If we vectorize a e.g. store, we leave around a bunch of getelementptrs for the individual scalar stores which we removed. We can go ahead and delete them as well.
This is purely for test output quality and readability. It should have no effect in any sane pipeline.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122493
The original commit exposed several missing dependencies (e.g. latent bugs in SLP scheduling). Most of these were fixed over the weekend and have had several days to bake. The last was fixed this morning after being noticed in manual review of test changes yesterday. See the review thread for links to each change.
Original commit message follows:
SLP currently schedules all instructions within a scheduling window which stretches from the first instruction potentially vectorized to the last. This window can include a very large number of unrelated instructions which are not being considered for vectorization. This change switches the code to only schedule the sub-graph consisting of the instructions being vectorized and their transitive users.
This has the effect of greatly reducing the amount of work performed in large basic blocks, and thus greatly improves compile time on degenerate examples. To understand the effects, I added some statistics (not planned for upstream contribution). Here's an illustration from my motivating example:
Before this patch:
704357 SLP - Number of calcDeps actions
699021 SLP - Number of schedule calls
5598 SLP - Number of ReSchedule actions
59 SLP - Number of ReScheduleOnFail actions
10084 SLP - Number of schedule resets
8523 SLP - Number of vector instructions generated
After this patch:
102895 SLP - Number of calcDeps actions
161916 SLP - Number of schedule calls
5637 SLP - Number of ReSchedule actions
55 SLP - Number of ReScheduleOnFail actions
10083 SLP - Number of schedule resets
8403 SLP - Number of vector instructions generated
I do want to highlight that there is a small difference in number of generated vector instructions. This example is hitting the bailout due to maximum window size, and the change in scheduling is slightly perturbing when and how we hit it. This can be seen in the RescheduleOnFail counter change. Given that, I think we can safely ignore.
The downside of this change can be seen in the large test diff. We group all vectorizable instructions together at the bottom of the scheduling region. This means that vector instructions can move quite far from their original point in code. While maybe undesirable, I don't see this as being a major problem as this pass is not intended to be a general scheduling pass.
For context, it's worth noting that the pre-scheduling that SLP does while building the vector tree is exactly the sub-graph scheduling implemented by this patch.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118538
Root issue which triggered the revert was fixed in 689bab. No changes in the reapplied patch.
Original commit message follows:
SLP currently schedules all instructions within a scheduling window which stretches from the first instr
uction potentially vectorized to the last. This window can include a very large number of unrelated instruct
ions which are not being considered for vectorization. This change switches the code to only schedule the su
b-graph consisting of the instructions being vectorized and their transitive users.
This has the effect of greatly reducing the amount of work performed in large basic blocks, and thus greatly improves compile time on degenerate examples. To understand the effects, I added some statistics (not planned for upstream contribution). Here's an illustration from my motivating example:
Before this patch:
704357 SLP - Number of calcDeps actions
699021 SLP - Number of schedule calls
5598 SLP - Number of ReSchedule actions
59 SLP - Number of ReScheduleOnFail actions
10084 SLP - Number of schedule resets
8523 SLP - Number of vector instructions generated
After this patch:
102895 SLP - Number of calcDeps actions
161916 SLP - Number of schedule calls
5637 SLP - Number of ReSchedule actions
55 SLP - Number of ReScheduleOnFail actions
10083 SLP - Number of schedule resets
8403 SLP - Number of vector instructions generated
I do want to highlight that there is a small difference in number of generated vector instructions. This example is hitting the bailout due to maximum window size, and the change in scheduling is slightly perturbing when and how we hit it. This can be seen in the RescheduleOnFail counter change. Given that, I think we can safely ignore.
The downside of this change can be seen in the large test diff. We group all vectorizable instructions together at the bottom of the scheduling region. This means that vector instructions can move quite far from their original point in code. While maybe undesirable, I don't see this as being a major problem as this pass is not intended to be a general scheduling pass.
For context, it's worth noting that the pre-scheduling that SLP does while building the vector tree is exactly the sub-graph scheduling implemented by this patch.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118538
This reverts commit 0539a26d91a1b7c74022fa9cf33bd7faca87544d.
Causes a miscompile, see comments on D118538.
Required updating bottom-to-top-reorder.ll.
SLP currently schedules all instructions within a scheduling window which stretches from the first instruction potentially vectorized to the last. This window can include a very large number of unrelated instructions which are not being considered for vectorization. This change switches the code to only schedule the sub-graph consisting of the instructions being vectorized and their transitive users.
