These are changes to reduce redundant computations when calculating a
feasible vectorization factor:
1. early return when target has no vector registers
2. don't compute register usage for the default VF.
Suggested during review for D37702.
llvm-svn: 313176
Summary:
When the MaxVectorSize > ConstantTripCount, we should just clamp the
vectorization factor to be the ConstantTripCount.
This vectorizes loops where the TinyTripCountThreshold >= TripCount < MaxVF.
Earlier we were finding the maximum vector width, which could be greater than
the trip count itself. The Loop vectorizer does all the work for generating a
vectorizable loop, but in the end we would always choose the scalar loop (since
the VF > trip count). This allows us to choose the VF keeping in mind the trip
count if available.
This is a fix on top of rL312472.
Reviewers: Ayal, zvi, hfinkel, dneilson
Reviewed by: Ayal
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37702
llvm-svn: 313046
Summary:
Improve how MaxVF is computed while taking into account that MaxVF should not be larger than the loop's trip count.
Other than saving on compile-time by pruning the possible MaxVF candidates, this patch fixes pr34438 which exposed the following flow:
1. Short trip count identified -> Don't bail out, set OptForSize:=True to avoid tail-loop and runtime checks.
2. Compute MaxVF returned 16 on a target supporting AVX512.
3. OptForSize -> choose VF:=MaxVF.
4. Bail out because TripCount = 8, VF = 16, TripCount % VF !=0 means we need a tail loop.
With this patch step 2. will choose MaxVF=8 based on TripCount.
Reviewers: Ayal, dorit, mkuper, hfinkel
Reviewed By: hfinkel
Subscribers: hfinkel, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37425
llvm-svn: 312472
Store operation takes 2 UOps on X86 processors. The exact cost calculation affects several optimization passes including loop unroling.
This change compensates performance degradation caused by https://reviews.llvm.org/D34458 and shows improvements on some benchmarks.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35888
llvm-svn: 311285
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
Summary:
The New Pass Manager infrastructure was forgetting to keep around the optimization remark yaml file that the compiler might have been producing. This meant setting the option to '-' for stdout worked, but setting it to a filename didn't give file output (presumably it was deleted because compilation didn't explicitly keep it). This change just ensures that the file is kept if compilation succeeds.
So far I have updated one of the optimization remark output tests to add a version with the new pass manager. It is my intention for this patch to also include changes to all tests that use `-opt-remark-output=` but I wanted to get the code patch ready for review while I was making all those changes.
Fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33951
Reviewers: anemet, chandlerc
Reviewed By: anemet, chandlerc
Subscribers: javed.absar, chandlerc, fhahn, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36906
llvm-svn: 311271
Summary:
When simplifying unconditional branches from empty blocks, we pre-test if the
BB belongs to a set of loop headers and keep the block to prevent passes from
destroying canonical loop structure. However, the current algorithm fails if
the destination of the branch is a loop header. Especially when such a loop's
latch block is folded into loop header it results in additional backedges and
LoopSimplify turns it into a nested loop which prevent later optimizations
from being applied (e.g., loop unrolling and loop interleaving).
This patch augments the existing algorithm by further checking if the
destination of the branch belongs to a set of loop headers and defer
eliminating it if yes to LateSimplifyCFG.
Fixes PR33605: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33605
Reviewers: efriedma, mcrosier, pacxx, hsung, davidxl
Reviewed By: efriedma
Subscribers: ashutosh.nema, gberry, javed.absar, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35411
llvm-svn: 308422
Generate a single test to decide if there are enough iterations to jump to the
vectorized loop, or else go to the scalar remainder loop. This test compares the
Scalar Trip Count: if STC < VF * UF go to the scalar loop. If
requiresScalarEpilogue() holds, at-least one iteration must remain scalar; the
rest can be used to form vector iterations. So in this case the test checks
instead if (STC - 1) < VF * UF by comparing STC <= VF * UF, and going to the
scalar loop if so. Otherwise the vector loop is entered for at-least one vector
iteration.
This test covers the case where incrementing the backedge-taken count will
overflow leading to an incorrect trip count of zero. In this (rare) case we will
also avoid the vector loop and jump to the scalar loop.
