x86_mmx is conceptually a vector already. Don't introduce an extra conversion between it and scalar i64.
I'm using VectorType::isValidElementType which checks for floating point, integer, and pointers to hopefully make this more readable than just blacklisting x86_mmx.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69964
As the test cases show, we end up with an insert/extract and a
bitcast to/from i64. x86_mmx is for some purposes conceptually a
vector. We shouldn't be adding scalar conversions around it.
Since _m64 is defined as <1 x i64> and intrinsics use x86_mmx
as their input/output these extra scalar operations prevent
the X86 backend from generating good code especially on 32-bit
targets where i64 gets split.
Instcombiner pass was erasing trivially dead instruction without updating dependent llvm.dbg.value.
which was not showing programmer current state of variables while debugging.
As a part of this fix I did following,
Iterate throught all the users (llvm.dbg) of a instruction which is trivially dead and set each if them undef, Before deleting the instruction.
Now user will see optimized out, when try to print those variables.
This fixes
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43893
This is my first fix to llvm.
Patch by kamlesh kumar!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69809
shift (logic (shift X, C0), Y), C1 --> logic (shift X, C0+C1), (shift Y, C1)
This is an IR translation of an existing SDAG transform added here:
rL370617
So we again have 9 possible patterns with a commuted IR variant of each pattern:
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/VlIhttps://rise4fun.com/Alive/n1mhttps://rise4fun.com/Alive/1Vn
Part of the motivation is to allow easier recognition and subsequent
canonicalization of bswap patterns as discussed in PR43146:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43146
We had to delay this transform because it used to allow the SLP vectorizer
to create awful reductions out of simple load-combines.
That problem was fixed with:
rL375025
(we'll bring back load combining in IR someday...)
The backend is also better equipped to deal with these patterns now
using hooks like TLI.getShiftAmountThreshold().
The only remaining potential controversy is that the -reassociate pass
tends to reverse this kind of pattern (to help GVN?). But since -reassociate
doesn't do anything with these specific patterns, there is no conflict currently.
Finally, there's a new pass proposal at D67383 for general tree-height-reduction
reassociation, and it could use a cost model to decide how to optimally rearrange
these kinds of ops for a target. That patch appears to be stalled.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69842
We have a vector compare reduction problem seen in PR39665 comment 2:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39665#c2
Or slightly reduced here:
define i1 @cmp2(<2 x double> %a0) {
%a = fcmp ogt <2 x double> %a0, <double 1.0, double 1.0>
%b = extractelement <2 x i1> %a, i32 0
%c = extractelement <2 x i1> %a, i32 1
%d = and i1 %b, %c
ret i1 %d
}
SLP would not attempt to turn this into a vector reduction because there is an
artificial lower limit on that transform. We can not completely remove that limit
without inducing regressions though, so this patch just hacks an extra attempt at
creating a 2-way reduction to the end of the analysis.
As shown in the test file, we are still not getting some of the motivating cases,
so follow-on patches will be needed to solve those cases.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59710
It broke Chromium, causing "Instruction does not dominate all uses!" errors.
See https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1022297#c1 for a
reproducer.
> If the recurrence PHI node has a single user, we can sink any
> instruction without side effects, given that all users are dominated by
> the instruction computing the incoming value of the next iteration
> ('Previous'). We can sink instructions that may cause traps, because
> that only causes the trap to occur later, but not on any new paths.
>
> With the relaxed check, we also have to make sure that we do not have a
> direct cycle (meaning PHI user == 'Previous), which indicates a
> reduction relation, which potentially gets missed by
> ReductionDescriptor.
>
> As follow-ups, we can also sink stores, iff they do not alias with
> other instructions we move them across and we could also support sinking
> chains of instructions and multiple users of the PHI.
>
> Fixes PR43398.
>
> Reviewers: hsaito, dcaballe, Ayal, rengolin
>
> Reviewed By: Ayal
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69228
Summary:
When adjusting function entry counts after inlining, Funciton::setEntryCount is called without providing an import function list. The side effect of that is the previously set import function list will be dropped. The import function list is used by ThinLTO to help import hot cross module callee for LTO inlining, so dropping that during ThinLTO pre-link may adversely affect LTO inlining. The fix is to keep the list while updating entry counts for inlining.
Reviewers: wmi, davidxl, tejohnson
Subscribers: mehdi_amini, hiraditya, dexonsmith, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69736
"[SLP] Generalization of stores vectorization."
"[SLP] Fix -Wunused-variable. NFC"
"[SLP] Vectorize jumbled stores."
As they're causing significant (10-30x) compile time regressions on
vectorizable code.
The primary cause of the compile-time regression is f228b5371647f471853c5fb3e6719823a42fe451.
