This patch adds the predicate as additional operand to VPReplicateRecipe
during initial construction. The predicated recipes are later moved into
replicate regions. This simplifies constructions and some VPlan
transformations, like fixed-order recurrence handling.
It also improves codegen in some cases (e.g. for in-loop reductions),
because the recipes remain in the same block.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D143865
Since AArch64 has sqrt instructions, we want to use those instead of
calls to vector math routines for llvm sqrt intrinsics (since those
don't imply some of the constraints that libm calls might have) so
we just remove the mappings.
Code originally written by mgabka
Reviewed By: danielkiss, paulwalker-arm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D145392
This patch adds support for scalarizing calls to a function when
there is a vector variant that cannot be used, either because there
isn't a masked variant or because the cost model indicated a VF
without a masked variant was better.
Reviewed By: paulwalker-arm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D134422
This work follows on from D142109 and addresses a possible regression
when we know the loop iteration counter cannot overflow.
When we know the overflow-check always evaluates to false, it's better to
use the other style of tail folding where it assumes a runtime check was
added, because that avoids having to calculate a modified trip-count.
Reviewed By: paulwalker-arm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D142894
When using tail-folding and using the predicate for both data and control-flow
(the next vector iteration's predicate is generated with the llvm.active.lane.mask
intrinsic and then tested for the backedge), the LoopVectorizer still inserts a
runtime check to see if the 'i + VF' may at any point overflow for the given
trip-count. When it does, it falls back to a scalar epilogue loop.
We can get rid of that runtime check in the pre-header and therefore also
remove the scalar epilogue loop. This reduces code-size and avoids a runtime
check.
Consider the following loop:
void foo(char * __restrict__ dst, char *src, unsigned long N) {
for (unsigned long i=0; i<N; ++i)
dst[i] = src[i] + 42;
}
If 'N' is e.g. ULONG_MAX, and the VF > 1, then the loop iteration counter
will overflow when calculating the predicate for the next vector iteration
at some point, because LLVM does:
vector.ph:
%active.lane.mask.entry = tail call <vscale x 16 x i1> @llvm.get.active.lane.mask.nxv16i1.i64(i64 0, i64 %N)
vector.body:
%index = phi i64 [ 0, %vector.ph ], [ %index.next, %vector.body ]
%active.lane.mask = phi <vscale x 16 x i1> [ %active.lane.mask.entry, %vector.ph ], [ %active.lane.mask.next, %vector.body ]
...
%index.next = add i64 %index, 16
; The add above may overflow, which would affect the lane mask and control flow. Hence a runtime check is needed.
%active.lane.mask.next = tail call <vscale x 16 x i1> @llvm.get.active.lane.mask.nxv16i1.i64(i64 %index.next, i64 %N)
%8 = extractelement <vscale x 16 x i1> %active.lane.mask.next, i64 0
br i1 %8, label %vector.body, label %for.cond.cleanup, !llvm.loop !7
The solution:
What we can do instead is calculate the predicate before incrementing
the loop iteration counter, such that the llvm.active.lane.mask is
calculated from 'i' to 'tripcount > VF ? tripcount - VF : 0', i.e.
vector.ph:
%active.lane.mask.entry = tail call <vscale x 16 x i1> @llvm.get.active.lane.mask.nxv16i1.i64(i64 0, i64 %N)
%N_minus_VF = select %N > 16 ? %N - 16 : 0
vector.body:
%index = phi i64 [ 0, %vector.ph ], [ %index.next, %vector.body ]
%active.lane.mask = phi <vscale x 16 x i1> [ %active.lane.mask.entry, %vector.ph ], [ %active.lane.mask.next, %vector.body ]
...
%active.lane.mask.next = tail call <vscale x 16 x i1> @llvm.get.active.lane.mask.nxv16i1.i64(i64 %index, i64 %N_minus_VF)
%index.next = add i64 %index, %4
; The add above may still overflow, but this time the active.lane.mask is not affected
%8 = extractelement <vscale x 16 x i1> %active.lane.mask.next, i64 0
br i1 %8, label %vector.body, label %for.cond.cleanup, !llvm.loop !7
For N = 20, we'd then get:
vector.ph:
%active.lane.mask.entry = tail call <vscale x 16 x i1> @llvm.get.active.lane.mask.nxv16i1.i64(i64 0, i64 %N)
; %active.lane.mask.entry = <1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1>
%N_minus_VF = select 20 > 16 ? 20 - 16 : 0
; %N_minus_VF = 4
vector.body: (1st iteration)
... ; using <1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1> as predicate in the loop
...
