This patch returns an Invalid cost from getInstructionCost() for alloca
instructions if the VF is scalable, as otherwise loops which contain
these instructions will crash when attempting to scalarize the alloca.
Reviewed By: sdesmalen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105824
The original patch was:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D105806
There were some issues with undeterministic behaviour of the sorting
function, which led to scalable-call.ll passing and/or failing. This
patch fixes the issue by numbering all instructions in the array first,
and using that number as the order, which should provide a consistent
ordering.
This reverts commit a607f64118.
This change enables vectorization of multiple exit loops when the exit count is statically computable. That requirement - shared with the rest of LV - in turn requires each exit to be analyzeable and to dominate the latch.
The majority of work to support this was done in a set of previous patches. In particular,, 72314466 avoids having multiple edges from the middle block to the exits, and 4b33b2387 which added support for non-latch single exit and multiple exits with a single exiting block. As a result, this change is basically just removing a bailout and adjusting some tests now that the prerequisite work is done and has stuck in tree for a bit.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105817
The sort function for emitting an OptRemark was not deterministic,
which caused scalable-call.ll to fail on some buildbots. This patch
fixes that.
This patch also fixes an issue where `Instruction::comesBefore()`
is called when two Instructions are in different basic blocks,
which would otherwise cause an assertion failure.
This patch emits remarks for instructions that have invalid costs for
a given set of vectorization factors. Some example output:
t.c:4:19: remark: Instruction with invalid costs prevented vectorization at VF=(vscale x 1): load
dst[i] = sinf(src[i]);
^
t.c:4:14: remark: Instruction with invalid costs prevented vectorization at VF=(vscale x 1, vscale x 2, vscale x 4): call to llvm.sin.f32
dst[i] = sinf(src[i]);
^
t.c:4:12: remark: Instruction with invalid costs prevented vectorization at VF=(vscale x 1): store
dst[i] = sinf(src[i]);
^
Reviewed By: fhahn, kmclaughlin
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105806
At the moment, <vscale x 1 x eltty> are not yet fully handled by the
code-generator, so to avoid vectorizing loops with that VF, we mark the
cost for these types as invalid.
The reason for not adding a new "TTI::getMinimumScalableVF" is because
the type is supposed to be a type that can be legalized. It partially is,
although the support for these types need some more work.
Reviewed By: paulwalker-arm, dmgreen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103882
Update (mainly) vXf32/vXf64 -> vXi8/vXi16 fptosi/fptoui costs based on the worst case costs from the script in D103695.
Move to using legalized types wherever possible, which allows us to prune the cost tables.
Revived D101297 in its original form + added some changes in X86
legalization cehcking for masked gathers.
This solution is the most stable and the most correct one. We have to
check the legality before trying to build the masked gather in SLP.
Without this check we have incorrect cost (for SLP) in case if the masked gather
is not legal/slower than the gather. And we're missing some
vectorization opportunities.
This can be fixed in the cost model, but in this case we need to add
special checks for the cost of GEPs for ScatterVectorize node, add
special check for small trees, etc., i.e. there are a lot of corner
cases here and there, which insrease code base and make it harder to
maintain the code.
> Can't we rely on cost model to deal with this? This can be profitable for futher vectorization, when we can start from such gather loads as seed.
The question from D101297. Actually, no, it can't. Actually, simple
gather may give us better result, especially after we started
vectorization of insertelements. Plus, like I said before, the cost for
non-legal masked gathers leads to missed vectorization opportunities.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105042
Resubmit after the following changes:
* Fix a latent bug related to unrolling with required epilogue (see e49d65f). I believe this is the cause of the prior PPC buildbot failure.
* Disable non-latch exits for epilogue vectorization to be safe (9ffa90d)
* Split out assert movement (600624a) to reduce churn if this gets reverted again.
Previous commit message (try 3)
Resubmit after fixing test/Transforms/LoopVectorize/ARM/mve-gather-scatter-tailpred.ll
Previous commit message...
This is a resubmit of 3e5ce4 (which was reverted by 7fe41ac). The original commit caused a PPC build bot failure we never really got to the bottom of. I can't reproduce the issue, and the bot owner was non-responsive. In the meantime, we stumbled across an issue which seems possibly related, and worked around a latent bug in 80e8025. My best guess is that the original patch exposed that latent issue at higher frequency, but it really is just a guess.
Original commit message follows...
If we know that the scalar epilogue is required to run, modify the CFG to end the middle block with an unconditional branch to scalar preheader. This is instead of a conditional branch to either the preheader or the exit block.
The motivation to do this is to support multiple exit blocks. Specifically, the current structure forces us to identify immediate dominators and *which* exit block to branch from in the middle terminator. For the multiple exit case - where we know require scalar will hold - these questions are ill formed.
This is the last change needed to support multiple exit loops, but since the diffs are already large enough, I'm going to land this, and then enable separately. You can think of this as being NFCIish prep work, but the changes are a bit too involved for me to feel comfortable tagging the review that way.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94892
This reverts commit 706bbfb35b.
