caio/clang-p2996
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
Files
814b60509599614ba767cf0afef119cdbb7c4df8
clang-p2996/llvm/test/Transforms/LoopInterchange/loop-interchange-optimization-remarks.ll
Congzhe Cao c251bfc3b9 [LoopInterchange] Remove a limitation in LoopInterchange legality 
There was a limitation in legality that in the original inner loop latch,
no instruction was allowed between the induction variable increment
and the branch instruction. This is because we used to split the
inner latch at the induction variable increment instruction. Since
now we have split at the inner latch branch instruction and have
properly duplicated instructions over to the split block, we remove
this limitation.

Please refer to the test case updates to see how we now interchange
loops where instructions exist between the induction variable
increment and the branch instruction.

Reviewed By: bmahjour

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115238
2022-01-06 15:56:32 -05:00

259 lines
9.4 KiB
LLVM
Raw Blame History

; Test optimization remarks generated by the LoopInterchange pass.
;
; RUN: opt < %s -basic-aa -loop-interchange -verify-dom-info -verify-loop-info \
; RUN: -pass-remarks-output=%t -pass-remarks-missed='loop-interchange' \
; RUN: -pass-remarks='loop-interchange' -S
; RUN: cat %t | FileCheck %s
; RUN: opt < %s -basic-aa -loop-interchange -verify-dom-info -verify-loop-info \
; RUN: -pass-remarks-output=%t -pass-remarks-missed='loop-interchange' \
; RUN: -pass-remarks='loop-interchange' -S -da-disable-delinearization-checks
; RUN: cat %t | FileCheck --check-prefix=DELIN %s
@A = common global [100 x [100 x i32]] zeroinitializer
@B = common global [100 x [100 x i32]] zeroinitializer
@C = common global [100 x i32] zeroinitializer
;;---------------------------------------Test case 01---------------------------------
;; Loops interchange is not profitable.
;; for(int i=1;i<N;i++)
;; for(int j=1;j<N;j++)
;; A[i-1][j-1] = A[i - 1][j-1] + B[i][j];
define void @test01(i32 %N){
entry:
%cmp31 = icmp sgt i32 %N, 1
br i1 %cmp31, label %for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph, label %for.end19
for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph:
%0 = add i32 %N, -1
br label %for.body3.lr.ph
for.body3.lr.ph:
%indvars.iv34 = phi i64 [ 1, %for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph ], [ %indvars.iv.next35, %for.inc17 ]
%1 = add nsw i64 %indvars.iv34, -1
br label %for.body3
for.body3:
%indvars.iv = phi i64 [ 1, %for.body3.lr.ph ], [ %indvars.iv.next, %for.body3 ]
%2 = add nsw i64 %indvars.iv, -1
%arrayidx6 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @A, i64 0, i64 %1, i64 %2
%3 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx6
%arrayidx10 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @B, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv34, i64 %indvars.iv
%4 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx10
%add = add nsw i32 %4, %3
store i32 %add, i32* %arrayidx6
%indvars.iv.next = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv, 1
%lftr.wideiv = trunc i64 %indvars.iv to i32
%exitcond = icmp eq i32 %lftr.wideiv, %0
br i1 %exitcond, label %for.inc17, label %for.body3
for.inc17:
%indvars.iv.next35 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv34, 1
%lftr.wideiv37 = trunc i64 %indvars.iv34 to i32
%exitcond38 = icmp eq i32 %lftr.wideiv37, %0
br i1 %exitcond38, label %for.end19, label %for.body3.lr.ph
for.end19:
ret void
}
; CHECK: --- !Missed
; CHECK-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange
; CHECK-NEXT: Name: Dependence