%active.lane.mask.next = tail call <vscale x 16 x i1> @llvm.get.active.lane.mask.nxv16i1.i64(i64 0, i64 4)
; %active.lane.mask.next = <1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0>
%index.next = add i64 0, 16
; %index.next = 16
%8 = extractelement <vscale x 16 x i1> %active.lane.mask.next, i64 0
; %8 = 1
br i1 %8, label %vector.body, label %for.cond.cleanup, !llvm.loop !7
; branch to %vector.body
vector.body: (2nd iteration)
... ; using <1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0> as predicate in the loop
...
%active.lane.mask.next = tail call <vscale x 16 x i1> @llvm.get.active.lane.mask.nxv16i1.i64(i64 16, i64 4)
; %active.lane.mask.next = <0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0>
%index.next = add i64 16, 16
; %index.next = 32
%8 = extractelement <vscale x 16 x i1> %active.lane.mask.next, i64 0
; %8 = 0
br i1 %8, label %vector.body, label %for.cond.cleanup, !llvm.loop !7
; branch to %for.cond.cleanup
Reviewed By: fhahn, david-arm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D142109
Previously, while calculating register usage due to invariants, it was assumed that invariant would always be part of widening
instructions. This resulted in calculating vector register types for vectors which cant be legalized(check the newly added test for more details).
An invariant might not always need a vector register. For e.g., invariant might just be used for iteration check.
This patch checks if the invariant is part of any widening instruction and considers register usage accordingly. Fixes issue 60493
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D143422
Previously, while calculating register usage due to invariants, it was assumed that invariant would always be part of widening
instructions. This resulted in calculating vector register types for vectors which cant be legalized(check the newly added test for more details).
An invariant might not always need a vector register. For e.g., invariant might just be used for iteration check.
This patch checks if the invariant is part of any widening instruction and considers register usage accordingly. Fixes issue 60493
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D143422
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
This is a test for an upcoming patch that proposes to change the default LMUL used by the loop vectorizer from 1 to 2
Reviewed By: reames
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D143722
- Add test config: -force-vector-width=4 -force-vector-interleave=1
- New test case: The test case both returns the minimum value and the index.
Reviewed By: fhahn
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D143905
When vectorizing code with function calls in it, if we encounter
a function which only has vectorized variants requiring a mask
we can synthesize an all-true mask to enable us to proceed.
Since we want the mask to be represented in vplan, the pointer
to the chosen Function is now stored as part of the
VPWidenCallRecipe, and mask arguments are added at the
appropriate index to the recipe operands.
Reviewed By: david-arm, fhahn, reames
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D132458
adjustFixedOrderRecurrences may insert instructions after immediately
after the PHI nodes in the block. This invalidates the phis() iterator.
To avoid crashing/accessing invalid recipes, first collect all
first-order recurrence phi recipes.
This should fix a crash reported by @dmgreen after D142589 landed.
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 patch updates LV to sink recipes directly using the VPlan use
chains. The initial patch only moves sinking to be purely VPlan-based.
Follow-up patches will move legality checks to VPlan as well.
At the moment, there's a single test failure remaining.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D142589
Fix an issue about module linking with LTO.
When compiling with PIE, the small data limitation needs to be consistent with that in PIC, otherwise there will be linking errors due to conflicting values.
bar.c
```
int bar() { return 1; }
```
foo.c
```
int foo() { return 1; }
```
```
clang --target=riscv64-unknown-linux-gnu -flto -c foo.c -o foo.o -fPIE
clang --target=riscv64-unknown-linux-gnu -flto -c bar.c -o bar.o -fPIC
clang --target=riscv64-unknown-linux-gnu -flto foo.o bar.o -flto -nostdlib -v -fuse-ld=lld
```
```
ld.lld: error: linking module flags 'SmallDataLimit': IDs have conflicting values in 'bar.o' and 'ld-temp.o'
clang-15: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see invocation)
```
Use Min instead of Error for conflicting SmallDataLimit.
Authored by: @joshua-arch1
Signed-off-by: xiaojing.zhang <xiaojing.zhang@xcalibyte.com>
Signed-off-by: jianxin.lai <jianxin.lai@xcalibyte.com>
Reviewed By: MaskRay
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D131230
The test contained a unused load that appears unrelated to the test
(store of vector of i1). Remove it to avoid test changes in follow-up
change which will lead to dead loads being removed.
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
Update a few tests to add users to loads to avoid them being optimized
out by future changes. In cases the unused loads didn't matter for the
test, remove them.