The committed version moves the definition of VPReductionPHIRecipe out
of an ifdef only intended for ::print helpers. This should resolve the
build failures that caused the revert
This patch adds a TTI function, isElementTypeLegalForScalableVector, to query
whether it is possible to vectorize a given element type. This is called by
isLegalToVectorizeInstTypesForScalable to reject scalable vectorization if
any of the instruction types in the loop are unsupported, e.g:
int foo(__int128_t* ptr, int N)
#pragma clang loop vectorize_width(4, scalable)
for (int i=0; i<N; ++i)
ptr[i] = ptr[i] + 42;
This example currently crashes if we attempt to vectorize since i128 is not a
supported type for scalable vectorization.
Reviewed By: sdesmalen, david-arm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102253
This reverts commit 3fed6d443f,
bbcbf21ae6 and
6c3451cd76.
The changes causing build failures with certain configurations, e.g.
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/67/builds/3365/steps/6/logs/stdio
lib/libLLVMVectorize.a(LoopVectorize.cpp.o): In function `llvm::VPRecipeBuilder::tryToCreateWidenRecipe(llvm::Instruction*, llvm::ArrayRef<llvm::VPValue*>, llvm::VFRange&, std::unique_ptr<llvm::VPlan, std::default_delete<llvm::VPlan> >&) [clone .localalias.8]':
LoopVectorize.cpp:(.text._ZN4llvm15VPRecipeBuilder22tryToCreateWidenRecipeEPNS_11InstructionENS_8ArrayRefIPNS_7VPValueEEERNS_7VFRangeERSt10unique_ptrINS_5VPlanESt14default_deleteISA_EE+0x63b): undefined reference to `vtable for llvm::VPReductionPHIRecipe'
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
This patch is a first step towards splitting up VPWidenPHIRecipe into
separate recipes for the 3 distinct cases they model:
1. reduction phis,
2. first-order recurrence phis,
3. pointer induction phis.
This allows untangling the code generation and allows us to reduce the
reliance on LoopVectorizationCostModel during VPlan code generation.
Discussed/suggested in D100102, D100113, D104197.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104989
Loads of <4 x i8> vectors were modeled as extremely expensive. And while we
don't have a load instruction that supports this, it isn't that expensive to
create a vector of i8 elements. The codegen for this was fixed/optimised in
D105110. This now tweaks the cost model and enables SLP vectorisation of my
motivating case loadi8.ll.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103629
Update v4i64 -> v4f32/v4f64 uitofp costs based on the worst case costs from the script in D103695.
Fixes a few regressions before we start adding AVX costs for legalized types.
If we unroll a loop in the vectorizer (without vectorizing), and the cost model requires a epilogue be generated for correctness, the code generation must actually do so.
The included test case on an unmodified opt will access memory one past the expected bound. As a result, this patch is fixing a latent miscompile.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103700
This patch fixes a crash when the target instruction for sinking is
dead. In that case, no recipe is created and trying to get the recipe
for it results in a crash. To ensure all sink targets are alive, find &
use the first previous alive instruction.
Note that the case where the sink source is dead is already handled.
Found by
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=35320
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104603
Previously in setCostBasedWideningDecision if we encountered an
invariant store we just assumed that we could scalarize the store
and called getUniformMemOpCost to get the associated cost.
However, for scalable vectors this is not an option because it is
not currently possibly to scalarize the store. At the moment we
crash in VPReplicateRecipe::execute when trying to scalarize the
store.
Therefore, I have changed setCostBasedWideningDecision so that if
we are storing a scalable vector out to a uniform address and the
target supports scatter instructions, then we should use those
instead.
Tests have been added here:
Transforms/LoopVectorize/AArch64/sve-inv-store.ll
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104624
Currently we will allow loops with a fixed width VF of 1 to vectorize
if the -enable-strict-reductions flag is set. However, the loop vectorizer
will not use ordered reductions if `VF.isScalar()` and the resulting
vectorized loop will be out of order.
This patch removes `VF.isVector()` when checking if ordered reductions
should be used. Also, instead of converting the FAdds to reductions if the
VF = 1, operands of the FAdds are changed such that the order is preserved.
Reviewed By: david-arm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104533
Sinking scalar operands into predicated-triangle regions may allow
merging regions. This patch adds a VPlan-to-VPlan transform that tries
to merge predicate-triangle regions after sinking.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100260
This patch updates VPWidenPHI recipes for first-order recurrences to
also track the incoming value from the back-edge. Similar to D99294,
which did the same for reductions.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104197
A backedge-taken count doesn't refer to memory; returning a pointer type
is nonsense. So make sure we always return an integer.
The obvious way to do this would be to just convert the operands of the
icmp to integers, but that doesn't quite work out at the moment:
isLoopEntryGuardedByCond currently gets confused by ptrtoint operations.
So we perform the ptrtoint conversion late for lt/gt operations.
The test changes are mostly innocuous. The most interesting changes are
more complex SCEV expressions of the form "(-1 * (ptrtoint i8* %ptr to
i64)) + %ptr)". This is expected: we can't fold this to zero because we
need to preserve the pointer base.
