It did not handle correctly cases without GEP.
The following loop wasn't vectorized:
for (int i=0; i<len; i++)
*to++ = *from++;
I use getPtrStride() to find Stride for memory access and return 0 is the Stride is not 1 or -1.
Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20789
llvm-svn: 273257
r272715 broke libcxx because it did not correctly handle cases where the
last iteration of one IV is the second-to-last iteration of another.
Original commit message:
Vectorizing loops with "escaping" IVs has been disabled since r190790, due to
PR17179. This re-enables it, with support for external use of both
"post-increment" (last iteration) and "pre-increment" (second-to-last iteration)
IVs.
llvm-svn: 272742
Vectorizing loops with "escaping" IVs has been disabled since r190790, due to
PR17179. This re-enables it, with support for external use of both
"post-increment" (last iteration) and "pre-increment" (second-to-last iteration)
IVs.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21048
llvm-svn: 272715
This reapplies commit r272385 with a fix. The build was failing when compiled
with gcc, but not with clang. With the fix, we now get the data layout from the
current TTI implementation, which will hopefully solve the issue.
llvm-svn: 272395
This patch refines the default cost for interleaved load groups having gaps. If
a load group has gaps, the legalized instructions corresponding to the unused
elements will be dead. Thus, we don't need to account for them in the cost
model. Instead, we only need to account for the fraction of legalized loads
that will actually be used.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20873
llvm-svn: 272385
Previously, we materialized secondary vector IVs from the primary scalar IV,
by offseting the primary to match the correct start value, and then broadcasting
it - inside the loop body. Instead, we can use a real vector IV, like we do for
the primary.
This enables using vector IVs for secondary integer IVs whose type matches the
type of the primary.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20932
llvm-svn: 272283
scalarizePHI only looked for phis that have exactly two uses - the "latch"
use, and an extract. Unfortunately, we can not assume all equivalent extracts
are CSE'd, since InstCombine itself may create an extract which is a duplicate
of an existing one. This extends it to handle several distinct extracts from
the same index.
This should fix at least some of the performance regressions from PR27988.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20983
llvm-svn: 271961
Patch by Taewook Oh
Summary: Patch for Bug 27478. Make BasicAliasAnalysis claims NoAlias if two GEPs index different fields of the same structure.
Reviewers: hfinkel, dberlin
Subscribers: dberlin, mcrosier, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20665
llvm-svn: 271415
Previously, whenever we needed a vector IV, we would create it on the fly,
by splatting the scalar IV and adding a step vector. Instead, we can create a
real vector IV. This tends to save a couple of instructions per iteration.
This only changes the behavior for the most basic case - integer primary
IVs with a constant step.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20315
llvm-svn: 271410
When we traced through a phi node looking for floating-point reductions, we
forgot whether we'd ever seen an instruction without fast-math flags (that
would block vectorization). This propagates it through to the end.
llvm-svn: 271015
Getting accurate locations for loops is important, because those locations are
used by the frontend to generate optimization remarks. Currently, optimization
remarks for loops often appear on the wrong line, often the first line of the
loop body instead of the loop itself. This is confusing because that line might
itself be another loop, or might be somewhere else completely if the body was
inlined function call. This happens because of the way we find the loop's
starting location. First, we look for a preheader, and if we find one, and its
terminator has a debug location, then we use that. Otherwise, we look for a
location on an instruction in the loop header.
The fallback heuristic is not bad, but will almost always find the beginning of
the body, and not the loop statement itself. The preheader location search
often fails because there's often not a preheader, and even when there is a
preheader, depending on how it was formed, it sometimes carries the location of
some preceeding code.
I don't see any good theoretical way to fix this problem. On the other hand,
this seems like a straightforward solution: Put the debug location in the
loop's llvm.loop metadata. A companion Clang patch will cause Clang to insert
llvm.loop metadata with appropriate locations when generating debugging
information. With these changes, our loop remarks have much more accurate
locations.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19738
llvm-svn: 270771
By making pointer extraction from a vector more expensive in the cost model,
we avoid the vectorization of a loop that is very likely to be memory-bound:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=27826
There are still bugs related to this, so we may need a more general solution
to avoid vectorizing obviously memory-bound loops when we don't have HW gather
support.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20601
llvm-svn: 270729
This patch renames the option enabling the store-to-load forwarding conflict
detection optimization. This change was requested in the review of D20241.
llvm-svn: 269668
The selection of the vectorization factor currently doesn't consider
interleaved accesses. The vectorization factor is based on the maximum safe
dependence distance computed by LAA. However, for loops with interleaved
groups, we should instead base the vectorization factor on the maximum safe
dependence distance divided by the maximum interleave factor of all the
interleaved groups. Interleaved accesses not in a group will be scalarized.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20241
llvm-svn: 269659
*We don't currently handle the edge case constants (min/max values), so it's not a complete
canonicalization.