; CHECK-NEXT: Function: test01
; CHECK-NEXT: Args:
; CHECK-NEXT: - String: Cannot interchange loops due to dependences.
; CHECK-NEXT: ...
; DELIN: --- !Missed
; DELIN-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange
; DELIN-NEXT: Name: InterchangeNotProfitable
; DELIN-NEXT: Function: test01
; DELIN-NEXT: Args:
; DELIN-NEXT: - String: 'Interchanging loops is too costly (cost='
; DELIN-NEXT: - Cost: '2'
; DELIN-NEXT: - String: ', threshold='
; DELIN-NEXT: - Threshold: '0'
; DELIN-NEXT: - String: ') and it does not improve parallelism.'
; DELIN-NEXT: ...
;;--------------------------------------Test case 02------------------------------------
;; [FIXME] This loop though valid is currently not interchanged due to the
;; limitation that we cannot split the inner loop latch due to multiple use of inner induction
;; variable.(used to increment the loop counter and to access A[j+1][i+1]
;; for(int i=0;i<N-1;i++)
;; for(int j=1;j<N-1;j++)
;; A[j+1][i+1] = A[j+1][i+1] + k;
define void @test02(i32 %k, i32 %N) {
entry:
%sub = add nsw i32 %N, -1
%cmp26 = icmp sgt i32 %N, 1
br i1 %cmp26, label %for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph, label %for.end17
for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph:
%cmp324 = icmp sgt i32 %sub, 1
%0 = add i32 %N, -2
%1 = sext i32 %sub to i64
br label %for.cond1.preheader
for.cond.loopexit:
%cmp = icmp slt i64 %indvars.iv.next29, %1
br i1 %cmp, label %for.cond1.preheader, label %for.end17
for.cond1.preheader:
%indvars.iv28 = phi i64 [ 0, %for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph ], [ %indvars.iv.next29, %for.cond.loopexit ]
%indvars.iv.next29 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv28, 1
br i1 %cmp324, label %for.body4, label %for.cond.loopexit
for.body4:
%indvars.iv = phi i64 [ %indvars.iv.next, %for.body4 ], [ 1, %for.cond1.preheader ]
%indvars.iv.next = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv, 1
%arrayidx7 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @A, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv.next, i64 %indvars.iv.next29
%2 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx7
%add8 = add nsw i32 %2, %k
store i32 %add8, i32* %arrayidx7
%lftr.wideiv = trunc i64 %indvars.iv to i32
%exitcond = icmp eq i32 %lftr.wideiv, %0
br i1 %exitcond, label %for.cond.loopexit, label %for.body4
for.end17:
ret void
}
; CHECK: --- !Missed
; CHECK-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange
; CHECK-NEXT: Name: Dependence
; CHECK-NEXT: Function: test02
; CHECK-NEXT: Args:
; CHECK-NEXT: - String: Cannot interchange loops due to dependences.
; CHECK-NEXT: ...
; DELIN: --- !Passed
; DELIN-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange
; DELIN-NEXT: Name: Interchanged
; DELIN-NEXT: Function: test02
; DELIN-NEXT: Args:
; DELIN-NEXT: - String: Loop interchanged with enclosing loop.
; DELIN-NEXT: ...
;;-----------------------------------Test case 03-------------------------------
;; Test to make sure we can handle output dependencies.
;;
;; for (int i = 0; i < 2; ++i)
;; for(int j = 0; j < 3; ++j) {
;; A[j][i] = i;
;; A[j][i+1] = j;
;; }
@A10 = local_unnamed_addr global [3 x [3 x i32]] zeroinitializer, align 16
define void @test03() {
entry:
br label %for.cond1.preheader
for.cond.loopexit: ; preds = %for.body4
%exitcond28 = icmp ne i64 %indvars.iv.next27, 2
br i1 %exitcond28, label %for.cond1.preheader, label %for.cond.cleanup
for.cond1.preheader: ; preds = %for.cond.loopexit, %entry
%indvars.iv26 = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %indvars.iv.next27, %for.cond.loopexit ]
