This enum is used by dataflow analyses to indicate whether further
propagation is necessary to reach the fix point. Accidentally discarding
such a value will likely lead to propagation stopping early, leading to
incomplete or incorrect results. The most egregious example is the
duality between `join` on the analysis class, which triggers propagation
internally, and `join` on the lattice class that does not and expects
the caller to trigger it depending on the returned `ChangeResult`.
The core implementation of the dataflow anlysis framework is
interpocedural by design. While this offers better analysis precision,
it also comes with additional cost as it takes longer for the analysis
to reach the fixpoint state. Add a configuration mechanism to the
dataflow solver to control whether it operates inteprocedurally or not
to offer clients a choice.
As a positive side effect, this change also adds hooks for explicitly
processing external/opaque function calls in the dataflow analyses,
e.g., based off of attributes present in the the function declaration or
call operation such as alias scopes and modref available in the LLVM
dialect.
This change should not affect existing analyses and the default solver
configuration remains interprocedural.
Co-authored-by: Jacob Peng <jacobmpeng@gmail.com>
Functions are always callable operations and thus every operation
implementing the `FunctionOpInterface` also implements the
`CallableOpInterface`. The only exception was the FuncOp in the toy
example. To make implementation of the `FunctionOpInterface` easier,
this commit lets `FunctionOpInterface` inherit from
`CallableOpInterface` and merges some of their methods. More precisely,
the `CallableOpInterface` has methods to get the argument and result
attributes and a method to get the result types of the callable region.
These methods are always implemented the same way as their analogues in
`FunctionOpInterface` and thus this commit moves all the argument and
result attribute handling methods to the callable interface as well as
the methods to get the argument and result types. The
`FuntionOpInterface` then does not have to declare them as well, but
just inherits them from the `CallableOpInterface`.
Adding the inheritance relation also required to move the
`FunctionOpInterface` from the IR directory to the Interfaces directory
since IR should not depend on Interfaces.
Reviewed By: jpienaar, springerm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D157988
The current implementation is not very ergonomic or descriptive: It uses `std::optional<unsigned>` where `std::nullopt` represents the parent op and `unsigned` is the region number.
This doesn't give us any useful methods specific to region control flow and makes the code fragile to changes due to now taking the region number into account.
This patch introduces a new type called `RegionBranchPoint`, replacing all uses of `std::optional<unsigned>` in the interface. It can be implicitly constructed from a region or a `RegionSuccessor`, can be compared with a region to check whether the branch point is branching from the parent, adds `isParent` to check whether we are coming from a parent op and adds `RegionSuccessor::parent` as a descriptive way to indicate branching from the parent.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D159116
Currently, data in `AbstractSparseBackwardDataFlowAnalysis` is
considered to flow one-to-one, in order, from the operands of an op
implementing `CallOpInterface` to the arguments of the function it is
calling.
This understanding of the data flow is inaccurate. The operands of such
an op that forward to the function arguments are obtained using a
method provided by `CallOpInterface` called `getArgOperands()`.
This commit fixes this bug by using `getArgOperands()` instead of
`getOperands()` to get the mapping from operands to function arguments
because not all operands necessarily forward to the function arguments
and even if they do, they don't necessarily have to be in the order in
which they appear in the op. The operands that don't get forwarded are
handled by the newly introduced `visitCallOperand()` function, which
works analogous to the `visitBranchOperand()` function.
This fix is also propagated to liveness analysis that earlier relied on
this incorrect implementation of the sparse backward dataflow analysis
framework and corrects some incorrect assumptions made in it.
Extra cleanup: Improved a comment and removed an unnecessary code line.
Signed-off-by: Srishti Srivastava <srishtisrivastava.ai@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: matthiaskramm, jcai19
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D157261
This commit adds a utility to implement liveness analysis using the
sparse backward data-flow analysis framework. Theoretically, liveness
analysis assigns liveness to each (value, program point) pair in the
program and it is thus a dense analysis. However, since values are
immutable in MLIR, a sparse analysis, which will assign liveness to
each value in the program, suffices here.
