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
There is no need to update the AlsoPack field when creating
VPReplicateRecipes. It can be easily computed based on the VP def-use
chains when it is needed.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D143864
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
This patch introduces DomTreeNodeTraits for customization. Clients can implement
DomTreeNodeTraitsCustom to provide custom ParentPtr, getEntryNode and getParent.
There's also a default specialization if DomTreeNodeTraitsCustom is not implemented,
that assume a Function-like NodeT. This is what is used for the existing DominatorTree
and MachineDominatorTree.
The main motivation for this patch is using DominatorTreeBase across all
regions of a VPlan, see D140513.
Reviewed By: kuhar
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D142162
At the moment, both VPValue and VPDef have an ID used when casting via
classof. This duplication is cumbersome, because it requires adding IDs
for new recipes twice and also requires setting them twice. In a few
cases, there's only a VPDef ID and no VPValue ID, which can cause same
confusion.
To simplify things, remove the VPValue IDs for different recipes.
Instead, only retain the generic VPValue ID (= used VPValues without a
corresponding defining recipe) and VPVRecipe for VPValues that are
defined by recipes that inherit from VPValue.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D140848
Various places in the code where still using the VPRecipeBase:: prefix
for VPDef IDs or not prefix at all. Now that the VPDef IDs have been
moved to VPDef, use this prefix instead and consistently use it.
This reduces the size of VPlan.h and avoids future growth of the file
when the graph traits are extended in future patches.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D140500
Add and run VPlan transform to fold blocks with a single predecessor
into the predecessor. This remove redundant blocks and addresses a TODO
to replace special handling for the vector latch VPBB.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D139927
This sets the stage for D133017 by moving out the code that performs
VPlan based simplifications to a separate transform that takes the
chosen VF & UF as arguments.
The main advantage is that this transform runs before any changes to
the CFG are being made. This allows using SCEV without worrying about
making queries while the IR is in an incomplete state.
Note that this patch switches the reasoning to use SCEV, but still only
simplifies loops with constant trip counts. Using SCEV here is needed to
access the backedge taken count, because the trip count IR value has not
been created yet.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D135017
Explicitly track the UFs supported in a VPlan. This is needed to
allow transformations to restrict the UFs which are supported.
Discussed as separate improvement in D135017.
The VFs and UFs may be more constrained as the plans are transformed
(e.g. see D135017 for an example).
To make sure the VFs/UFs included in the VPlan dump are accurate,
generate them when accessing a plan's name, rather than include them in
the name string set after initial construction.
Code generation now uses the start VPValue of induction recipes.
This makes it possible to adjust the start value of the epilogue
vector loop to use the 'resume' value of the main vector loop.
Fixes#59459.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92132
Add a VP_CLASSOF_IMPL macro to define common classof implementations for
recipes. This reduces duplication and also adds missing implementations
to existing recipes.
In scalar plans, replicate recipes will only generate a single value per
UF, independent of whether they are uniform or not. So don't consider
uniformity for plans with scalar VFs only.
This allows us to handle a few additional cases in VPlan sinking instead
of non-VPlan sinkScalarOperands.
Depends on D133762.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D134218
Document recipes used to model inductions after introducing
VPDerivedIVRecipe in 0c5df7cd2f81c.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D138748
This reverts commit bf15f1e489aa2f1ac13268c9081a992a8963eb5b.
The updated version fixes a crash by checking the induction kind instead
of the opcode; for integer inductions, the step is always added, but the
opcode might not be set.
This patch splits off the logic to transform the canonical IV to a
a value for an induction with a different start and step. This
transformation only needs to be done once (independent of VF/UF) and
enables sinking of VPScalarIVStepsRecipe as follow-up.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133758
The return value of getDef is guaranteed to be a VPRecipeBase and all
users can also accept a VPRecipeBase *. Most users actually case to
VPRecipeBase or a specific recipe before using it, so this change
removes a number of redundant casts.
Also rename it to getDefiningRecipe to make the name a bit clearer.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D136068
@Ayal suggested a better named helper than using `!getDef()` to check if
a value is invariant across all parts.
