It's less clear with scalable vectors than fixed length vectors that
interleaving exposes more ILP, as scalable vectors can be thought of a
sort of hardware form of interleaving, especially with larger LMULs.
This also addresses the unexpected additional unrolling that occurs when
using larger LMULs in the loop vectorizer.
Reviewed By: craig.topper
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D144485
Fixed issue where 'ConstantInt::get(IndextTy, -Part)' was executed with the wrong type for Part,
e.g. IndexTy was i64, but Part was 'unsigned', which led to things like 'mul i64 .., 4294967292',
which was obviously wrong.
Also changed sve-vector-reverse.ll to be vectorized with UF>1 to test this.
This reverts commit 1f01cdda68614dba12af3cc3aff38541d0abcc6b.
This is specifically relevant for loops that vectorize using a scalable VF,
where the code results in:
%vscale = call i32 llvm.vscale.i32()
%vf.part1 = mul i32 %vscale, 4
%gep = getelementptr ..., i32 %vf.part1
Which InstCombine then changes into:
%vscale = call i32 llvm.vscale.i32()
%vf.part1 = mul i32 %vscale, 4
%vf.part1.zext = sext i32 %vf.part1 to i64
%gep = getelementptr ..., i32 %vf.part1.zext
D143016 tried to remove these extends, but that only works when
the call to llvm.vscale.i32() has a single use. After doing any
kind of CSE on these calls the combine no longer kicks in.
It seems more sensible to ask DataLayout what type to use, rather
than relying on InstCombine to insert the extend and hoping it can
fold it away.
I've only changed this for indices that are not constant, because
I vaguely remember there was a reason for sticking with i32. It
would also mean patching up loads more tests.
Reviewed By: paulwalker-arm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D143267
Instcombine prefers this canonical form (see getPreferredVectorIndex),
as does IRBuilder when passing the index as an integer so we may as
well use the prefered form from creation.
NOTE: All test changes are mechanical with nothing else expected
beyond a change of index type from i32 to i64.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D140983
Epilogue loop vectorization is a feature in the vectorize intended to avoid running fully scalar code when the vector length of the main loop turns out to be either longer than the trip count of the actual loop, or with a huge remainder.
In practice, this feature appears to not have been well tuned. I honestly don't think it should be on by default at all, but it definitely shouldn't be on for RISCV. Note that other targets have also disabled it, but they've done so via disabling interleaving - which is, well, completely unrelated - and we don't want to do that for RISCV.
In the near term, many examples I'm seeing have terrible codegen for epilogue vectorization. We are greatly increasing code size for little value at reasonable VLEN values for small types. In the long term, the cases that epilogue vectorization are intended to handle are likely better handled via tail folding on RISCV.
As an aside, I also don't really trust the correctness of epilogue vectorization. The code structure is such that otherwise straight forward changes sometimes break only epilogue vectorization. The reuse of an existing vplan without careful validation opens significant room for nasty bugs. Given how rarely the code is exercised, that is not a good combination.
As such, this patch introduces a TTI hook, and completely disables epilogue vectorization on RISCV.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D136695
This extends the safe-divisor widening scheme recently added for scalable vectors to handle fixed vectors as well.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D132591
