[LoopUtils] Simplify addRuntimeCheck to return a single value.

This simplifies the return value of addRuntimeCheck from a pair of
instructions to a single `Value *`.

The existing users of addRuntim

[LoopUtils] Simplify addRuntimeCheck to return a single value.

This simplifies the return value of addRuntimeCheck from a pair of
instructions to a single `Value *`.

The existing users of addRuntimeChecks were ignoring the first element
of the pair, hence there is not reason to track FirstInst and return
it.

Additionally all users of addRuntimeChecks use the second returned
`Instruction *` just as `Value *`, so there is no need to return an
`Instruction *`. Therefore there is no need to create a redundant
dummy `and X, true` instruction any longer.

Effectively this change should not impact the generated code because the
redundant AND will be folded by later optimizations. But it is easy to
avoid creating it in the first place and it allows more accurately
estimating the cost of the runtime checks.

show more ...

[LoopUtils] Fix incorrect RT check bounds of loop-invariant mem accesses

This fixes the lower and upper bound calculation of a
RuntimeCheckingPtrGroup when it has more than one loop
invariant pointe

[LoopUtils] Fix incorrect RT check bounds of loop-invariant mem accesses

This fixes the lower and upper bound calculation of a
RuntimeCheckingPtrGroup when it has more than one loop
invariant pointers. Resolves PR50686.

Reviewed By: fhahn

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104148

show more ...

[LV] Re-generate check lines of some fragile tests (NFC)

Reviewed By: fhahn

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105438

[LV] Mark increment of main vector loop induction variable as NUW.

This patch marks the induction increment of the main induction variable
of the vector loop as NUW when not folding the tail.

If th

[LV] Mark increment of main vector loop induction variable as NUW.

This patch marks the induction increment of the main induction variable
of the vector loop as NUW when not folding the tail.

If the tail is not folded, we know that End - Start >= Step (either
statically or through the minimum iteration checks). We also know that both
Start % Step == 0 and End % Step == 0. We exit the vector loop if %IV +
%Step == %End. Hence we must exit the loop before %IV + %Step unsigned
overflows and we can mark the induction increment as NUW.

This should make SCEV return more precise bounds for the created vector
loops, used by later optimizations, like late unrolling.

At the moment quite a few tests still need to be updated, but before
doing so I'd like to get initial feedback to make sure I am not missing
anything.

Note that this could probably be further improved by using information
from the original IV.

Attempt of modeling of the assumption in Alive2:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/H_DL_g

Part of a set of fixes required for PR50412.

Reviewed By: mkazantsev

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103255

show more ...

[IR] Let IRBuilder's CreateVectorSplat/CreateShuffleVector use poison as placeholder

This patch updates IRBuilder to create insertelement/shufflevector using poison as a placeholder.

Reviewed By: n

[IR] Let IRBuilder's CreateVectorSplat/CreateShuffleVector use poison as placeholder

This patch updates IRBuilder to create insertelement/shufflevector using poison as a placeholder.

Reviewed By: nikic

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93793

show more ...

[LoopVectorizer] Lower uniform loads as a single load (instead of relying on CSE)

A uniform load is one which loads from a uniform address across all lanes. As currently implemented, we cost model s

[LoopVectorizer] Lower uniform loads as a single load (instead of relying on CSE)

A uniform load is one which loads from a uniform address across all lanes. As currently implemented, we cost model such loads as if we did a single scalar load + a broadcast, but the actual lowering replicates the load once per lane.

This change tweaks the lowering to use the REPLICATE strategy by marking such loads (and the computation leading to their memory operand) as uniform after vectorization. This is a useful change in itself, but it's real purpose is to pave the way for a following change which will generalize our uniformity logic.

In review discussion, there was an issue raised with coupling cost modeling with the lowering strategy for uniform inputs. The discussion on that item remains unsettled and is pending larger architectural discussion. We decided to move forward with this patch as is, and revise as warranted once the bigger picture design questions are settled.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D91398

show more ...

Infer alignment of unmarked loads in IR/bitcode parsing.

For IR generated by a compiler, this is really simple: you just take the
datalayout from the beginning of the file, and apply it to all the I

Infer alignment of unmarked loads in IR/bitcode parsing.

For IR generated by a compiler, this is really simple: you just take the
datalayout from the beginning of the file, and apply it to all the IR
later in the file. For optimization testcases that don't care about the
datalayout, this is also really simple: we just use the default
datalayout.

The complexity here comes from the fact that some LLVM tools allow
overriding the datalayout: some tools have an explicit flag for this,
some tools will infer a datalayout based on the code generation target.
Supporting this properly required plumbing through a bunch of new
machinery: we want to allow overriding the datalayout after the
datalayout is parsed from the file, but before we use any information
from it. Therefore, IR/bitcode parsing now has a callback to allow tools
to compute the datalayout at the appropriate time.

Not sure if I covered all the LLVM tools that want to use the callback.
(clang? lli? Misc IR manipulation tools like llvm-link?). But this is at
least enough for all the LLVM regression tests, and IR without a
datalayout is not something frontends should generate.

This change had some sort of weird effects for certain CodeGen
regression tests: if the datalayout is overridden with a datalayout with
a different program or stack address space, we now parse IR based on the
overridden datalayout, instead of the one written in the file (or the
default one, if none is specified). This broke a few AVR tests, and one
AMDGPU test.

