recommit: [LoopVectorize][PowerPC] Estimate int and float register pressure separately in loop-vectorize

In loop-vectorize, interleave count and vector factor depend on target register number. Curre

recommit: [LoopVectorize][PowerPC] Estimate int and float register pressure separately in loop-vectorize

In loop-vectorize, interleave count and vector factor depend on target register number. Currently, it does not
estimate different register pressure for different register class separately(especially for scalar type,
float type should not be on the same position with int type), so it's not accurate. Specifically,
it causes too many times interleaving/unrolling, result in too many register spills in loop body and hurting performance.

So we need classify the register classes in IR level, and importantly these are abstract register classes,
and are not the target register class of backend provided in td file. It's used to establish the mapping between
the types of IR values and the number of simultaneous live ranges to which we'd like to limit for some set of those types.

For example, POWER target, register num is special when VSX is enabled. When VSX is enabled, the number of int scalar register is 32(GPR),
float is 64(VSR), but for int and float vector register both are 64(VSR). So there should be 2 kinds of register class when vsx is enabled,
and 3 kinds of register class when VSX is NOT enabled.

It runs on POWER target, it makes big(+~30%) performance improvement in one specific bmk(503.bwaves_r) of spec2017 and no other obvious degressions.

Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67148

llvm-svn: 374634

show more ...

Revert "[LoopVectorize][PowerPC] Estimate int and float register pressure separately in loop-vectorize"

Also Revert "[LoopVectorize] Fix non-debug builds after rL374017"

This reverts commit 9f41dec

Revert "[LoopVectorize][PowerPC] Estimate int and float register pressure separately in loop-vectorize"

Also Revert "[LoopVectorize] Fix non-debug builds after rL374017"

This reverts commit 9f41deccc0e648a006c9f38e11919f181b6c7e0a.
This reverts commit 18b6fe07bcf44294f200bd2b526cb737ed275c04.

The patch is breaking PowerPC internal build, checked with author, reverting
on behalf of him for now due to timezone.

llvm-svn: 374091

show more ...

[LoopVectorize][PowerPC] Estimate int and float register pressure separately in loop-vectorize

In loop-vectorize, interleave count and vector factor depend on target register number. Currently, it d

[LoopVectorize][PowerPC] Estimate int and float register pressure separately in loop-vectorize

In loop-vectorize, interleave count and vector factor depend on target register number. Currently, it does not
estimate different register pressure for different register class separately(especially for scalar type,
float type should not be on the same position with int type), so it's not accurate. Specifically,
it causes too many times interleaving/unrolling, result in too many register spills in loop body and hurting performance.

So we need classify the register classes in IR level, and importantly these are abstract register classes,
and are not the target register class of backend provided in td file. It's used to establish the mapping between
the types of IR values and the number of simultaneous live ranges to which we'd like to limit for some set of those types.

For example, POWER target, register num is special when VSX is enabled. When VSX is enabled, the number of int scalar register is 32(GPR),
float is 64(VSR), but for int and float vector register both are 64(VSR). So there should be 2 kinds of register class when vsx is enabled,
and 3 kinds of register class when VSX is NOT enabled.

It runs on POWER target, it makes big(+~30%) performance improvement in one specific bmk(503.bwaves_r) of spec2017 and no other obvious degressions.

Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67148

llvm-svn: 374017

show more ...

Update the file headers across all of the LLVM projects in the monorepo
to reflect the new license.

We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the ne

Update the file headers across all of the LLVM projects in the monorepo
to reflect the new license.

We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.

Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.

llvm-svn: 351636

show more ...

Fix a bunch more layering of CodeGen headers that are in Target

All these headers already depend on CodeGen headers so moving them into
CodeGen fixes the layering (since CodeGen depends on Target, n

Fix a bunch more layering of CodeGen headers that are in Target

All these headers already depend on CodeGen headers so moving them into
CodeGen fixes the layering (since CodeGen depends on Target, not the
other way around).

llvm-svn: 318490

show more ...

Do a sweep over move ctors and remove those that are identical to the default.

All of these existed because MSVC 2013 was unable to synthesize default
move ctors. We recently dropped support for it

Do a sweep over move ctors and remove those that are identical to the default.