%indvars.iv.next27 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv26, 1
br label %for.body4
for.cond.cleanup: ; preds = %for.cond.loopexit
ret void
for.body4: ; preds = %for.body4, %for.cond1.preheader
%indvars.iv = phi i64 [ 0, %for.cond1.preheader ], [ %indvars.iv.next, %for.body4 ]
%arrayidx6 = getelementptr inbounds [3 x [3 x i32]], [3 x [3 x i32]]* @A10, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv, i64 %indvars.iv26
%tmp = trunc i64 %indvars.iv26 to i32
store i32 %tmp, i32* %arrayidx6, align 4
%arrayidx10 = getelementptr inbounds [3 x [3 x i32]], [3 x [3 x i32]]* @A10, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv, i64 %indvars.iv.next27
%tmp1 = trunc i64 %indvars.iv to i32
store i32 %tmp1, i32* %arrayidx10, align 4
%indvars.iv.next = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv, 1
%exitcond = icmp ne i64 %indvars.iv.next, 3
br i1 %exitcond, label %for.body4, label %for.cond.loopexit
}
; CHECK: --- !Passed
; CHECK-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange
; CHECK-NEXT: Name: Interchanged
; CHECK-NEXT: Function: test03
; CHECK-NEXT: Args:
; CHECK-NEXT: - String: Loop interchanged with enclosing loop.
; CHECK-NEXT: ...
; DELIN: --- !Passed
; DELIN-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange
; DELIN-NEXT: Name: Interchanged
; DELIN-NEXT: Function: test03
; DELIN-NEXT: Args:
; DELIN-NEXT: - String: Loop interchanged with enclosing loop.
; DELIN-NEXT: ...
;;--------------------------------------Test case 04-------------------------------------
;; Loops not tightly nested are not interchanged
;; for(int j=0;j<N;j++) {
;; B[j] = j+k;
;; for(int i=0;i<N;i++)
;; A[j][i] = A[j][i]+B[j];
;; }
define void @test04(i32 %k, i32 %N){
entry:
%cmp30 = icmp sgt i32 %N, 0
br i1 %cmp30, label %for.body.lr.ph, label %for.end17
for.body.lr.ph:
%0 = add i32 %N, -1
%1 = zext i32 %k to i64
br label %for.body
for.body:
%indvars.iv32 = phi i64 [ 0, %for.body.lr.ph ], [ %indvars.iv.next33, %for.inc15 ]
%2 = add nsw i64 %indvars.iv32, %1
%arrayidx = getelementptr inbounds [100 x i32], [100 x i32]* @C, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv32
%3 = trunc i64 %2 to i32
store i32 %3, i32* %arrayidx
br label %for.body3
for.body3:
%indvars.iv = phi i64 [ 0, %for.body ], [ %indvars.iv.next, %for.body3 ]
%arrayidx7 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @A, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv32, i64 %indvars.iv
%4 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx7
%add10 = add nsw i32 %3, %4
store i32 %add10, i32* %arrayidx7
%indvars.iv.next = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv, 1
%lftr.wideiv = trunc i64 %indvars.iv to i32
%exitcond = icmp eq i32 %lftr.wideiv, %0
br i1 %exitcond, label %for.inc15, label %for.body3
for.inc15:
%indvars.iv.next33 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv32, 1
%lftr.wideiv35 = trunc i64 %indvars.iv32 to i32
%exitcond36 = icmp eq i32 %lftr.wideiv35, %0
br i1 %exitcond36, label %for.end17, label %for.body
for.end17:
ret void
}
; CHECK: --- !Missed
; CHECK-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange
; CHECK-NEXT: Name: Dependence
; CHECK-NEXT: Function: test04
; CHECK-NEXT: Args:
; CHECK-NEXT: - String: Cannot interchange loops due to dependences.
; CHECK-NEXT: ...
; DELIN: --- !Missed
; DELIN-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange
; DELIN-NEXT: Name: NotTightlyNested
; DELIN-NEXT: Function: test04
; DELIN-NEXT: Args:
; DELIN-NEXT: - String: Cannot interchange loops because they are not tightly nested.
; DELIN-NEXT: ...
Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink