In the test case, the BECount of the second loop uses %load,
but we only have an LCSSA phi node for %add, so that is what
gets invalidated. Use the forgetLcssaPhiWithNewPredecessor()
API instead, which will invalidate the roots of the expression
instead.
Fixes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/109333.
This is a helper to avoid writing `getModule()->getDataLayout()`. I
regularly try to use this method only to remember it doesn't exist...
`getModule()->getDataLayout()` is also a common (the most common?)
reason why code has to include the Module.h header.
…f weights" #95136
Reverts #95060, and relands #86609, with the unintended code generation
changes addressed.
This patch implements the changes to LLVM IR discussed in
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-update-branch-weights-metadata-to-allow-tracking-branch-weight-origins/75032
In this patch, we add an optional field to MD_prof meatdata nodes for
branch weights, which can be used to distinguish weights added from
llvm.expect* intrinsics from those added via other methods, e.g. from
profiles or inserted by the compiler.
One of the major motivations, is for use with MisExpect diagnostics,
which need to know if branch_weight metadata originates from an
llvm.expect intrinsic. Without that information, we end up checking
branch weights multiple times in the case if ThinLTO + SampleProfiling,
leading to some inaccuracy in how we report MisExpect related
diagnostics to users.
Since we change the format of MD_prof metadata in a fundamental way, we
need to update code handling branch weights in a number of places.
We also update the lang ref for branch weights to reflect the change.
This patch implements the changes to LLVM IR discussed in
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-update-branch-weights-metadata-to-allow-tracking-branch-weight-origins/75032
In this patch, we add an optional field to MD_prof metadata nodes for
branch weights, which can be used to distinguish weights added from
`llvm.expect*` intrinsics from those added via other methods, e.g.
from profiles or inserted by the compiler.
One of the major motivations, is for use with MisExpect diagnostics,
which need to know if branch_weight metadata originates from an
llvm.expect intrinsic. Without that information, we end up checking
branch weights multiple times in the case if ThinLTO + SampleProfiling,
leading to some inaccuracy in how we report MisExpect related
diagnostics to users.
Since we change the format of MD_prof metadata in a fundamental way, we
need to update code handling branch weights in a number of places.
We also update the lang ref for branch weights to reflect the change.
This patch adds processing of min/max intrinsics in LoopPeel in the
similar way as it was done for conditional statements: for
min/max(IterVal, BoundVal) we peel iterations where IterVal < BoundVal
for monotonically increasing IterVal; for monotonically decreasing
IterVal we peel iterations where IterVal > BoundVal (strict comparision
predicates are used to minimize number of peeled iterations).
For example, this allows us to peel this loop with a `and`:
```
for (int i = 0; i < N; ++i) {
if (i % 2 == 0 && i < 3) // can peel based on || as well
f1();
f2();
```
into:
```
for (int i = 0; i < 3; ++i) { // peel three iterations
if (i % 2 == 0)
f1();
f2();
}
for (int i = 3; i < N; ++i)
f2();
```
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D64235 a new algorithm has been introduced
for updating the branch weights of latch blocks and their copies.
It increases the probability of going to the exit block for each next
peel iteration, calculating weights by (F - I * E, E), where:
- F is a weight of the edge from latch to header.
- E is a weight of the edge from latch to exit.
- I is a number of peeling iteration.
E.g: Let's say the latch branch weights are (100,300) and the estimated
trip count is 4. If we peel off all 4 iterations the weights of the
copied branches will be:
0: (100,300)
1: (100,200)
2: (100,100)
3: (100,1)
https://godbolt.org/z/93KnoEsT6
So we make the original loop almost unreachable from the 3rd peeled copy
according to the profile data. But that's only true if the profiling
data is accurate.
Underestimated trip count can lead to a performance issues with the
register allocator, which may decide to spill intervals inside the loop
assuming it's unreachable.
Since we don't know how accurate the profiling data is, it seems better
to set neutral 1/1 weights on the last peeled latch branch. After this
change, the weights in the example above will look like this:
0: (100,300)
1: (100,200)
2: (100,100)
3: (100,100)
Co-authored-by: Aleksandr Popov <apopov@azul.com>
Block dispositions of values defined inside the loop may change
during peeling, so clear them. We already do this for other kinds
of unrolling.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D153762
This also allows us to peel loops with a `select`:
```
for (int i = 0; i <= N; ++i);
f3(i == 0 ? a : b); // select instruction
```
into:
```
f3(a); // peel one iteration
for (int i = 1; i <= N; ++i)
f3(b);
```
Reviewed By: nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D151052
The value map of last peeled iteration is computed within peelLoop API.
This patch exposes it for callers of peelLoop.
While this is not currently used by upstream passes, we have a usecase
downstream which benefits from this API update. Future users of peelLoop
can also use the ValueMap if needed.
Similar value maps are exposed by other loop utilities such as loop
cloning.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D138228
Summary:
Expand the capabilities of the code for computing how many peels are
needed to make phis determined. A cast gets the peel count for the
value being casted while a binary op gets the maximum of the operands.
Respond to review comments: remove redundant asserts.
Author: Jamie Schmeiser <schmeise@ca.ibm.com>
Reviewed By:mkazantsev (Max Kazantsev),syzaara (Zaara Syeda)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D138719
This patch mechanically replaces None with std::nullopt where the
compiler would warn if None were deprecated. The intent is to reduce
the amount of manual work required in migrating from Optional to
std::optional.
This is part of an effort to migrate from llvm::Optional to
std::optional:
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/deprecating-llvm-optional-x-hasvalue-getvalue-getvalueor/63716
Summary:
Refactor loop peeling code by moving code for calculating phi invariance
into a separate class that does the calculation. Redescribe and rework
the algorithm in preparation for adding increased functionality. Add
test case that does not exhibit peeling that will be subsequently supported.
Author: Jamie Schmeiser <schmeise@ca.ibm.com>
Reviewed By: mkazantsev (Max Kazantsev)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D138232
Loop peeling currently requires that a) the latch is exiting
b) a branch and c) other exits are unreachable/deopt. This patch
removes all of these limitations, and adds the necessary branch
weight updating support. It essentially works the same way as
before with latch -> exiting terminator and
loop trip count -> per exit trip count.
It's worth noting that there are still other limitations in
profitability heuristics: This patch enables peeling of loops to
make conditions invariant (which is pretty much always highly
profitable if possible), while peeling to make loads dereferenceable
still checks that non-latch exits are unreachable and PGO-based
peeling has even more conditions. Those checks could be relaxed
later if we consider those cases profitable.
The motivation for this change is that loops using iterator adaptors
in Rust often optimize very badly, and end up with a loop phi of the
form phi(true, false) in the final result. Peeling eliminates that
phi and conditions based on it, which enables a lot of follow-on
simplification.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D134803
In this patch we replace common code patterns with the use of utility
functions for dealing with profiling metadata. There should be no change
in functionality, as the existing checks should be preserved in all
cases.
Reviewed By: bogner, davidxl
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D128860
In this patch we replace common code patterns with the use of utility
functions for dealing with profiling metadata. There should be no change
in functionality, as the existing checks should be preserved in all
cases.
Reviewed By: bogner, davidxl
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D128860
LoopPeel add new incoming values to exit phi nodes which can change the
SCEV for the phi after 20d798bd47ec51.
Forget SCEVs for such phis.
Fixes#56044.
Reviewed By: nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D128164
This reorganizes the code as a preparation for D123865:
* Use more descriptive names for variables
* Simplify a condition by use an already calculated value
for `MaxPeelCount`
* Remove a duplicate log entry
* Report basic values for loop costs
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D124388
The verify call was taking 50% of the compile time in our internal LLVM
fork when trying to unroll many loops.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D113028
Cleanup code in peelLoop API. We already have usage of DT without guarding
against a null DT, so this change constant folds the remaining null DT
checks.