The property we are using here is that the VPValue is defined outside
any vector loop region. There's a TODO left to handle recipes defined in
pre-header blocks.
Reviewed By: reames
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133666
The dependent code has been changed quite a lot since 151c144 which
b73d2c8 effectively reverts. Now we run into a case where lowering
didn't expect/support the behavior pre 151c144 any longer.
Update the code dealing with scalable pointer inductions to also check
for uniformity in combination with isScalarAfterVectorization. This
should ensure scalable pointer inductions are handled properly during
epilogue vectorization.
Fixes#57912.
Epilogue vectorization uses isScalarAfterVectorization to check if
widened versions for inductions need to be generated and bails out in
those cases.
At the moment, there are scenarios where isScalarAfterVectorization
returns true but VPWidenPointerInduction::onlyScalarsGenerated would
return false, causing widening.
This can lead to widened phis with incorrect start values being created
in the epilogue vector body.
This patch addresses the issue by storing the cost-model decision in
VPWidenPointerInductionRecipe and restoring the behavior before 151c144.
This effectively reverts 151c144, but the long-term fix is to properly
support widened inductions during epilogue vectorization
Fixes#57712.
Use VPExpandSCEVRecipe to expand the step of pointer inductions. This
cleanup addresses a corresponding FIXME.
It should be NFC, as steps for pointer induction must be constants,
which makes expansion trivial.
This patch moves the cost-based decision whether to use an intrinsic or
library call to the point where the recipe is created. This untangles
code-gen from the cost model and also avoids doing some extra work as
the information is already computed at construction.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D132585
This addresses a suggestion to simplify the check from D131989. This
also makes it easier to ensure that VPHeaderPHIRecipe::classof checks
for all header phi ids.
Add verification that VPHeaderPHIRecipes are only in header VPBBs. Also
adds missing checks for VPPointerInductionRecipe to
VPHeaderPHIRecipe::classof.
Split off from D119661.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D131989
Currently, for vectorised loops that use the get.active.lane.mask
intrinsic we only use the mask for predicated vector operations,
such as masked loads and stores, etc. The loop itself is still
controlled by comparing the canonical induction variable with the
trip count. However, for some targets this is inefficient when it's
cheap to use the mask itself to control the loop.
This patch adds support for using the active lane mask for control
flow by:
1. Generating the active lane mask for the next iteration of the
vector loop, rather than the current one. If there are still any
remaining iterations then at least the first bit of the mask will
be set.
2. Extract the first bit of this mask and use this bit for the
conditional branch.
I did this by creating a new VPActiveLaneMaskPHIRecipe that sets
up the initial PHI values in the vector loop pre-header. I've also
made use of the new BranchOnCond VPInstruction for the final
instruction in the loop region.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D125301
This patch is a simple piece of refactoring that now permits users
to create VPInstructions and specify the name of the value being
generated. This is useful for creating more readable/meaningful
names in IR.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D128982
The moved helpers are only used for codegen. It will allow moving the
remaining ::execute implementations out of LoopVectorize.cpp.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D128657
At the moment, the same VPlan can be used code generation of both the
main vector and epilogue vector loop. This can lead to wrong results, if
the plan is optimized based on the VF of the main vector loop and then
re-used for the epilogue loop.
One example where this is problematic is if the scalar loops need to
execute at least one iteration, e.g. due to interleave groups.
To prevent mis-compiles in the short-term, disable optimizing exit
conditions for VPlans when using epilogue vectorization. The proper fix
is to avoid re-using the same plan for both loops, which will require
support for cloning plans first.
Fixes#56319.
The moved helpers are only used for codegen. It will allow moving the
remaining ::execute implementations out of LoopVectorize.cpp.
Depends on D127966.
Depends on D127965.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127968
All information is already available in VPlan. Note that there are some
test changes, because we now can correctly look through instructions
like truncates to analyze the actual users.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D123541
This reverts commit 266ea446ab747671eb6c736569c3c9c5f3c53d11.
The reasons for the revert have been addressed by cleaning up condition
handling in VPlan and properly marking VPBranchOnMaskRecipe as using
scalars.
The test case for the revert from D123720 has been added in 3d663308a5d.
