Without this simplification for a loop nest:
void foo(long n1_a, long n1_b, long n1_c, long n1_d,
long p1_b, long p1_c, long p1_d,
float A_1[][p1_b][p1_c][p1_d]) {
for (long i = 0; i < n1_a; i++)
for (long j = 0; j < n1_b; j++)
for (long k = 0; k < n1_c; k++)
for (long l = 0; l < n1_d; l++)
A_1[i][j][k][l] += i + j + k + l;
}
the assumption:
n1_a <= 0 or (n1_a > 0 and n1_b <= 0) or
(n1_a > 0 and n1_b > 0 and n1_c <= 0) or
(n1_a > 0 and n1_b > 0 and n1_c > 0 and n1_d <= 0) or
(n1_a > 0 and n1_b > 0 and n1_c > 0 and n1_d > 0 and
p1_b >= n1_b and p1_c >= n1_c and p1_d >= n1_d)
is taken rather than the simpler assumption:
p9_b >= n9_b and p9_c >= n9_c and p9_d >= n9_d.
The former is less strict, as it allows arbitrary values of p1_* in case, the
loop is not executed at all. However, in practice these precise constraints
explode when combined across different accesses and loops. For now it seems
to make more sense to take less precise, but more scalable constraints by
default. In case we find a practical example where more precise constraints
are needed, we can think about allowing such precise constraints in specific
situations where they help.
This change speeds up the new test case from taking very long (waited at least
a minute, but it probably takes a lot more) to below a second.
llvm-svn: 296456
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
Arthur Eubanks