops at the same time.
However, existing LSR only handles innermost loop, so for any SCEVAddRecExpr with a loop other
than current loop, it is an invariant and will be simple to handle, and the formula doesn't have
to be dropped.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26429
llvm-svn: 294814
This was marking the loop for deletion after the loop was deleted. This
almost works, except that when we do any kind of debug logging it starts
reading the name of the loop from deleted memory or otherwise blowing
up. This can fail in a bunch of ways. I recently added a test that
*always* does this, and it started failing on the sanitizer bots.
The fix is to mark the loop as deleted in the loop PM infrastructure
before we remove the loop. We can do this by passing the updater into
the routine. That also lets us simplify a bunch of other interface
components here for a net win.
llvm-svn: 294810
Daniel Berlin