1; Test optimization remarks generated by the LoopInterchange pass. 2; 3; RUN: opt < %s -basic-aa -loop-interchange -verify-dom-info -verify-loop-info \ 4; RUN: -pass-remarks-output=%t -pass-remarks-missed='loop-interchange' \ 5; RUN: -pass-remarks='loop-interchange' -S 6; RUN: cat %t | FileCheck %s 7 8; RUN: opt < %s -basic-aa -loop-interchange -verify-dom-info -verify-loop-info \ 9; RUN: -pass-remarks-output=%t -pass-remarks-missed='loop-interchange' \ 10; RUN: -pass-remarks='loop-interchange' -S -da-disable-delinearization-checks 11; RUN: cat %t | FileCheck --check-prefix=DELIN %s 12 13target triple = "powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu" 14@A = common global [100 x [100 x i32]] zeroinitializer 15@B = common global [100 x [100 x i32]] zeroinitializer 16@C = common global [100 x i32] zeroinitializer 17 18;;---------------------------------------Test case 01--------------------------------- 19;; Loops interchange is not profitable. 20;; for(int i=1;i<N;i++) 21;; for(int j=1;j<N;j++) 22;; A[i-1][j-1] = A[i - 1][j-1] + B[i][j]; 23 24define void @test01(i32 %N){ 25entry: 26 %cmp31 = icmp sgt i32 %N, 1 27 br i1 %cmp31, label %for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph, label %for.end19 28 29for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph: 30 %0 = add i32 %N, -1 31 br label %for.body3.lr.ph 32 33for.body3.lr.ph: 34 %indvars.iv34 = phi i64 [ 1, %for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph ], [ %indvars.iv.next35, %for.inc17 ] 35 %1 = add nsw i64 %indvars.iv34, -1 36 br label %for.body3 37 38for.body3: 39 %indvars.iv = phi i64 [ 1, %for.body3.lr.ph ], [ %indvars.iv.next, %for.body3 ] 40 %2 = add nsw i64 %indvars.iv, -1 41 %arrayidx6 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @A, i64 0, i64 %1, i64 %2 42 %3 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx6 43 %arrayidx10 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @B, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv34, i64 %indvars.iv 44 %4 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx10 45 %add = add nsw i32 %4, %3 46 store i32 %add, i32* %arrayidx6 47 %indvars.iv.next = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv, 1 48 %lftr.wideiv = trunc i64 %indvars.iv to i32 49 %exitcond = icmp eq i32 %lftr.wideiv, %0 50 br i1 %exitcond, label %for.inc17, label %for.body3 51 52for.inc17: 53 %indvars.iv.next35 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv34, 1 54 %lftr.wideiv37 = trunc i64 %indvars.iv34 to i32 55 %exitcond38 = icmp eq i32 %lftr.wideiv37, %0 56 br i1 %exitcond38, label %for.end19, label %for.body3.lr.ph 57 58for.end19: 59 ret void 60} 61 62; CHECK: --- !Missed 63; CHECK-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange 64; CHECK-NEXT: Name: Dependence 65; CHECK-NEXT: Function: test01 66; CHECK-NEXT: Args: 67; CHECK-NEXT: - String: Cannot interchange loops due to dependences. 68; CHECK-NEXT: ... 69 70; DELIN: --- !Missed 71; DELIN-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange 72; DELIN-NEXT: Name: InterchangeNotProfitable 73; DELIN-NEXT: Function: test01 74; DELIN-NEXT: Args: 75; DELIN-NEXT: - String: Interchanging loops is too costly and it does not improve parallelism. 76; DELIN-NEXT: ... 77 78;;--------------------------------------Test case 02------------------------------------ 79;; [FIXME] This loop though valid is currently not interchanged due to the 80;; limitation that we cannot split the inner loop latch due to multiple use of inner induction 81;; variable.