Liveness analysis has many applications. It can be used to avoid the
computation of extraneous operations that have no effect on the memory
or the final output of a program. It can also be used to optimize
register allocation. Both of these applications help achieve one very
important goal: reducing runtime.
A value is considered "live" iff it:
(1) has memory effects OR
(2) is returned by a public function OR
(3) is used to compute a value of type (1) or (2).
It is also to be noted that a value could be of multiple types (1/2/3) at
the same time.
A value "has memory effects" iff it:
(1.a) is an operand of an op with memory effects OR
(1.b) is a non-forwarded branch operand and a block where its op could
take the control has an op with memory effects.
A value `A` is said to be "used to compute" value `B` iff `B` cannot be
computed in the absence of `A`. Thus, in this implementation, we say that
value `A` is used to compute value `B` iff:
(3.a) `B` is a result of an op with operand `A` OR
(3.b) `A` is used to compute some value `C` and `C` is used to compute
`B`.
---
It is important to note that there already exists an MLIR liveness
utility here: llvm-project/mlir/include/mlir/Analysis/Liveness.h. So,
what is the need for this new liveness analysis utility being added by
this commit? That need is explained as follows:-
The similarities between these two utilities is that both use the
fixpoint iteration method to converge to the final result of liveness.
And, both have the same theoretical understanding of liveness as well.
However, the main difference between (a) the existing utility and (b)
the added utility is the "scope of the analysis". (a) is restricted to
analysing each block independently while (b) analyses blocks together,
i.e., it looks at how the control flows from one block to the other,
how a caller calls a callee, etc. The restriction in the former implies
that some potentially non-live values could be marked live and thus the
full potential of liveness analysis will not be realised.
This can be understood using the example below:
```
1 func.func private @private_dead_return_value_removal_0() -> (i32, i32) {
2 %0 = arith.constant 0 : i32
3 %1 = arith.addi %0, %0 : i32
4 return %0, %1 : i32, i32
5 }
6 func.func @public_dead_return_value_removal_0() -> (i32) {
7 %0:2 = func.call @private_dead_return_value_removal_0() : () -> (i32, i32)
8 return %0#0 : i32
9 }
```
Here, if we just restrict our analysis to a per-block basis like (a), we
will say that the %1 on line 3 is live because it is computed and then
returned outside its block by the function. But, if we perform a
backward data-flow analysis like (b) does, we will say that %0#1 of line
7 is not live because it isn't returned by the public function and thus,
%1 of line 3 is also not live. So, while (a) will be unable to suggest
any IR optimizations, (b) can enable this IR to convert to:-
```
1 func.func private @private_dead_return_value_removal_0() -> i32 {
2 %0 = arith.constant 0 : i32
3 return %0 : i32
4 }
5 func.func @public_dead_return_value_removal_0() -> i32 {
6 %0 = call @private_dead_return_value_removal_0() : () -> i32
7 return %0 : i32
8 }
```
One operation was removed and one unnecessary return value of the
function was removed and the function signature was modified. This is an
optimization that (b) can enable but (a) cannot. Such optimizations can
help remove a lot of extraneous computations that are currently being
done.
Signed-off-by: Srishti Srivastava <srishtisrivastava.ai@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: matthiaskramm, jcai19
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D153779
Initial implementations of dense dataflow analyses feature special cases
for operations that have region- or call-based control flow by
leveraging the corresponding interfaces. This is not necessarily
sufficient as these operations may influence the dataflow state by
themselves as well we through the control flow. For example,
`linalg.generic` and similar operations have region-based control flow
and their proper memory effects, so any memory-related analyses such as
last-writer require processing `linalg.generic` directly instead of, or
in addition to, the region-based flow.
Provide hooks to customize the processing of operations with region-
cand call-based contol flow in forward and backward dense dataflow
analysis. These hooks are trigerred when control flow is transferred
between the "main" operation, i.e. the call or the region owner, and
another region. Such an apporach allows the analyses to update the
lattice before and/or after the regions. In the `linalg.generic`
example, the reads from memory are interpreted as happening before the
body region and the writes to memory are interpreted as happening after
the body region. Using these hooks in generic analysis may require
introducing additional interfaces, but for now assume that the specific
analysis have spceial cases for the (rare) operaitons with call- and
region-based control flow that need additional processing.