This patch simplifies the existing tests and effectively removes the basic-block
originally named "min.iters.checked", leaving the single test in block
"vector.ph".
Original observation and initial patch by Evgeny Stupachenko.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34150
llvm-svn: 308421
this patch updates the cost of addq\subq (add\subtract of vectors of 64bits)
based on the performance numbers of SLM arch.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33983
llvm-svn: 306974
Summary:
vectorizer-maximize-bandwidth is generally useful in terms of performance. I've tested the impact of changing this to default on speccpu benchmarks on sandybridge machines. The result shows non-negative impact:
spec/2006/fp/C++/444.namd 26.84 -0.31%
spec/2006/fp/C++/447.dealII 46.19 +0.89%
spec/2006/fp/C++/450.soplex 42.92 -0.44%
spec/2006/fp/C++/453.povray 38.57 -2.25%
spec/2006/fp/C/433.milc 24.54 -0.76%
spec/2006/fp/C/470.lbm 41.08 +0.26%
spec/2006/fp/C/482.sphinx3 47.58 -0.99%
spec/2006/int/C++/471.omnetpp 22.06 +1.87%
spec/2006/int/C++/473.astar 22.65 -0.12%
spec/2006/int/C++/483.xalancbmk 33.69 +4.97%
spec/2006/int/C/400.perlbench 33.43 +1.70%
spec/2006/int/C/401.bzip2 23.02 -0.19%
spec/2006/int/C/403.gcc 32.57 -0.43%
spec/2006/int/C/429.mcf 40.35 +0.27%
spec/2006/int/C/445.gobmk 26.96 +0.06%
spec/2006/int/C/456.hmmer 24.4 +0.19%
spec/2006/int/C/458.sjeng 27.91 -0.08%
spec/2006/int/C/462.libquantum 57.47 -0.20%
spec/2006/int/C/464.h264ref 46.52 +1.35%
geometric mean +0.29%
The regression on 453.povray seems real, but is due to secondary effects as all hot functions are bit-identical with and without the flag.
I started this patch to consult upstream opinions on this. It will be greatly appreciated if the community can help test the performance impact of this change on other architectures so that we can decided if this should be target-dependent.
Reviewers: hfinkel, mkuper, davidxl, chandlerc
Reviewed By: chandlerc
Subscribers: rengolin, sanjoy, javed.absar, bjope, dorit, magabari, RKSimon, llvm-commits, mzolotukhin
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33341
llvm-svn: 306933
It may be detrimental to vectorize loops with very small trip count, as various
costs of the vectorized loop body as well as enclosing overheads including
runtime tests and scalar iterations may outweigh the gains of vectorizing. The
current cost model measures the cost of the vectorized loop body only, expecting
it will amortize other costs, and loops with known or expected very small trip
counts are not vectorized at all. This patch allows loops with very small trip
counts to be vectorized, but under OptForSize constraints, which ensure the cost
of the loop body is dominant, having no runtime guards nor scalar iterations.
Patch inspired by D32451.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34373
llvm-svn: 306803
Summary:
vectorizer-maximize-bandwidth is generally useful in terms of performance. I've tested the impact of changing this to default on speccpu benchmarks on sandybridge machines. The result shows non-negative impact:
spec/2006/fp/C++/444.namd 26.84 -0.31%
spec/2006/fp/C++/447.dealII 46.19 +0.89%
spec/2006/fp/C++/450.soplex 42.92 -0.44%
spec/2006/fp/C++/453.povray 38.57 -2.25%
spec/2006/fp/C/433.milc 24.54 -0.76%
spec/2006/fp/C/470.lbm 41.08 +0.26%
spec/2006/fp/C/482.sphinx3 47.58 -0.99%
spec/2006/int/C++/471.omnetpp 22.06 +1.87%
spec/2006/int/C++/473.astar 22.65 -0.12%
spec/2006/int/C++/483.xalancbmk 33.69 +4.97%
spec/2006/int/C/400.perlbench 33.43 +1.70%
spec/2006/int/C/401.bzip2 23.02 -0.19%
spec/2006/int/C/403.gcc 32.57 -0.43%
spec/2006/int/C/429.mcf 40.35 +0.27%
spec/2006/int/C/445.gobmk 26.96 +0.06%
spec/2006/int/C/456.hmmer 24.4 +0.19%
spec/2006/int/C/458.sjeng 27.91 -0.08%
spec/2006/int/C/462.libquantum 57.47 -0.20%
spec/2006/int/C/464.h264ref 46.52 +1.35%
geometric mean +0.29%
The regression on 453.povray seems real, but is due to secondary effects as all hot functions are bit-identical with and without the flag.