(used to increment the loop counter and to access A[j+1][i+1] 82;; for(int i=0;i<N-1;i++) 83;; for(int j=1;j<N-1;j++) 84;; A[j+1][i+1] = A[j+1][i+1] + k; 85 86define void @test02(i32 %k, i32 %N) { 87 entry: 88 %sub = add nsw i32 %N, -1 89 %cmp26 = icmp sgt i32 %N, 1 90 br i1 %cmp26, label %for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph, label %for.end17 91 92 for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph: 93 %cmp324 = icmp sgt i32 %sub, 1 94 %0 = add i32 %N, -2 95 %1 = sext i32 %sub to i64 96 br label %for.cond1.preheader 97 98 for.cond.loopexit: 99 %cmp = icmp slt i64 %indvars.iv.next29, %1 100 br i1 %cmp, label %for.cond1.preheader, label %for.end17 101 102 for.cond1.preheader: 103 %indvars.iv28 = phi i64 [ 0, %for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph ], [ %indvars.iv.next29, %for.cond.loopexit ] 104 %indvars.iv.next29 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv28, 1 105 br i1 %cmp324, label %for.body4, label %for.cond.loopexit 106 107 for.body4: 108 %indvars.iv = phi i64 [ %indvars.iv.next, %for.body4 ], [ 1, %for.cond1.preheader ] 109 %indvars.iv.next = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv, 1 110 %arrayidx7 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @A, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv.next, i64 %indvars.iv.next29 111 %2 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx7 112 %add8 = add nsw i32 %2, %k 113 store i32 %add8, i32* %arrayidx7 114 %lftr.wideiv = trunc i64 %indvars.iv to i32 115 %exitcond = icmp eq i32 %lftr.wideiv, %0 116 br i1 %exitcond, label %for.cond.loopexit, label %for.body4 117 118 for.end17: 119 ret void 120} 121 122; CHECK: --- !Missed 123; CHECK-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange 124; CHECK-NEXT: Name: Dependence 125; CHECK-NEXT: Function: test02 126; CHECK-NEXT: Args: 127; CHECK-NEXT: - String: Cannot interchange loops due to dependences. 128; CHECK-NEXT: ... 129 130; DELIN: --- !Passed 131; DELIN-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange 132; DELIN-NEXT: Name: Interchanged 133; DELIN-NEXT: Function: test02 134; DELIN-NEXT: Args: 135; DELIN-NEXT: - String: Loop interchanged with enclosing loop. 136; DELIN-NEXT: ... 137 138;;-----------------------------------Test case 03------------------------------- 139;; Test to make sure we can handle output dependencies. 140;; 141;; for (int i = 0; i < 2; ++i) 142;; for(int j = 0; j < 3; ++j) { 143;; A[j][i] = i; 144;; A[j][i+1] = j; 145;; } 146 147@A10 = local_unnamed_addr global [3 x [3 x i32]] zeroinitializer, align 16 148 149define void @test03() { 150entry: 151 br label %for.cond1.preheader 152 153for.cond.loopexit: ; preds = %for.body4 154 %exitcond28 = icmp ne i64 %indvars.iv.next27, 2 155 br i1 %exitcond28, label %for.cond1.preheader, label %for.cond.cleanup 156 157for.cond1.preheader: ; preds = %for.cond.loopexit, %entry 158 %indvars.iv26 = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %indvars.iv.next27, %for.cond.loopexit ] 159 %indvars.iv.next27 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv26, 1 160 br label %for.body4 161 162for.cond.cleanup: ; preds = %for.cond.loopexit 163 ret void 164 165for.body4: ; preds = %for.body4, %for.cond1.preheader 166 %indvars.iv = phi i64 [ 0, %for.cond1.preheader ], [ %indvars.iv.next, %for.body4 ] 167 %arrayidx6 = getelementptr inbounds [3 x [3 x i32]], [3 x [3 x i32]]* @A10, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv, i64 %indvars.iv26 168 %tmp = trunc i64 %indvars.iv26 to i32 169 store i32 %tmp, i32* %arrayidx6, align 4 170 %arrayidx10 = getelementptr inbounds [3 x [3 x i32]], [3 x [3 x i32]]* @A10, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv, i64 %indvars.iv.next27 171 %tmp1 = trunc i64 %indvars.iv to i32 172 store i32 %tmp1, i32* %arrayidx10, align 4 173 %indvars.iv.next = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv, 1 174 %exitcond = icmp ne i64 %indvars.iv.next, 3 175 br i1 %exitcond, label %for.body4, label %for.cond.loopexit 176} 177 178; CHECK: --- !Passed 179; CHECK-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange 180; CHECK-NEXT: Name: Interchanged 181; CHECK-NEXT: Function: test03 182; CHECK-NEXT: Args: 183; CHECK-NEXT: - String: Loop interchanged with enclosing loop. 184; CHECK-NEXT: ... 185 186; DELIN: --- !Passed 187; DELIN-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange 188; DELIN-NEXT: Name: Interchanged 189; DELIN-NEXT: Function: test03 190; DELIN-NEXT: Args: 191; DELIN-NEXT: - String: Loop interchanged with enclosing loop. 192; DELIN-NEXT: ... 193 194;;--------------------------------------Test case 04------------------------------------- 195;; Loops not tightly nested are not interchanged 196;; for(int j=0;j<N;j++) { 197;; B[j] = j+k; 198;; for(int i=0;i<N;i++) 199;; A[j][i] = A[j][i]+B[j]; 200;; } 201 202define void @test04(i32 %k, i32 %N){ 203entry: 204 %cmp30 = icmp sgt i32 %N, 0 205 br i1 %cmp30, label %for.body.lr.ph, label %for.end17 206 207for.body.lr.ph: 208 %0 = add i32 %N, -1 209 %1 = zext i32 %k to i64 210 br label %for.body 211 212for.body: 213 %indvars.iv32 = phi i64 [ 0, %for.body.lr.ph ], [ %indvars.iv.next33, %for.inc15 ] 214 %2 = add nsw i64 %indvars.iv32, %1 215 %arrayidx = getelementptr inbounds [100 x i32], [100 x i32]* @C, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv32 216 %3 = trunc i64 %2 to i32 217 store i32 %3, i32* %arrayidx 218 br label %for.body3 219 220for.body3: 221 %indvars.iv = phi i64 [ 0, %for.body ], [ %indvars.iv.next, %for.body3 ] 222 %arrayidx7 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @A, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv32, i64 %indvars.iv 223 %4 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx7 224 %add10 = add nsw i32 %3, %4 225 store i32 %add10, i32* %arrayidx7 226 %indvars.iv.next = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv, 1 227 %lftr.wideiv = trunc i64 %indvars.iv to i32 228 %exitcond = icmp eq i32 %lftr.wideiv, %0 229 br i1 %exitcond, label %for.inc15, label %for.body3 230 231for.inc15: 232 %indvars.iv.next33 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv32, 1 233 %lftr.wideiv35 = trunc i64 %indvars.iv32 to i32 234 %exitcond36 = icmp eq i32 %lftr.wideiv35, %0 235 br i1 %exitcond36, label %for.end17, label %for.body 236 237for.end17: 238 ret void 239} 240 241; CHECK: --- !Missed 242; CHECK-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange 243; CHECK-NEXT: Name: Dependence 244; CHECK-NEXT: Function: test04 245; CHECK-NEXT: Args: 246; CHECK-NEXT: - String: Cannot interchange loops due to dependences. 247; CHECK-NEXT: ... 248 249; DELIN: --- !Missed 250; DELIN-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange 251; DELIN-NEXT: Name: NotTightlyNested 252; DELIN-NEXT: Function: test04 253; DELIN-NEXT: Args: 254; DELIN-NEXT: - String: Cannot interchange loops because they are not tightly nested. 255; DELIN-NEXT: ... 256