Reviewed By: Mogball, phisiart
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D155757
This is the counterpart to the forward dense dataflow analysis and
integrates into the dataflow framework. The implementation follows the
structure of existing dataflow analyses.
Reviewed By: Mogball, phisiart
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D154713
The MLIR classes Type/Attribute/Operation/Op/Value support
cast/dyn_cast/isa/dyn_cast_or_null functionality through llvm's doCast
functionality in addition to defining methods with the same name.
This change begins the migration of uses of the method to the
corresponding function call as has been decided as more consistent.
Note that there still exist classes that only define methods directly,
such as AffineExpr, and this does not include work currently to support
a functional cast/isa call.
Context:
- https://mlir.llvm.org/deprecation/ at "Use the free function variants
for dyn_cast/cast/isa/…"
- Original discussion at https://discourse.llvm.org/t/preferred-casting-style-going-forward/68443
Implementation:
This patch updates all remaining uses of the deprecated functionality in
mlir/. This was done with clang-tidy as described below and further
modifications to GPUBase.td and OpenMPOpsInterfaces.td.
Steps are described per line, as comments are removed by git:
0. Retrieve the change from the following to build clang-tidy with an
additional check:
main...tpopp:llvm-project:tidy-cast-check
1. Build clang-tidy
2. Run clang-tidy over your entire codebase while disabling all checks
and enabling the one relevant one. Run on all header files also.
3. Delete .inc files that were also modified, so the next build rebuilds
them to a pure state.
```
ninja -C $BUILD_DIR clang-tidy
run-clang-tidy -clang-tidy-binary=$BUILD_DIR/bin/clang-tidy -checks='-*,misc-cast-functions'\
-header-filter=mlir/ mlir/* -fix
rm -rf $BUILD_DIR/tools/mlir/**/*.inc
```
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D151542
The MLIR classes Type/Attribute/Operation/Op/Value support
cast/dyn_cast/isa/dyn_cast_or_null functionality through llvm's doCast
functionality in addition to defining methods with the same name.
This change begins the migration of uses of the method to the
corresponding function call as has been decided as more consistent.
Note that there still exist classes that only define methods directly,
such as AffineExpr, and this does not include work currently to support
a functional cast/isa call.
Caveats include:
- This clang-tidy script probably has more problems.
- This only touches C++ code, so nothing that is being generated.
Context:
- https://mlir.llvm.org/deprecation/ at "Use the free function variants
for dyn_cast/cast/isa/…"
- Original discussion at https://discourse.llvm.org/t/preferred-casting-style-going-forward/68443
Implementation:
This first patch was created with the following steps. The intention is
to only do automated changes at first, so I waste less time if it's
reverted, and so the first mass change is more clear as an example to
other teams that will need to follow similar steps.
Steps are described per line, as comments are removed by git:
0. Retrieve the change from the following to build clang-tidy with an
additional check:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/compare/main...tpopp:llvm-project:tidy-cast-check
1. Build clang-tidy
2. Run clang-tidy over your entire codebase while disabling all checks
and enabling the one relevant one. Run on all header files also.
3. Delete .inc files that were also modified, so the next build rebuilds
them to a pure state.
4. Some changes have been deleted for the following reasons:
- Some files had a variable also named cast
- Some files had not included a header file that defines the cast
functions
- Some files are definitions of the classes that have the casting
methods, so the code still refers to the method instead of the
function without adding a prefix or removing the method declaration
at the same time.