This reverts commits:
f228b5371647f471853c5fb3e6719823a42fe451
5503455ccb3f5fcedced158332c016c8d3a7fa81
21d498c9c0f32dcab5bc89ac593aa813b533b43a
The basic idea of the transform is to convert variant loop exit conditions into invariant exit conditions by changing the iteration on which the exit is taken when we know that the trip count is unobservable. See the original patch which introduced the code for a more complete explanation.
The individual parts of this have been reviewed, the result has been fuzzed, and then further analyzed by hand, but despite all of that, I will not be suprised to see breakage here. If you see problems, please don't hesitate to revert - though please do provide a test case. The most likely class of issues are latent SCEV bugs and without a reduced test case, I'll be essentially stuck on reducing them.
(Note: A bunch of tests were opted out of the new transform to preserve coverage. That landed in a previous commit to simplify revert cycles if they turn out to be needed.)
I'm about to enable the new loop predication transform by default. It has the effect of completely destroying many read only loops - which happen to be a super common idiom in our test cases. So as to preserve test coverage of other transforms, disable the new transform where it would cause sharp test coverage regressions.
(This is semantically part of the enabling commit. It's committed separate to ease revert if the actual flag flip gets reverted.)
We had a subtle, but nasty bug in our definition of a widenable branch, and thus in the transforms which used that utility. Specifically, we returned true for any branch which included a widenable condition within it's condition, regardless of whether that widenable condition also had other uses.
The problem is that the result of the WC() call is defined to be one particular value. As such, all users must agree as to what that value is. If we widen a branch without also updating *all other users* of the WC in the same way, we have broken the required semantics.
Most of the textual diff is updating existing transforms not to leave dead uses hanging around. They're largely NFC as the dead instructions would be immediately deleted by other passes. The reason to make these changes is so that the transforms preserve the widenable branch form.
In practice, we don't get bitten by this only because it isn't profitable to CSE WC() calls and the lowering pass from guards uses distinct WC calls per branch.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69916
Summary:
I believe this bisects to https://reviews.llvm.org/D44983
(`[LoopUnroll] Only peel if a predicate becomes known in the loop body.`)
While that revision did contain tests that showed arguably-subpar peeling
for [in]equality predicates that [not] happen in the middle of the loop,
it also disabled peeling for the *first* loop iteration,
because latch would be canonicalized to [in]equality comparison..
That was intentional as per https://reviews.llvm.org/D44983#1059583.
I'm not 100% sure that i'm using correct checks here,
but this fix appears to be going in the right direction..
Let me know if i'm missing some checks here..
Fixes [[ https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43840 | PR43840 ]].
Reviewers: fhahn, mkazantsev, efriedma
Reviewed By: fhahn
Subscribers: xbolva00, hiraditya, zzheng, llvm-commits, fhahn
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69617
We have two ways to steer creating a predicated vector body over creating a
scalar epilogue. To force this, we have 1) a command line option and 2) a
pragma available. This adds a third: a target hook to TargetTransformInfo that
can be queried whether predication is preferred or not, which allows the
vectoriser to make the decision without forcing it.
While this change behaves as a non-functional change for now, it shows the
required TTI plumbing, usage of this new hook in the vectoriser, and the
beginning of an ARM MVE implementation. I will follow up on this with:
- a complete MVE implementation, see D69845.
- a patch to disable this, i.e. we should respect "vector_predicate(disable)"
and its corresponding loophint.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69040
When eliminating a pair of
`llvm.objc.autoreleaseReturnValue`
followed by
`llvm.objc.retainAutoreleasedReturnValue`
we need to make sure that the instructions in between are safe to
ignore.
Other than bitcasts and useless GEPs, it's also safe to ignore lifetime
markers for both static allocas (lifetime.start/lifetime.end) and dynamic
allocas (stacksave/stackrestore).
These get added by the inliner as part of the return sequence and can
prevent the transformation from happening in practice.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69833
Summary:
That fold keeps growing and growing :(
I think this may be one of the last pieces for it.
Since D67677/D67725, the fold knowns the general form
of the pattern - where some masking is needed:
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/F5Rhttps://rise4fun.com/Alive/gslRa
But there is one more huge piece missing - if you are extracting some bits,
it is not impossible that the origin is wider than the extraction,
i.e. there may be a truncation. And we don't deal with that yet.
But we can, and the generalization remains fully identical:
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/Uarhttps://rise4fun.com/Alive/5SW
After a preparatory cleanup i think the diff looks rather clean.
One missing piece is that in some patterns (especially pat. b),
`-1` only needs to be `-1` in final type, but that is for later..
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42563
Reviewers: spatel, nikic
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69125
With a few things fixed:
- initialisaiton of the optimisation remark pass (this was causing the buildbot
failures on PPC),
- a test case.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69660
This transformation is a variation on the GuardWidening transformation we have checked in as it's own pass. Instead of focusing on merge (i.e. hoisting and simplifying) two widenable branches, this transform makes the observation that simply removing a second slowpath block (by reusing an existing one) is often a very useful canonicalization. This may lead to later merging, or may not. This is a useful generalization when the intermediate block has loads whose dereferenceability is hard to establish.