Outside the CodeGen tests I mentioned, the test changes are all just
fixing CHECK lines and moving around datalayout lines in weird places.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78403

show more ...

Recommit #2: "[LV] Induction Variable does not remain scalar under tail-folding."

This was reverted because of a miscompilation. At closer inspection, the
problem was actually visible in a changed l

Recommit #2: "[LV] Induction Variable does not remain scalar under tail-folding."

This was reverted because of a miscompilation. At closer inspection, the
problem was actually visible in a changed llvm regression test too. This
one-line follow up fix/recommit will splat the IV, which is what we are trying
to avoid if unnecessary in general, if tail-folding is requested even if all
users are scalar instructions after vectorisation. Because with tail-folding,
the splat IV will be used by the predicate of the masked loads/stores
instructions. The previous version omitted this, which caused the
miscompilation. The original commit message was:

If tail-folding of the scalar remainder loop is applied, the primary induction
variable is splat to a vector and used by the masked load/store vector
instructions, thus the IV does not remain scalar. Because we now mark
that the IV does not remain scalar for these cases, we don't emit the vector IV
if it is not used. Thus, the vectoriser produces less dead code.

Thanks to Ayal Zaks for the direction how to fix this.

show more ...

Revert "Recommit "[LV] Induction Variable does not remain scalar under tail-folding.""

This reverts commit ae45b4dbe73ffde5fe3119835aa947d5a49635ed. It
causes miscompilations, test case on the maili

Revert "Recommit "[LV] Induction Variable does not remain scalar under tail-folding.""

This reverts commit ae45b4dbe73ffde5fe3119835aa947d5a49635ed. It
causes miscompilations, test case on the mailing list.

show more ...

Recommit "[LV] Induction Variable does not remain scalar under tail-folding."

With 3 llvm regr tests fixed/updated that I had missed.

Revert "[LV] Induction Variable does not remain scalar under tail-folding."

This reverts commit 617aa64c84146468b384453375d1d34f97eb57db.

while I investigate buildbot failures.

[LV] Induction Variable does not remain scalar under tail-folding.

If tail-folding of the scalar remainder loop is applied, the primary induction
variable is splat to a vector and used by the masked

[LV] Induction Variable does not remain scalar under tail-folding.

If tail-folding of the scalar remainder loop is applied, the primary induction
variable is splat to a vector and used by the masked load/store vector
instructions, thus the IV does not remain scalar. Because we now mark
that the IV does not remain scalar for these cases, we don't emit the vector IV
if it is not used. Thus, the vectoriser produces less dead code.

Thanks to Ayal Zaks for the direction how to fix this.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78911

show more ...

Revert "Temporarily Revert "Add basic loop fusion pass.""

The reversion apparently deleted the test/Transforms directory.

Will be re-reverting again.

llvm-svn: 358552

[Loop Vectorize] Added a separate metadata

Added a separate metadata to indicate when the loop
has already been vectorized instead of setting width and count to 1.

Patch written by Divya Shanmughan

[Loop Vectorize] Added a separate metadata

Added a separate metadata to indicate when the loop
has already been vectorized instead of setting width and count to 1.

Patch written by Divya Shanmughan and Aditya Kumar

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36220

llvm-svn: 311281

show more ...

[LV/LoopAccess] Check statically if an unknown dependence distance can be
proven larger than the loop-count

This fixes PR31098: Try to resolve statically data-dependences whose
compile-time-unknown

[LV/LoopAccess] Check statically if an unknown dependence distance can be
proven larger than the loop-count

This fixes PR31098: Try to resolve statically data-dependences whose
compile-time-unknown distance can be proven larger than the loop-count,
instead of resorting to runtime dependence checking (which are not always
possible).

For vectorization it is sufficient to prove that the dependence distance
is >= VF; But in some cases we can prune unknown dependence distances early,
and even before selecting the VF, and without a runtime test, by comparing
the distance against the loop iteration count. Since the vectorized code
will be executed only if LoopCount >= VF, proving distance >= LoopCount
also guarantees that distance >= VF. This check is also equivalent to the
Strong SIV Test.

Reviewers: mkuper, anemet, sanjoy

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28044

llvm-svn: 294892

show more ...

[LV] Remove triples from target-independent vectorizer tests. NFC.

Vectorizer tests in the target-independent directory should not have a target
triple. If a test really needs to query a specific ba

[LV] Remove triples from target-independent vectorizer tests. NFC.

Vectorizer tests in the target-independent directory should not have a target
triple. If a test really needs to query a specific backend, it belongs in the
right target subdirectory (which "REQUIRES" the right backend). Otherwise, it
should not specify a triple.

llvm-svn: 283512

show more ...

Quick fix for the test from rL272014 "[LAA] Improve non-wrapping pointer
detection by handling loop-invariant case" (s couple of buildbots failed).

Patch by Roman Shirokiy.

llvm-svn: 272019

[LAA] Improve non-wrapping pointer detection by handling loop-invariant case.

This fixes PR26314. This patch adds new helper “isNoWrap” with detection of
loop-invariant pointer case.

Patch by Roman

[LAA] Improve non-wrapping pointer detection by handling loop-invariant case.

This fixes PR26314. This patch adds new helper “isNoWrap” with detection of
loop-invariant pointer case.

Patch by Roman Shirokiy.

Ref: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=26314

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17268

llvm-svn: 272014

show more ...