```
ninja -C $BUILD_DIR clang-tidy
run-clang-tidy -clang-tidy-binary=$BUILD_DIR/bin/clang-tidy -checks='-*,misc-cast-functions'\
-header-filter=mlir/ mlir/* -fix
rm -rf $BUILD_DIR/tools/mlir/**/*.inc
git restore mlir/lib/IR mlir/lib/Dialect/DLTI/DLTI.cpp\
mlir/lib/Dialect/Complex/IR/ComplexDialect.cpp\
mlir/lib/**/IR/\
mlir/lib/Dialect/SparseTensor/Transforms/SparseVectorization.cpp\
mlir/lib/Dialect/Vector/Transforms/LowerVectorMultiReduction.cpp\
mlir/test/lib/Dialect/Test/TestTypes.cpp\
mlir/test/lib/Dialect/Transform/TestTransformDialectExtension.cpp\
mlir/test/lib/Dialect/Test/TestAttributes.cpp\
mlir/unittests/TableGen/EnumsGenTest.cpp\
mlir/test/python/lib/PythonTestCAPI.cpp\
mlir/include/mlir/IR/
```
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D150123
This commit introduces an instantiation of LLVM's LoopInfo for CFGs in
MLIR. To test the LoopInfo, a test pass is added the checks the analysis
results for a set of CFGs.
Reviewed By: ftynse
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D147323
Replace references to enumerate results with either result_pairs
(reference wrapper type) or structured bindings. I did not use
structured bindings everywhere as it wasn't clear to me it would
improve readability.
This is in preparation to the switch to zip semantics which won't
support non-const lvalue reference to elements:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D144503.
I chose to use values instead of const lvalue-refs because MLIR is
biased towards avoiding `const` local variables. This won't degrade
performance because currently `result_pair` is cheap to copy (size_t
+ iterator), and in the future, the enumerator iterator dereference
will return temporaries anyway.
Reviewed By: dblaikie
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D146006
* Remove `reset` function. Use copy assignment directly (instead of within `reset`).
* Fix potential `nullptr` dereference in `getFlattenedAffineExprs`.
* Make constraint set optional in `checkMemrefAccessDependence`.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D145935
Foo analysis for testing the data flow analysis does not support the region without any block. Although that analysis is assumed to be used for testing purpose, it is generally better to be explicit about the scope the framework supports.
The original issue was reported here.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/60580
Reviewed By: springerm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D144359
std::optional::value() has undesired exception checking semantics and is
unavailable in older Xcode (see _LIBCPP_AVAILABILITY_BAD_OPTIONAL_ACCESS). The
call sites block std::optional migration.
Support affine.parallel in the index set analysis. It allows us to do dependence analysis containing affine.parallel in addition to affine.for and affine.if. This change only supports the constant lower/upper bound in affine.parallel. Other complicated affine map bounds will be supported in further commits.
See https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/57327
Reviewed By: bondhugula
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D136056
This patch mechanically replaces None with std::nullopt where the
compiler would warn if None were deprecated. The intent is to reduce
the amount of manual work required in migrating from Optional to
std::optional.
This is part of an effort to migrate from llvm::Optional to
std::optional:
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/deprecating-llvm-optional-x-hasvalue-getvalue-getvalueor/63716
Currently, for sparse analyses, we always store a `Optional<ValueT>` in each lattice element. When it's `None`, we consider the lattice element as `uninitialized`.
However:
* Not all lattices have an `uninitialized` state. For example, `Executable` and `PredecessorState` have default values so they are always initialized.
* In dense analyses, we don't have the concept of an `uninitialized` state.
Given these inconsistencies, this patch removes `Lattice::isUninitialized()`. Individual analysis states are now default-constructed. If the default state of an analysis can be considered as "uninitialized" then this analysis should implement the following logic:
* Special join rule: `join(uninitialized, any) == any`.
* Special bail out logic: if any of the input states is uninitialized, exit the transfer function early.
Depends On D132086
Reviewed By: Mogball
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D132800
### Rationale
For a program point where we cannot reason about incoming dataflow (e.g. an argument of an entry block), the framework needs to initialize the state.
Currently, `AbstractSparseDataFlowAnalysis` initializes such state to the "pessimistic fixpoint", and `AbstractDenseDataFlowAnalysis` calls the state's `reset()` function.
However, entry states aren't necessarily the pessimistic fixpoint. Example: in reaching definition, the pessimistic fixpoint is `{all definitions}`, but the entry state is `{}`.
This awkwardness might be why the dense analysis API currently uses `reset()` instead of `markPessimisticFixpoint()`.
This patch consolidates entry point initialization into a single function `setToEntryState()`.
### API Location
Note that `setToEntryState()` is defined in the analysis rather than the lattice, so that we allow different analyses to use the same lattice but different entry states.