I started this patch to consult upstream opinions on this. It will be greatly appreciated if the community can help test the performance impact of this change on other architectures so that we can decided if this should be target-dependent.
Reviewers: hfinkel, mkuper, davidxl, chandlerc
Reviewed By: chandlerc
Subscribers: rengolin, sanjoy, javed.absar, bjope, dorit, magabari, RKSimon, llvm-commits, mzolotukhin
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33341
llvm-svn: 306336
Summary:
vectorizer-maximize-bandwidth is generally useful in terms of performance. I've tested the impact of changing this to default on speccpu benchmarks on sandybridge machines. The result shows non-negative impact:
spec/2006/fp/C++/444.namd 26.84 -0.31%
spec/2006/fp/C++/447.dealII 46.19 +0.89%
spec/2006/fp/C++/450.soplex 42.92 -0.44%
spec/2006/fp/C++/453.povray 38.57 -2.25%
spec/2006/fp/C/433.milc 24.54 -0.76%
spec/2006/fp/C/470.lbm 41.08 +0.26%
spec/2006/fp/C/482.sphinx3 47.58 -0.99%
spec/2006/int/C++/471.omnetpp 22.06 +1.87%
spec/2006/int/C++/473.astar 22.65 -0.12%
spec/2006/int/C++/483.xalancbmk 33.69 +4.97%
spec/2006/int/C/400.perlbench 33.43 +1.70%
spec/2006/int/C/401.bzip2 23.02 -0.19%
spec/2006/int/C/403.gcc 32.57 -0.43%
spec/2006/int/C/429.mcf 40.35 +0.27%
spec/2006/int/C/445.gobmk 26.96 +0.06%
spec/2006/int/C/456.hmmer 24.4 +0.19%
spec/2006/int/C/458.sjeng 27.91 -0.08%
spec/2006/int/C/462.libquantum 57.47 -0.20%
spec/2006/int/C/464.h264ref 46.52 +1.35%
geometric mean +0.29%
The regression on 453.povray seems real, but is due to secondary effects as all hot functions are bit-identical with and without the flag.
I started this patch to consult upstream opinions on this. It will be greatly appreciated if the community can help test the performance impact of this change on other architectures so that we can decided if this should be target-dependent.
Reviewers: hfinkel, mkuper, davidxl, chandlerc
Reviewed By: chandlerc
Subscribers: rengolin, sanjoy, javed.absar, bjope, dorit, magabari, RKSimon, llvm-commits, mzolotukhin
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33341
llvm-svn: 305960
Summary:
Existing heuristic uses the ratio between the function entry
frequency and the loop invocation frequency to find cold loops. However,
even if the loop executes frequently, if it has a small trip count per
each invocation, vectorization is not beneficial. On the other hand,
even if the loop invocation frequency is much smaller than the function
invocation frequency, if the trip count is high it is still beneficial
to vectorize the loop.
This patch uses estimated trip count computed from the profile metadata
as a primary metric to determine coldness of the loop. If the estimated
trip count cannot be computed, it falls back to the original heuristics.
Reviewers: Ayal, mssimpso, mkuper, danielcdh, wmi, tejohnson
Reviewed By: tejohnson
Subscribers: tejohnson, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32451
llvm-svn: 305729
The default behavior of -Rpass-analysis=loop-vectorizer is to report only the
first reason encountered for not vectorizing, if one is found, at which time the
vectorizer aborts its handling of the loop. This patch allows multiple reasons
for not vectorizing to be identified and reported, at the potential expense of
additional compile-time, under allowExtraAnalysis which can currently be turned
on by Clang's -fsave-optimization-record and opt's -pass-remarks-missed.