This artifact can appear from the vectorizer. (add X, -1) is the
backedge taken count. It gets zero extended and then 1 is added to
it to get the trip count.
There is usually a dominating branch that rules out X being zero.
Alive: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/NsRDwX
This patch vectorizes Phi node loop reductions for select's whos condition
comes from a floating-point comparison, with its operands being integers
for Add, Sub, and Mul reductions.
Example:
int foo(float *x, int n) {
int sum = 0;
for (int i=0; i<n; ++i) {
float elem = x[i];
if (elem > 0) {
sum += 2;
}
}
return sum;
}
This would previously fail to vectorize due to the integer reduction.
This patch vectorizes Phi node loop reductions for select's whos condition
comes from a floating-point comparison, with its operands being integers
for Add, Sub, and Mul reductions.
Example:
int foo(float *x, int n) {
int sum = 0;
for (int i=0; i<n; ++i) {
float elem = x[i];
if (elem > 0) {
sum += 2;
}
}
return sum;
}
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D141842
Update sinkScalarOperands to consider all operands of recipes in
replicate blocks as sink candidates This enables additional sinking
opportunities and is another step towards retiring LLVM IR-based
sinkScalarOperands.
This enables iterative sinking of operands for successive calls of
sinkScalarOperands.
Depends on D139788.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D139790
It enables trigonometry functions vectorization via SLEEF: http://sleef.org/.
- A new vectorization library enum is added to TargetLibraryInfo.h: SLEEF.
- A new option is added to TargetLibraryInfoImpl - ClVectorLibrary: SLEEF.
- A comprehensive test case is included in this changeset.
- A new vectorization library argument is added to -fveclib: -fveclib=SLEEF.
Trigonometry functions that are vectorized by sleef:
acos
asin
atan
atanh
cos
cosh
exp
exp2
exp10
lgamma
log10
log2
log
sin
sinh
sqrt
tan
tanh
tgamma
Co-authored-by: Stefan Teleman
Reviewed By: paulwalker-arm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D134719
IR is now always parsed in opaque pointer mode, unless
-opaque-pointers=0 is explicitly given. There is no automatic
detection of typed pointers anymore.
The -opaque-pointers=0 option is added to any remaining IR tests
that haven't been migrated yet.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D141912
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
LAI is cached during the LoopDistribute pass, and is later re-used during LoopVectorize. The problem is that LoopVectorize changes SCEV, and the cached LAI does not get updated. Hence, when re-using the cached LAI, it references an invalid SCEV.
Fixes#59319
Reviewed By: fhahn
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D139601
This is based on @frasercrmck's D107290. At least some of the clang
portion of D107290 has already been committed.
This uses vscale_range for min/max vector width unless the command
line overrides are used.
As a follow up, I plan to add a max or exact VLEN option to clang
to control the vscale_range. This will eliminate many of the reasons
for users to use the overrides through the -mllvm interface.
Reviewed By: reames
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D139873
This patch adds metadata to disable runtime unrolling to the vectorized
loop. If runtime unrolling/interleaving is considered profitable, LV
will interleave the loop directly. There should be no need to perform
runtime unrolling at a later stage.
Note that we already add metadata to disable runtime unrolling to the
scalar loop after vectorization.
The additional unrolling unnecessarily increases code size and compile
time. In addition to that we have several bug reports of unncessary
runtime unrolling for vectorized loops, e.g. PR40961
Compile-time improvements:
NewPM-O3: -1.04%
NewPM-ReleaseThinLTO: -0.59%
NewPM-ReleaseLTO-g: -0.97%
https://llvm-compile-time-tracker.com/compare.php?from=ce1be13a868d0f8afa367975558c1a6175cce33a&to=78bc2e67f22e9e10e61cdb6cdac4bb857d95eb1b&stat=instructions:uFixes#40306.
Reviewed By: lebedev.ri, nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115261
The validation of vplans could fail if an inloop reduction was created
with a block-in mask that did not dominate the reduction. This makes
sure that the insert point is set when creating the mask, to ensure it
dominates the reduction.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D141003
This reverts commit aa2414729ebbcb2d8f162e9002a3a6aa768b1f9d.
Previously-valid IR from a tensorflow test case (as shown on the
Diffusion revision for aa2414729ebbcb2d8f162e9002a3a6aa768b1f9d) started
hanging in the loop-vectorize pass. Reverting to keep everyone working.
Check lines for some of these tests were regenerated. The difference
is that with opaque pointers SCEVExpander always emits i8 GEPs,
making the address calculation explicit. This is a known problem
that will be solved long term by making all address calculations
explicit.