All of these existed because MSVC 2013 was unable to synthesize default
move ctors. We recently dropped support for it so all that error-prone
boilerplate can go.

No functionality change intended.

llvm-svn: 284721

show more ...

constify the Function parameter to the TTI creation callback and
propagate to all callers/users/etc.

llvm-svn: 247864

Make TargetTransformInfo keeping a reference to the Module DataLayout

DataLayout is no longer optional. It was initialized with or without
a DataLayout, and the DataLayout when supplied could have b

Make TargetTransformInfo keeping a reference to the Module DataLayout

DataLayout is no longer optional. It was initialized with or without
a DataLayout, and the DataLayout when supplied could have been the
one from the TargetMachine.

Summary:
This change is part of a series of commits dedicated to have a single
DataLayout during compilation by using always the one owned by the
module.

Reviewers: echristo

Subscribers: jholewinski, llvm-commits, rafael, yaron.keren

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11021

From: Mehdi Amini <[email protected]>
llvm-svn: 241774

show more ...

[multiversion] Switch the TTI queries from TargetMachine to Subtarget
now that we have a correct and cached subtarget specific to the
function.

Also, finish providing a cached per-function subtarget

[multiversion] Switch the TTI queries from TargetMachine to Subtarget
now that we have a correct and cached subtarget specific to the
function.

Also, finish providing a cached per-function subtarget in the core
LLVMTargetMachine -- that layer hadn't switched over yet.

The only use of the TargetMachine was to re-lookup a subtarget for
a particular function to work around the fact that TTI was immutable.
Now that it is per-function and we haved a cached subtarget, use it.

This still leaves a few interfaces with real warts on them where we were
passing Function objects through the TTI interface. I'll remove these
and clean their usage up in subsequent commits now that this isn't
necessary.

llvm-svn: 227738

show more ...

[multiversion] Remove the cached TargetMachine pointer from the
intermediate TTI implementation template and instead query up to the
derived class for both the TargetMachine and the TargetLowering.

[multiversion] Remove the cached TargetMachine pointer from the
intermediate TTI implementation template and instead query up to the
derived class for both the TargetMachine and the TargetLowering.

Most of the derived types had a TLI cached already and there is no need
to store a less precisely typed target machine pointer.

This will in turn make it much cleaner to look up the TLI via
a per-function subtarget instead of the generic subtarget, and it will
pave the way toward pulling the subtarget used for unroll preferences
into the same form once we are *always* using the function to look up
the correct subtarget.

llvm-svn: 227737

show more ...

[multiversion] Remove a false freedom to leave the TargetMachine pointer
null.

For some reason some of the original TTI code supported a null target
machine. This seems to have been legacy, and I ma

[multiversion] Remove a false freedom to leave the TargetMachine pointer
null.

For some reason some of the original TTI code supported a null target
machine. This seems to have been legacy, and I made matters worse when
refactoring this code by spreading that pattern further through the
various targets.

The TargetMachine can't actually be null, and it doesn't make sense to
support that use case. I've now consistently removed it and removed all
of the code trying to cope with that situation. This is probably good,
as several targets *didn't* cope with it being null despite the null
default argument in their constructors. =]

llvm-svn: 227734

show more ...

[PM] Switch the TargetMachine interface from accepting a pass manager
base which it adds a single analysis pass to, to instead return the type
erased TargetTransformInfo object constructed for that T

[PM] Switch the TargetMachine interface from accepting a pass manager
base which it adds a single analysis pass to, to instead return the type
erased TargetTransformInfo object constructed for that TargetMachine.

This removes all of the pass variants for TTI. There is now a single TTI
*pass* in the Analysis layer. All of the Analysis <-> Target
communication is through the TTI's type erased interface itself. While
the diff is large here, it is nothing more that code motion to make
types available in a header file for use in a different source file
within each target.

I've tried to keep all the doxygen comments and file boilerplate in line
with this move, but let me know if I missed anything.

With this in place, the next step to making TTI work with the new pass
manager is to introduce a really simple new-style analysis that produces
a TTI object via a callback into this routine on the target machine.
Once we have that, we'll have the building blocks necessary to accept
a function argument as well.

llvm-svn: 227685

show more ...