llvm-project/llvm/test/Transforms/LoopInterchange/interchange-flow-dep-outer.ll
Sjoerd Meijer 456ec1c2f4
[LoopInterchange] Remove 'S' Scalar Dependencies (#119345)
We are not handling 'S' scalar dependencies correctly and have at least
the following miscompiles related to that:

[LoopInterchange] incorrect handling of scalar dependencies and dependence vectors starting with ">" #54176
[LoopInterchange] Interchange breaks program correctness #46867
[LoopInterchange] Loops should not interchanged due to dependencies #47259
[LoopInterchange] Loops should not interchanged due to control flow #47401

This patch does no longer insert the "S" dependency/direction into the
dependency matrix, so a dependency is never "S". We seem to have
forgotten what the exact meaning is of this dependency type, and don't
see why it should be treated differently.

We prefer correctness over incorrect and more aggressive results. I.e.,
this prevents the miscompiles at the expense of handling less cases,
i.e. making interchange more pessimistic. However, some of the cases
that are now rejected for dependence analysis reasons, were rejected
before too but for other reasons (e.g. profitability). So at least for
the llvm regression tests, the number of regression are very reasonable.
This should be a stopgap. We would like to get interchange enabled by
default and thus prefer correctness over unsafe transforms, and later
see if we can get solve the regressions.
2025-01-20 13:04:58 +00:00

101 lines
4.1 KiB
LLVM

; Remove 'S' Scalar Dependencies #119345
; Scalar dependencies are not handled correctly, so they were removed to avoid
; miscompiles. The loop nest in this test case used to be interchanged, but it's
; no longer triggering. XFAIL'ing this test to indicate that this test should
; interchanged if scalar deps are handled correctly.
;
; XFAIL: *
; RUN: opt < %s -passes=loop-interchange -cache-line-size=64 -verify-dom-info -verify-loop-info -pass-remarks-output=%t -disable-output
; RUN: FileCheck -input-file %t %s
target datalayout = "e-m:e-i64:64-f80:128-n8:16:32:64-S128"
@A = common global [100 x [100 x i32]] zeroinitializer
@B = common global [100 x i32] zeroinitializer
@C = common global [100 x [100 x i32]] zeroinitializer
@D = common global [100 x [100 x [100 x i32]]] zeroinitializer
@T = internal global [100 x double] zeroinitializer, align 4
@Arr = internal global [1000 x [1000 x i32]] zeroinitializer, align 4
; Test that a flow dependency in outer loop doesn't prevent interchange in
; loops i and j.
;
; for (int k = 0; k < 100; ++k) {
; T[k] = fn1();
; for (int i = 0; i < 1000; ++i)
; for(int j = 1; j < 1000; ++j)
; Arr[j][i] = Arr[j][i]+k;
; fn2(T[k]);
; }
;
; So, loops InnerLoopId = 2 and OuterLoopId = 1 should be interchanged,
; but not InnerLoopId = 1 and OuterLoopId = 0.
;
; CHECK: --- !Passed
; CHECK-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange
; CHECK-NEXT: Name: Interchanged
; CHECK-NEXT: Function: interchange_09
; CHECK-NEXT: Args:
; CHECK-NEXT: - String: Loop interchanged with enclosing loop.
; CHECK-NEXT: ...
; CHECK-NEXT: --- !Missed
; CHECK-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange
; CHECK-NEXT: Name: NotTightlyNested
; CHECK-NEXT: Function: interchange_09
; CHECK-NEXT: Args:
; CHECK-NEXT: - String: Cannot interchange loops because they are not tightly nested.
; CHECK-NEXT: ...
; CHECK-NEXT: --- !Missed
; CHECK-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange
; CHECK-NEXT: Name: InterchangeNotProfitable
; CHECK-NEXT: Function: interchange_09
; CHECK-NEXT: Args:
; CHECK-NEXT: - String: Interchanging loops is not considered to improve cache locality nor vectorization.
; CHECK-NEXT: ...
define void @interchange_09(i32 %k) {
entry:
br label %for.body
for.cond.cleanup: ; preds = %for.cond.cleanup4
ret void
for.body: ; preds = %for.cond.cleanup4, %entry
%indvars.iv45 = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %indvars.iv.next46, %for.cond.cleanup4 ]
%call = call double @fn1()
%arrayidx = getelementptr inbounds [100 x double], ptr @T, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv45
store double %call, ptr %arrayidx, align 8
br label %for.cond6.preheader
for.cond6.preheader: ; preds = %for.cond.cleanup8, %for.body
%indvars.iv42 = phi i64 [ 0, %for.body ], [ %indvars.iv.next43, %for.cond.cleanup8 ]
br label %for.body9
for.cond.cleanup4: ; preds = %for.cond.cleanup8
%tmp = load double, ptr %arrayidx, align 8
call void @fn2(double %tmp)
%indvars.iv.next46 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv45, 1
%exitcond47 = icmp ne i64 %indvars.iv.next46, 100
br i1 %exitcond47, label %for.body, label %for.cond.cleanup
for.cond.cleanup8: ; preds = %for.body9
%indvars.iv.next43 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv42, 1
%exitcond44 = icmp ne i64 %indvars.iv.next43, 1000
br i1 %exitcond44, label %for.cond6.preheader, label %for.cond.cleanup4
for.body9: ; preds = %for.body9, %for.cond6.preheader
%indvars.iv = phi i64 [ 1, %for.cond6.preheader ], [ %indvars.iv.next, %for.body9 ]
%arrayidx13 = getelementptr inbounds [1000 x [1000 x i32]], ptr @Arr, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv, i64 %indvars.iv42
%t1 = load i32, ptr %arrayidx13, align 4
%t2 = trunc i64 %indvars.iv45 to i32
%add = add nsw i32 %t1, %t2
store i32 %add, ptr %arrayidx13, align 4
%indvars.iv.next = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv, 1
%exitcond = icmp ne i64 %indvars.iv.next, 1000
br i1 %exitcond, label %for.body9, label %for.cond.cleanup8
}
declare double @fn1() readnone
declare void @fn2(double) readnone