Removed from LoopVectorizationLegality::canVectorize() the redundant checking
and reporting if we CantComputeNumberOfIterations, as LAI::canAnalyzeLoop() also
does that. This redundancy is caught by a lit test once multiple reasons are
reported.
Patch initially developed by Dror Barak.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33396
llvm-svn: 303613
Fixes PR31789 - When loop-vectorize tries to use these intrinsics for a
non-default address space pointer we fail with a "Calling a function with a
bad singature!" assertion. This patch solves this by adding the 'vector of
pointers' argument as an overloaded type which will determine the address
space.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31490
llvm-svn: 302018
This patch reapplies r298620. The original patch was reverted because of two
issues. First, the patch exposed a bug in InstCombine that caused the Chromium
builds to fail (PR32414). This issue was fixed in r299017. Second, the patch
introduced a bug in the vectorizer's scalars analysis that caused test suite
builds to fail on SystemZ. The scalars analysis was too aggressive and marked a
memory instruction scalar, even though it was going to be vectorized. This
issue has been fixed in the current patch and several new test cases for the
scalars analysis have been added.
llvm-svn: 299770
Reason: breaks linking Chromium with LLD + ThinLTO (a pass crashes)
LLVM bug: https://bugs.llvm.org//show_bug.cgi?id=32413
Original change description:
[LV] Vectorize GEPs
This patch adds support for vectorizing GEPs. Previously, we only generated
vector GEPs on-demand when creating gather or scatter operations. All GEPs from
the original loop were scalarized by default, and if a pointer was to be stored
to memory, we would have to build up the pointer vector with insertelement
instructions.
With this patch, we will vectorize all GEPs that haven't already been marked
for scalarization.
The patch refines collectLoopScalars to more exactly identify the scalar GEPs.
The function now more closely resembles collectLoopUniforms. And the patch
moves vector GEP creation out of vectorizeMemoryInstruction and into the main
vectorization loop. The vector GEPs needed for gather and scatter operations
will have already been generated before vectoring the memory accesses.
Original Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30710
llvm-svn: 298735
This patch adds support for vectorizing GEPs. Previously, we only generated
vector GEPs on-demand when creating gather or scatter operations. All GEPs from
the original loop were scalarized by default, and if a pointer was to be stored
to memory, we would have to build up the pointer vector with insertelement
instructions.
With this patch, we will vectorize all GEPs that haven't already been marked
for scalarization.
The patch refines collectLoopScalars to more exactly identify the scalar GEPs.
The function now more closely resembles collectLoopUniforms. And the patch
moves vector GEP creation out of vectorizeMemoryInstruction and into the main
vectorization loop. The vector GEPs needed for gather and scatter operations
will have already been generated before vectoring the memory accesses.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30710
llvm-svn: 298620
The practice in LV is that we emit analysis remarks and then finally report
either a missed or applied remark on the final decision whether vectorization
is taking place. On this code path, we were closing with an analysis remark.
llvm-svn: 296578
Making the cost model selecting between Interleave, GatherScatter or Scalar vectorization form of memory instruction.
The right decision should be done for non-consecutive memory access instrcuctions that may have more than one vectorization solution.
This patch includes the following changes:
- Cost Model calculates the cost of Load/Store vector form and choose the better option between Widening, Interleave, GatherScactter and Scalarization. Cost Model keeps the widening decision.
- Arrays of Uniform and Scalar values are moved from Legality to Cost Model.
- Cost Model collects Uniforms and Scalars per VF. The collection is based on CM decision map of Loadis/Stores vectorization form.
- Vectorization of memory instruction is performed according to the CM decision.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27919
llvm-svn: 294503
If a memory instruction will be vectorized, but it's pointer operand is
non-consecutive-like, the instruction is a gather or scatter operation. Its
pointer operand will be non-uniform. This should fix PR31671.
Reference: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=31671
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28819
llvm-svn: 292254
updated instructions:
pmulld, pmullw, pmulhw, mulsd, mulps, mulpd, divss, divps, divsd, divpd, addpd and subpd.
special optimization case which replaces pmulld with pmullw\pmulhw\pshuf seq.