As noted in the patch, this can be generalized further, and will be.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69689
This reverts commit 004ed2b0d1b86d424643ffc88fce20ad8bab6804.
Original commit hash 6d03890384517919a3ba7fe4c35535425f278f89
Summary:
This adds a clang option to disable inline line tables. When it is used,
the inliner uses the call site as the location of the inlined function instead of
marking it as an inline location with the function location.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D67723
Summary:
If the GEP instructions are going to be vectorized, the indices in those
GEP instructions must be of the same type. Otherwise, the compiler may
crash when trying to build the vector constant.
Reviewers: RKSimon, spatel
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69627
The easy code fix won't catch non-canonical mismatched
constant patterns, so adding extra coverage for those in
case we decide that's important (but seems unlikely).
If the recurrence PHI node has a single user, we can sink any
instruction without side effects, given that all users are dominated by
the instruction computing the incoming value of the next iteration
('Previous'). We can sink instructions that may cause traps, because
that only causes the trap to occur later, but not on any new paths.
With the relaxed check, we also have to make sure that we do not have a
direct cycle (meaning PHI user == 'Previous), which indicates a
reduction relation, which potentially gets missed by
ReductionDescriptor.
As follow-ups, we can also sink stores, iff they do not alias with
other instructions we move them across and we could also support sinking
chains of instructions and multiple users of the PHI.
Fixes PR43398.
Reviewers: hsaito, dcaballe, Ayal, rengolin
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69228
Dependences between two abstract attributes SRC and TRG come naturally in
two flavors:
Either (1) "some" information of SRC is *required* for TRG to derive
information, or (2) SRC is just an *optional* way for TRG to derive
information.
While it is not strictly necessary to distinguish these types
explicitly, it can help us to converge faster, in terms of iterations,
and also cut down the number of `AbstractAttribute::update` calls.
As far as I can tell, we only use optional dependences for liveness so
far but that might change in the future. With this change the Attributor
can be informed about the "dependence class" and it will perform
appropriate actions when an Attribute is set to an invalid state, thus
one that cannot be used by others to derive information from.
As discussed in https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43870,
this transform is missing a crucial legality check:
the old (non-countable) loop would early-return upon first mismatch,
but there is no such guarantee for bcmp/memcmp.
We'd need to ensure that [PtrA, PtrA+NBytes) and [PtrB, PtrB+NBytes)
are fully dereferenceable memory regions. But that would limit
the transform to constant loop trip counts and would further
cripple it because dereferenceability analysis is *very* partial.
Furthermore, even if all that is done, every single test
would need to be rewritten from scratch.
So let's just give up.
BlockAddress users will not "call" the function so they do not qualify
as call sites in the first place. When we delete a function with
BlockAddress users we need to first remove the body so they are properly
discarded.
When the Attributor run on the IPConstantProp test case for multiple
callbacks it triggered a faulty assertion in the AbstractCallSite
implementation. The callee can well be at argument position 0.
When we replace constant returns at the call site we did issue a cast in
the hopes it would be a no-op if the types are equal. Turns out that is
not the case and we have to check it ourselves first.
Reused an IPConstantProp test for coverage. No functional change to the
test wrt. IPConstantProp.
Even if the invoked function may-return, we can replace it with a call
and branch if it is nounwind. We had almost everything in place to do
this but did not which actually caused a crash when we removed the
landingpad from the actually dead unwind block.
Exposed by the IPConstantProp tests.
We did merge "known" and "assumed" liveness information into a single
set which caused various kinds of problems, especially because we did
not properly record when something was actually known. With this patch
we properly track the "known" bit and distinguish dead ends we know from
the ones we still need to explore in future updates.
We gave up on `noreturn` if `willreturn` was known for a while but we
now again try to always derive `noreturn`. This is useful because a
function that is `noreturn` + `willreturn` is basically dead as
executing it would lead to undefined behavior (UB).
This came up in the IPConstantProp cases where a function only contained
a unreachable but was not marked `noreturn` which caused missed
opportunities down the line.
In D69605 only the "cases" of a switch were handled but if none matched
we did not make the default case life. This is fixed now and properly
tested (with code from IPConstantProp/user-with-multiple-uses.ll).
We cannot simply replace arguments that carry attributes like `nest`,
`inalloca`, `sret`, and `byval`. Except for the last one, which we can
replace if it is not written, we bail for now.
Trying to deduce information for declarations and calls sites of
declarations is not useful in practice but only for testing. Add a flag
that disables this by default but also enable it in the tests.
The misc.ll test will verify the flag "works" as expected.
We cannot look at the subsuming positions and take their nocapture bit
as shown with the two tests for which we derived nocapture on the call
site argument and readonly on the argument of the second before.