The call to isLoopEntryGuardedByCond in howFarToZero is less precise
because of ptrtoint operations; this shows up in the function
pr46786_c26_char in ptrtoint.ll. Fixing it here would require more
complex refactoring. It should eventually be fixed by future
improvements to isImpliedCond.
See https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46786 for context.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103656
This can be seen as a follow up to commit 0ee439b705,
that changed the second argument of __powidf2, __powisf2 and
__powitf2 in compiler-rt from si_int to int. That was to align with
how those runtimes are defined in libgcc.
One thing that seem to have been missing in that patch was to make
sure that the rest of LLVM also handle that the argument now depends
on the size of int (not using the si_int machine mode for 32-bit).
When using __builtin_powi for a target with 16-bit int clang crashed.
And when emitting libcalls to those rtlib functions, typically when
lowering @llvm.powi), the backend would always prepare the exponent
argument as an i32 which caused miscompiles when the rtlib was
compiled with 16-bit int.
The solution used here is to use an overloaded type for the second
argument in @llvm.powi. This way clang can use the "correct" type
when lowering __builtin_powi, and then later when emitting the libcall
it is assumed that the type used in @llvm.powi matches the rtlib
function.
One thing that needed some extra attention was that when vectorizing
calls several passes did not support that several arguments could
be overloaded in the intrinsics. This patch allows overload of a
scalar operand by adding hasVectorInstrinsicOverloadedScalarOpd, with
an entry for powi.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99439
As noted in https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46666, the current behavior of assuming if-conversion safety if a loop is annotated parallel (`!llvm.loop.parallel_accesses`), is not expectable, the documentation for this behavior was since removed from the LangRef again, and can lead to invalid reads.
This was observed in POCL (https://github.com/pocl/pocl/issues/757) and would require similar workarounds in current work at hipSYCL.
The question remains why this was initially added and what the implications of removing this optimization would be.
Do we need an alternative mechanism to propagate the information about legality of if-conversion?
Or is the idea that conditional loads in `#pragma clang loop vectorize(assume_safety)` can be executed unmasked without additional checks flawed in general?
I think this implication is not part of what a user of that pragma (and corresponding metadata) would expect and thus dangerous.
Only two additional tests failed, which are adapted in this patch. Depending on the further direction force-ifcvt.ll should be removed or further adapted.
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103907
Fixes getTypeConversion to return `TypeScalarizeScalableVector` when a scalable vector
type cannot be legalized by widening/splitting. When this is the method of legalization
found, getTypeLegalizationCost will return an Invalid cost.
The getMemoryOpCost, getMaskedMemoryOpCost & getGatherScatterOpCost functions already call
getTypeLegalizationCost and will now also return an Invalid cost for unsupported types.
Reviewed By: sdesmalen, david-arm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102515
If the `-enable-strict-reductions` flag is set to true, then currently we will
always choose to vectorize the loop with strict in-order reductions. This is
not necessary where we allow the reordering of FP operations, such as
when loop hints are passed via metadata.
This patch moves useOrderedReductions so that we can also check whether
loop hints allow reordering, in which case we should use the default
behaviour of vectorizing with unordered reductions.
Reviewed By: sdesmalen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103814
Noticed via code inspection. We changed the semantics of the IR when we added mustprogress, and we appear to have not updated this location.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103834
The non-DOT printing does not include the successors of VPregionBlocks.
This patch use the same style for printing successors as for
VPBasicBlock.
I think the printing of successors could be a bit improved further, as
at the moment it is hard to ensure a check line matches all successors.
But that can be done as follow-up.
Reviewed By: a.elovikov
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103515
This patch marks the induction increment of the main induction variable
of the vector loop as NUW when not folding the tail.
If the tail is not folded, we know that End - Start >= Step (either
statically or through the minimum iteration checks). We also know that both
Start % Step == 0 and End % Step == 0. We exit the vector loop if %IV +
%Step == %End. Hence we must exit the loop before %IV + %Step unsigned
overflows and we can mark the induction increment as NUW.
This should make SCEV return more precise bounds for the created vector
loops, used by later optimizations, like late unrolling.
At the moment quite a few tests still need to be updated, but before
doing so I'd like to get initial feedback to make sure I am not missing
anything.
Note that this could probably be further improved by using information
from the original IV.
Attempt of modeling of the assumption in Alive2:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/H_DL_g
Part of a set of fixes required for PR50412.
Reviewed By: mkazantsev
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103255
This patch uses the calculated maximum scalable VFs to build VPlans,
cost them and select a suitable scalable VF.
Reviewed By: paulwalker-arm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98722
Update isFirstOrderRecurrence to explore all uses of a recurrence phi
and check if we can sink them. If there are multiple users to sink, they
are all mapped to the previous instruction.
Fixes PR44286 (and another PR or two).
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84951
This is a patch that replaces shufflevector and insertelement's placeholder value with poison.
Underlying motivation is to fix the semantics of shufflevector with undef mask to return poison instead
(D93818)
The consensus has been made in the late 2020 via mailing list as well as the thread in https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44185 .
This patch is a simple syntactic change to the existing code, hence directly pushed as a commit.