In case if the real operands bitwidth <= 16.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28104
llvm-svn: 291657
This code seems to be target dependent which may not be the same for all targets.
Passed the decision whether the given stride is complex or not to the target by sending stride information via SCEV to getAddressComputationCost instead of 'IsComplex'.
Specifically at X86 targets we dont see any significant address computation cost in case of the strided access in general.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27518
llvm-svn: 291106
This patch attempts to scalarize the operand expressions of predicated
instructions if they were conditionally executed in the original loop. After
scalarization, the expressions will be sunk inside the blocks created for the
predicated instructions. The transformation essentially performs
un-if-conversion on the operands.
The cost model has been updated to determine if scalarization is profitable. It
compares the cost of a vectorized instruction, assuming it will be
if-converted, to the cost of the scalarized instruction, assuming that the
instructions corresponding to each vector lane will be sunk inside a predicated
block, possibly avoiding execution. If it's more profitable to scalarize the
entire expression tree feeding the predicated instruction, the expression will
be scalarized; otherwise, it will be vectorized. We only consider the cost of
the entire expression to accurately estimate the cost of the required
insertelement and extractelement instructions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26083
llvm-svn: 288909
The register usage algorithm incorrectly treats instructions whose value is
not used within the loop (e.g. those that do not produce a value).
The algorithm first calculates the usages within the loop. It iterates over
the instructions in order, and records at which instruction index each use
ends (in fact, they're actually recorded against the next index, as this is
when we want to delete them from the open intervals).
The algorithm then iterates over the instructions again, adding each
instruction in turn to a list of open intervals. Instructions are then
removed from the list of open intervals when they occur in the list of uses
ended at the current index.
The problem is, instructions which are not used in the loop are skipped.
However, although they aren't used, the last use of a value may have been
recorded against that instruction index. In this case, the use is not deleted
from the open intervals, which may then bump up the estimated register usage.
This patch fixes the issue by simply moving the "is used" check after the loop
which erases the uses at the current index.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26554
llvm-svn: 286969
Add explicit v16i16/v32i8 ADD/SUB costs, matching the costs of v4i64/v8i32 - they were missing for some reason.
This has side effects on the LV max bandwidth tests (AVX1 now prefers 128-bit vectors vs AVX2 which still prefers 256-bit)
llvm-svn: 286832
This is PR28376.
Unfortunately given the current structure of optimization diagnostics we
lack the capability to tell whether the user has
passed -Rpass-analysis=loop-vectorize since this is local to the
front-end (BackendConsumer::OptimizationRemarkHandler).
So rather than printing this even if the user has already
passed -Rpass-analysis, this patch just punts and stops recommending
this option. I don't think that getting this right is worth the
complexity.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26563
llvm-svn: 286662
possible pointer-wrap-around concerns, in some cases.
Before this patch, collectConstStridedAccesses (part of interleaved-accesses
analysis) called getPtrStride with [Assume=false, ShouldCheckWrap=true] when
examining all candidate pointers. This is too conservative. Instead, this
patch makes collectConstStridedAccesses use an optimistic approach, calling
getPtrStride with [Assume=true, ShouldCheckWrap=false], and then, once the
candidate interleave groups have been formed, revisits the pointer-wrapping
analysis but only where it matters: namely, in groups that have gaps, and where
the gaps are not at the very end of the group (in which case the loop is
peeled). This second time getPtrStride is called with [Assume=false,
ShouldCheckWrap=true], but this could further be improved to using Assume=true,
once we also add the logic to track that we are not going to meet the scev
runtime checks threshold.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25276
llvm-svn: 285517
After r279649 when getting a vector value from VectorLoopValueMap, we create an
insertelement sequence on-demand if the value has been scalarized instead of
vectorized. We previously inserted this insertelement sequence before the
value's first vector user. However, this insert location is problematic if that
user is the phi node of a first-order recurrence. With this patch, we move the
insertelement sequence after the last scalar instruction we created when
scalarizing the value. Thus, the value's vector definition in the new loop will
immediately follow its scalar definitions. This should fix PR30183.
Reference: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=30183
llvm-svn: 280001