### Removal of the concept of optimistic/known value
The concept of optimistic/known value is too specific to SCCP.
Furthermore, the known value is not really used: In the current SCCP implementation, the known value (pessimistic fixpoint) is always `Attribute{}` (non-constant). This means there's no point storing a `knownValue` in each state.
If we do need to re-introduce optimistic/known value, we should put it in the SCCP analysis, not the sparse analysis API.
### Terminology
Please let me know if "entry state" is a good terminology.
I chose "entry" from Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data-flow_analysis#Basic_principles).
Another term I can think of is "boundary" (https://suif.stanford.edu/~courses/cs243/lectures/L3-DFA2-revised.pdf) which might be better since it also makes sense for backward analysis.
Reviewed By: Mogball
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D132086
Depends On D131660
`defaultInitialize()` was introduced for the "nudging" behavior, which has been deleted.
Reviewed By: Mogball, rriddle
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D131746
Currently, in the MLIR `{Sparse,Dense}DataFlowAnalysis` API, there is a small optimization:
Before running a transfer function, if the "out state" is already at the pessimistic fixpoint (bottom lattice value), then we know that it cannot possibly be changed, therefore we can skip the transfer function.
I benchmarked and found that this optimization is ineffective, so we can remove it and simplify `{Sparse,Dense}DataFlowAnalysis`. In a subsequent patch, I plan to change/remove the concept of the pessimistic fixpoint so that the API is further simplified.
Benchmark: I ran the following tests 5 times (after 3 warmup runs), and timed the `initializeAndRun()` function.
| Test | Before (us) | After (us) |
| mlir-opt -test-dead-code-analysis mlir/test/Analysis/DataFlow/test-dead-code-analysis.mlir | 181.2536 | 187.7074 |
| mlir-opt -- -test-dead-code-analysis mlir/test/Analysis/DataFlow/test-last-modified-callgraph.mlir | 109.5504 | 105.0654 |
| mlir-opt -- -test-dead-code-analysis mlir/test/Analysis/DataFlow/test-last-modified.mlir | 333.3646 | 322.4224 |
| mlir-opt -- -allow-unregistered-dialect -sccp mlir/test/Analysis/DataFlow/test-combined-sccp.mlir | 1027.1492 | 1081.818 |
Note: `test-combined-sccp.mlir` is crafted by combining `mlir/test/Transforms/sccp.mlir`, `mlir/test/Transforms/sccp-structured.mlir` and `mlir/test/Transforms/sccp-callgraph.mlir`.
Reviewed By: aartbik, Mogball
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D131660
With SCCP and integer range analysis ported to the new framework, this old framework is redundant. Delete it.
Depends on D128866
Reviewed By: rriddle
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D128867
Integer range inference has been swapped to the new framework. The integer value range lattices automatically updates the corresponding constant value on update.
Depends on D127173
Reviewed By: krzysz00, rriddle
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D128866
This patch introduces an implementation of dense data-flow analysis. Dense
data-flow analysis attaches a lattice before and after the execution of every
operation. The lattice state is propagated across operations by a user-defined
transfer function. The state is joined across control-flow and callgraph edges.
Thge patch provides an example pass that uses both a dense and a sparse analysis
together.
Depends on D127139
Reviewed By: rriddle, phisiart
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127173
This patch implements the analysis state classes needed for sparse data-flow analysis and implements a dead-code analysis using those states to determine liveness of blocks, control-flow edges, region predecessors, and function callsites.
Depends on D126751
Reviewed By: rriddle, phisiart
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127064
Removes one element of the pointer union to make it work on 32-bit
systems.
This patch introduces a generic data-flow analysis framework to MLIR. The framework implements a fixed-point iteration algorithm and a dependency graph between lattice states and analysis. Lattice states and points are fully extensible to support highly-customizable analyses.
Reviewed By: phisiart, rriddle
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126751
This patch introduces a generic data-flow analysis framework to MLIR. The framework implements a fixed-point iteration algorithm and a dependency graph between lattice states and analysis. Lattice states and points are fully extensible to support highly-customizable analyses.
Reviewed By: phisiart, rriddle
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126751