Also make the argument a reference so that it is clear the argument is
a nonnull DT.
Extracted from D118472.
The TripCount is not modified by the function so it doesn't need
to be passed by reference. Verified by passing it as const reference
before changing to value.
Reviewed By: reames
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117735
This change allows us to estimate trip count from profile metadata for all multiple exit loops. We still do the estimate only from the latch, but that's fine as it causes us to over estimate the trip count at worst.
Reviewing the uses of the API, all but one are cases where we restrict a loop transformation (unroll, and vectorize respectively) when we know the trip count is short enough. So, as a result, the change makes these passes strictly less aggressive. The test change illustrates a case where we'd previously have runtime unrolled a loop which ran fewer iterations than the unroll factor. This is definitely unprofitable.
The one case where an upper bound on estimate trip count could drive a more aggressive transform is peeling, and I duplicated the logic being removed from the generic estimation there to keep it the same. The resulting heuristic makes no sense and should probably be immediately removed, but we can do that in a separate change.
This was noticed when analyzing regressions on D113939.
I plan to come back and incorporate estimated trip counts from other exits, but that's a minor improvement which can follow separately.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115362
Added support for peeling loops with exits that are followed either by an
unreachable-terminated block or block that has a terminatnig deoptimize call.
All blocks in the sequence must have an unique successor, maybe except
for the last one.
Reviewed By: mkazantsev
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110922
When peeling a loop, we assume that the latch has a `br` terminator and that
all loop exits are either terminated with an `unreachable` or have a terminating
deoptimize call. So when we peel off the 1st iteration, we change the IDom of
all loop exits to the peeled copy of `NCD(IDom(Exit), Latch)`. This works now,
but if we add logic to support loops with exits that are followed by a block
with an `unreachable` or a terminating deoptimize call, changing the exit's idom
wouldn't be enough and DT would be broken.
For example, let `Exit1` and `Exit2` are loop exits, and each of them
unconditionally branches to the same `unreachable` terminated block. So neither
of the exits dominates this unreachable block. If we change the IDoms of the
exits to some peeled loop block, we don't update the dominators of the unreachable
block. Currently we just don't get to the peeling logic, saying that we can't peel
such loops.
Previously we stored exits' IDoms in a map before peeling a loop and then, after
peeling off one iteration, we changed their IDoms.
Now we use the same logic not only for exits but for all non-loop blocks dominated
by the loop.
So when we add logic to support peeling loops with exits which branch, for example,
to an unreachable-terminated block, we would update the IDoms not only for exits,
but for their successors.
Patch by Dmitry Makogon!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111611
Reviewed By: mkazantsev, nikic
This reverts commit fa16329ae0721023376f24c7577b9020d438df1a.
See comments in discussion. Merged by mistake, not entirely getting what
the problem was.
When peeling a loop, we assume that the latch has a `br` terminator and
that all loop exits are either terminated with an `unreachable` or have
a terminating deoptimize call. So when we peel off the 1st iteration, we
change the IDom of all loop exits to the peeled copy of
`NCD(IDom(Exit), Latch)`. This works now, but if we add logic to support
loops with exits that are followed by a block with an `unreachable` or a
terminating deoptimize call, changing the exit's idom wouldn't be enough
and DT would be broken.
For example, let `Exit1` and `Exit2` are loop exits, and each of them
unconditionally branches to the same `unreachable` terminated block. So
neither of the exits dominates this unreachable block. If we change the
IDoms of the exits to some peeled loop block, we don't update the
dominators of the unreachable block. Currently we just don't get to the
peeling logic, saying that we can't peel such loops.
With this NFC we just insert edges from cloned exiting blocks to their
exits after peeling each iteration (we accumulate the insertion updates
and then after peeling apply the updates to DT).
This patch was a part of D110922.
Patch by Dmitry Makogon!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111611
Reviewed By: mkazantsev