This has the effect of greatly reducing the amount of work performed in large basic blocks, and thus greatly improves compile time on degenerate examples. To understand the effects, I added some statistics (not planned for upstream contribution). Here's an illustration from my motivating example:
Before this patch:
704357 SLP - Number of calcDeps actions
699021 SLP - Number of schedule calls
5598 SLP - Number of ReSchedule actions
59 SLP - Number of ReScheduleOnFail actions
10084 SLP - Number of schedule resets
8523 SLP - Number of vector instructions generated
After this patch:
102895 SLP - Number of calcDeps actions
161916 SLP - Number of schedule calls
5637 SLP - Number of ReSchedule actions
55 SLP - Number of ReScheduleOnFail actions
10083 SLP - Number of schedule resets
8403 SLP - Number of vector instructions generated
I do want to highlight that there is a small difference in number of generated vector instructions. This example is hitting the bailout due to maximum window size, and the change in scheduling is slightly perturbing when and how we hit it. This can be seen in the RescheduleOnFail counter change. Given that, I think we can safely ignore.
The downside of this change can be seen in the large test diff. We group all vectorizable instructions together at the bottom of the scheduling region. This means that vector instructions can move quite far from their original point in code. While maybe undesirable, I don't see this as being a major problem as this pass is not intended to be a general scheduling pass.
For context, it's worth noting that the pre-scheduling that SLP does while building the vector tree is exactly the sub-graph scheduling implemented by this patch.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118538
It is possible to merge reuse and reorder shuffles and reduce the total
cost of the vectorization tree/number of final instructions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94992
This reverts commit 438682de6a38ac97f89fa38faf5c8dc9b09cd9ad to fix the
bug with the reducing size of the resulting vector for the entry node
with multiple users.
This patch updates IRBuilder to create insertelement/shufflevector using poison as a placeholder.
Reviewed By: nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93793
It is possible to merge reuse and reorder shuffles and reduce the total
cost of the ivectorization tree/number of final instructions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92668
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).
This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.
llvm-svn: 358546
Summary:
Reversed loads are handled as gathering. But we can just reshuffle
these values. Patch adds support for vectorization of reversed loads.
Reviewers: RKSimon, spatel, mkuper, hfinkel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D43022
llvm-svn: 325134
Summary:
If the same value is going to be vectorized several times in the same
tree entry, this entry is considered to be a gather entry and cost of
this gather is counter as cost of InsertElementInstrs for each gathered
value. But we can consider these elements as ShuffleInstr with
SK_PermuteSingle shuffle kind.
Reviewers: spatel, RKSimon, mkuper, hfinkel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38697
llvm-svn: 323662
Summary:
If the same value is going to be vectorized several times in the same
tree entry, this entry is considered to be a gather entry and cost of
this gather is counter as cost of InsertElementInstrs for each gathered
value. But we can consider these elements as ShuffleInstr with
SK_PermuteSingle shuffle kind.
Reviewers: spatel, RKSimon, mkuper, hfinkel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38697
llvm-svn: 323530
Summary:
If the same value is going to be vectorized several times in the same
tree entry, this entry is considered to be a gather entry and cost of
this gather is counter as cost of InsertElementInstrs for each gathered
value. But we can consider these elements as ShuffleInstr with
SK_PermuteSingle shuffle kind.
Reviewers: spatel, RKSimon, mkuper, hfinkel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38697
llvm-svn: 323441
Summary:
If the same value is going to be vectorized several times in the same
tree entry, this entry is considered to be a gather entry and cost of
this gather is counter as cost of InsertElementInstrs for each gathered
value. But we can consider these elements as ShuffleInstr with
SK_PermuteSingle shuffle kind.
Reviewers: spatel, RKSimon, mkuper, hfinkel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38697
llvm-svn: 323430
Summary:
If the same value is going to be vectorized several times in the same
tree entry, this entry is considered to be a gather entry and cost of
this gather is counter as cost of InsertElementInstrs for each gathered
value. But we can consider these elements as ShuffleInstr with
SK_PermuteSingle shuffle kind.
Reviewers: spatel, RKSimon, mkuper, hfinkel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38697
llvm-svn: 323348
Summary:
If the same value is going to be vectorized several times in the same
tree entry, this entry is considered to be a gather entry and cost of
this gather is counter as cost of InsertElementInstrs for each gathered
value. But we can consider these elements as ShuffleInstr with
SK_PermuteSingle shuffle kind.
Reviewers: spatel, RKSimon, mkuper, hfinkel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38697
llvm-svn: 323246