To fully solve the motivating bugs, we need to enhance this to recognize a zero vector
too because that's a ConstantAggregateZero which is a ConstantData, not a ConstantVector
or a ConstantDataVector.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17859
llvm-svn: 269426
Allow vectorization when the step is a loop-invariant variable.
This is the loop example that is getting vectorized after the patch:
int int_inc;
int bar(int init, int *restrict A, int N) {
int x = init;
for (int i=0;i<N;i++){
A[i] = x;
x += int_inc;
}
return x;
}
"x" is an induction variable with *loop-invariant* step.
But it is not a primary induction. Primary induction variable with non-constant step is not handled yet.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19258
llvm-svn: 269023
When we encounter unsafe memory dependencies, loop distribution could
help.
Even though, the diagnostics is in LAA, it's only currently emitted in
the vectorizer.
llvm-svn: 268987
When deciding if a vector calculation can be done in a smaller bitwidth, use sign bit information from ValueTracking to add more information and allow more truncations.
llvm-svn: 268921
Summary:
Some PHIs can have expressions that are not AddRecExprs due to the presence
of sext/zext instructions. In order to prevent the Loop Vectorizer from
bailing out when encountering these PHIs, we now coerce the SCEV
expressions to AddRecExprs using SCEV predicates (when possible).
We only do this when the alternative would be to not vectorize.
Reviewers: mzolotukhin, anemet
Subscribers: mssimpso, sanjoy, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17153
llvm-svn: 268633
We need to keep loop hints from the original loop on the new vector loop.
Failure to do this meant that, for example:
void foo(int *b) {
#pragma clang loop unroll(disable)
for (int i = 0; i < 16; ++i)
b[i] = 1;
}
this loop would be unrolled. Why? Because we'd vectorize it, thus dropping the
hints that unrolling should be disabled, and then we'd unroll it.
llvm-svn: 267970
We previously disallowed interleaved load groups that may cause us to
speculatively access memory out-of-bounds (r261331). We did this by ensuring
each load group had an access corresponding to the first and last member.
Instead of bailing out for these interleaved groups, this patch enables us to
peel off the last vector iteration, ensuring that we execute at least one
iteration of the scalar remainder loop. This solution was proposed in the
review of the previous patch.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19487
llvm-svn: 267751
I really thought we were doing this already, but we were not. Given this input:
void Test(int *res, int *c, int *d, int *p) {
for (int i = 0; i < 16; i++)
res[i] = (p[i] == 0) ? res[i] : res[i] + d[i];
}
we did not vectorize the loop. Even with "assume_safety" the check that we
don't if-convert conditionally-executed loads (to protect against
data-dependent deferenceability) was not elided.
One subtlety: As implemented, it will still prefer to use a masked-load
instrinsic (given target support) over the speculated load. The choice here
seems architecture specific; the best option depends on how expensive the
masked load is compared to a regular load. Ideally, using the masked load still
reduces unnecessary memory traffic, and so should be preferred. If we'd rather
do it the other way, flipping the order of the checks is easy.
The LangRef is updated to make explicit that llvm.mem.parallel_loop_access also
implies that if conversion is okay.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19512
llvm-svn: 267514
Currently each Function points to a DISubprogram and DISubprogram has a
scope field. For member functions the scope is a DICompositeType. DIScopes
point to the DICompileUnit to facilitate type uniquing.
Distinct DISubprograms (with isDefinition: true) are not part of the type
hierarchy and cannot be uniqued. This change removes the subprograms
list from DICompileUnit and instead adds a pointer to the owning compile
unit to distinct DISubprograms. This would make it easy for ThinLTO to
strip unneeded DISubprograms and their transitively referenced debug info.
Motivation
----------
Materializing DISubprograms is currently the most expensive operation when
doing a ThinLTO build of clang.
We want the DISubprogram to be stored in a separate Bitcode block (or the
same block as the function body) so we can avoid having to expensively
deserialize all DISubprograms together with the global metadata. If a
function has been inlined into another subprogram we need to store a
reference the block containing the inlined subprogram.
Attached to https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=27284 is a python script
that updates LLVM IR testcases to the new format.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D19034
<rdar://problem/25256815>
llvm-svn: 266446
Some SIMD implementations are not IEEE-754 compliant, for example ARM's NEON.
This patch teaches the loop vectorizer to only allow transformations of loops
that either contain no floating-point operations or have enough allowance
flags supporting lack of precision (ex. -ffast-math, Darwin).
For that, the target description now has a method which tells us if the
vectorizer is allowed to handle FP math without falling into unsafe
representations, plus a check on every FP instruction in the candidate loop
to check for the safety flags.
