The cost of the InsertSubvector shuffle kind cost is not complete and
may end up with just extracts + inserts costs in many cases. Added
a workaround to represent it as a generic PermuteSingleSrc, which is
still pessimistic but better than InsertSubvector.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105827
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 a607f64118240f70bf1b14ec121b65f49d63800d.
This bug was introduced with D105730 / 25ee55c0baff .
If we are not converting all of the operations of a reduction
into a vector op, we need to preserve the existing select form
of the remaining ops. Otherwise, we are potentially leaking
poison where it did not in the original code.
Alive2 agrees that the version that freezes some inputs
and then falls back to scalar is correct:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/erF4K2
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
This reverts commit efaf3099c8cec1954831ee28a2f75a72096f50eb.
This reverts commit dc7bdc1e7121693df112f2fdb11cc6b88580ba4b.
Reverting patches due to buildbot failures.
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
The cost of the InsertSubvector shuffle kind cost is not complete and
may end up with just extracts + inserts costs in many cases. Added
a workaround to represent it as a generic PermuteSingleSrc, which is
still pessimistic but better than InsertSubvector.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105827
This has been a work-in-progress for a long time...we finally have all of
the pieces in place to handle vectorization of compare code as shown in:
https://llvm.org/PR41312
To do this (see PhaseOrdering tests), we converted SimplifyCFG and
InstCombine to the poison-safe (select) forms of the logic ops, so now we
need to have SLP recognize those patterns and insert a freeze op to make
a safe reduction:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/NH54Ah
We get the minimal patterns with this patch, but the PhaseOrdering tests
show that we still need adjustments to get the ideal IR in some or all of
the motivating cases.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105730
The const version of VPValue::getVPValue still had a default value for
the value index. Remove the default value and use getVPSingleValue
instead, which is the proper function.
Instead of performing the isMoreProfitable() operation on
InstructionCost::CostTy the operation is performed on InstructionCost
directly, so that it can handle the case where one of the costs is
Invalid.
This patch also changes the CostTy to be int64_t, so that the type is
wide enough to deal with multiplications with e.g. `unsigned MaxTripCount`.
Reviewed By: dmgreen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105113
This makes it clearer when we have encountered the extra arg.
Also, we may need to adjust the way the operand iteration
works when handling logical and/or.
This is NFC-intended currently (so no test diffs). The motivation
is to eventually allow matching for poison-safe logical-and and
logical-or (these are in the form of a select-of-bools).
( https://llvm.org/PR41312 )
Those patterns will not have all of the same constraints as min/max
in the form of cmp+sel. We may also end up removing the cmp+sel
min/max matching entirely (if we canonicalize to intrinsics), so
this will make that step easier.
This patch removes the IsPairwiseForm flag from the Reduction Cost TTI
hooks, along with some accompanying code for pattern matching reductions
from trees starting at extract elements. IsPairWise is now assumed to be
false, which was the predominant way that the value was used from both
the Loop and SLP vectorizers. Since the adjustments such as D93860, the
SLP vectorizer has not relied upon this distinction between paiwise and
non-pairwise reductions.
This also removes some code that was detecting reductions trees starting
from extract elements inside the costmodel. This case was
double-counting costs though, adding the individual costs on the
individual instruction _and_ the total cost of the reduction. Removing
it changes the costs in llvm/test/Analysis/CostModel/X86/reduction.ll to
not double count. The cost of reduction intrinsics is still tested
through the various tests in
llvm/test/Analysis/CostModel/X86/reduce-xyz.ll.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105484
Patch tries to improve the vectorization of stores. Originally, we just
check the type and the base pointer of the store.
Patch adds some extra checks to avoid non-profitable vectorization
cases. It includes analysis of the scalar values to be stored and
triggers the vectorization attempt only if the scalar values have
same/alt opcode and are from same basic block, i.e. we don't end up
immediately with the gather node, which is not profitable.
This also improves compile time by filtering out non-profitable cases.
Part of D57059.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104122
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
The reduction matching was probably only dealing with binops
when it was written, but we have now generalized it to handle
select and intrinsics too, so assert on that too.
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
When skimming through old review discussion, I noticed a post commit comment on an earlier patch which had gone unaddressed. Better late (4 months), than never right?
I'm not aware of an active problem with the combination of non-latch exits and epilogue vectorization, but the interaction was not considered and I'm not modivated to make epilogue vectorization work with early exits. If there were a bug in the interaction, it would be pretty hard to hit right now (as we canonicalize towards bottom tested loops), but an upcoming change to allow multiple exit loops will greatly increase the chance for error. Thus, let's play it safe for now.
Compare type IDs and DFS numbering for basic block instead of addresses
to fix non-determinism.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105031
This reverts commit 706bbfb35bd31051e46ac77aab3e9b2dbc3abe78.
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 3fed6d443f802c43aade1b5b1b09f5e2f8b3edb1,
bbcbf21ae60c928e07dde6a1c468763b3209d1e6 and
6c3451cd76cbd0cd973d9c2b08b168dcd0bce3c2.
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
Splits `getSmallestAndWidestTypes` into two functions, one of which now collects
a list of all element types found in the loop (`ElementTypesInLoop`). This ensures we do not
have to iterate over all instructions in the loop again in other places, such as in D102253
which disables scalable vectorization of a loop if any of the instructions use invalid types.
Reviewed By: sdesmalen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105437
The function vectorizeChainsInBlock does not support scalable vector,
because function like canReuseExtract and isCommutative in the code
path assert with scalable vectors.
This patch avoids vectorizing blocks that have extract instructions with scalable
vector..
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104809
This API is not compatible with opaque pointers, the method
accepting an explicit pointer element type should be used instead.
Thankfully there were few in-tree users. The BPF case still ends
up using the pointer element type for now and needs something like
D105407 to avoid doing so.
Same as other CreateLoad-style APIs, these need an explicit type
argument to support opaque pointers.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105395
The compiler should not ignore UndefValue when gathering the scalars,
otherwise the resulting code may be less defined than the original one.
Also, grouped scalars to insert them at first to reduce the analysis in
further passes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105275
In lots of places we were calling setDebugLocFromInst and passing
in the same Builder member variable found in InnerLoopVectorizer.
I personally found this confusing so I've changed the interface
to take an Optional<IRBuilder<> *> and we can now pass in None
when we want to use the class member variable.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105100
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