This commit makes LLVM behave like GCC with respect to ARM NEON support, but
it stops short of fixing the underlying problem: sub-normals. Neither GCC
nor LLVM have a flag for allowing sub-normal operations. Before this patch,
GCC only allows it using unsafe-math flags and LLVM allows it by default with
no way to turn it off (short of not using NEON at all).
As a first step, we push this change to make it safe and in sync with GCC.
The second step is to discuss a new sub-normal's flag on both communitues
and come up with a common solution. The third step is to improve the FastMath
flags in LLVM to encode sub-normals and use those flags to restrict NEON FP.
Fixes PR16275.
llvm-svn: 266363
This is a resubmittion of 263158 change.
This patch fixes the problem which occurs when loop-vectorize tries to use @llvm.masked.load/store intrinsic for a non-default addrspace pointer. It fails with "Calling a function with a bad signature!" assertion in CallInst constructor because it tries to pass a non-default addrspace pointer to the pointer argument which has default addrspace.
The fix is to add pointer type as another overloaded type to @llvm.masked.load/store intrinsics.
Reviewed By: reames
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17270
llvm-svn: 266086
This patch ensures that when we detect first-order recurrences, we reject a phi
node if its previous value is also a phi node. During vectorization the initial
and previous values of the recurrence are shuffled together to create the value
for the current iteration. However, phi nodes are not widened like other
instructions. This fixes PR27246.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18971
llvm-svn: 265983
Vectorization cost of uniform load wasn't correctly calculated.
As a result, a simple loop that loads a uniform value wasn't vectorized.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18940
llvm-svn: 265901
InstCombine cannot effectively remove redundant assumptions without them
registered in the assumption cache. The vectorizer can create identical
assumptions but doesn't register them with the cache, resulting in
slower compile times because InstCombine tries to reason about a lot
more assumptions.
Fix this by registering the cloned assumptions.
llvm-svn: 265800
This re-commits r265535 which was reverted in r265541 because it
broke the windows bots. The problem was that we had a PointerIntPair
which took a pointer to a struct allocated with new. The problem
was that new doesn't provide sufficient alignment guarantees.
This pattern was already present before r265535 and it just happened
to work. To fix this, we now separate the PointerToIntPair from the
ExitNotTakenInfo struct into a pointer and a bool.
Original commit message:
Summary:
When the backedge taken codition is computed from an icmp, SCEV can
deduce the backedge taken count only if one of the sides of the icmp
is an AddRecExpr. However, due to sign/zero extensions, we sometimes
end up with something that is not an AddRecExpr.
However, we can use SCEV predicates to produce a 'guarded' expression.
This change adds a method to SCEV to get this expression, and the
SCEV predicate associated with it.
In HowManyGreaterThans and HowManyLessThans we will now add a SCEV
predicate associated with the guarded backedge taken count when the
analyzed SCEV expression is not an AddRecExpr. Note that we only do
this as an alternative to returning a 'CouldNotCompute'.
We use new feature in Loop Access Analysis and LoopVectorize to analyze
and transform more loops.
Reviewers: anemet, mzolotukhin, hfinkel, sanjoy
Subscribers: flyingforyou, mcrosier, atrick, mssimpso, sanjoy, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17201
llvm-svn: 265786
Summary:
When the backedge taken codition is computed from an icmp, SCEV can
deduce the backedge taken count only if one of the sides of the icmp
is an AddRecExpr. However, due to sign/zero extensions, we sometimes
end up with something that is not an AddRecExpr.
However, we can use SCEV predicates to produce a 'guarded' expression.
This change adds a method to SCEV to get this expression, and the
SCEV predicate associated with it.
In HowManyGreaterThans and HowManyLessThans we will now add a SCEV
predicate associated with the guarded backedge taken count when the
analyzed SCEV expression is not an AddRecExpr. Note that we only do
this as an alternative to returning a 'CouldNotCompute'.
We use new feature in Loop Access Analysis and LoopVectorize to analyze
and transform more loops.
Reviewers: anemet, mzolotukhin, hfinkel, sanjoy
Subscribers: flyingforyou, mcrosier, atrick, mssimpso, sanjoy, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17201
llvm-svn: 265535
To quote the langref "Unlike sqrt in libm, however, llvm.sqrt has
undefined behavior for negative numbers other than -0.0 (which allows
for better optimization, because there is no need to worry about errno
being set). llvm.sqrt(-0.0) is defined to return -0.0 like IEEE sqrt."
This means that it's unsafe to replace sqrt with llvm.sqrt unless the
call is annotated with nnan.
Thanks to Hal Finkel for pointing this out!
llvm-svn: 265521
