In a later commit, `SplitBinaryAdd` will be used outside `IsConstDiff`,
so lift that out. And lift out `IsConstDiff` as
`computeConstantDifference` to keep things clean and to avoid playing
C++ access specifier games.
NFC.
llvm-svn: 250143
This patch also allows the -delinearize pass to delinearize expressions that do
not have an outermost SCEVAddRec expression. The SCEV::delinearize
infrastructure allowed this since r240952, but the -delinearize pass was not
updated yet.
llvm-svn: 250018
The current implementation of `StrengthenNoWrapFlags` is agnostic to the
order of `Ops`, so this commit should not change anything semantic. An
upcoming change will make `StrengthenNoWrapFlags` sensitive to the order
of `Ops`.
llvm-svn: 249802
Summary:
`getConstantEvolutionLoopExitValue` and `ComputeExitCountExhaustively`
assumed all phi nodes in the loop header have the same order of incoming
values. This is not correct, and this commit changes
`getConstantEvolutionLoopExitValue` and `ComputeExitCountExhaustively`
to lookup the backedge value of a phi node using the loop's latch block.
Unfortunately, there is still some code duplication
`getConstantEvolutionLoopExitValue` and `ComputeExitCountExhaustively`.
At some point in the future we should extract out a helper class /
method that can evolve constant evolution phi nodes across iterations.
Fixes 25060. Thanks to Mattias Eriksson for the spot-on analysis!
Depends on D13457.
Reviewers: atrick, hfinkel
Subscribers: materi, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13458
llvm-svn: 249712
Comparing `Pred` with `ICmpInst::ICMP_ULT` is cheaper that memory access
-- do that check before loading / storing `ProvingSplitPredicate`.
llvm-svn: 249654
This reverts commit r249528 and reapply r249431. The fix for the
fallout has been commited in r249575.
From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com>
llvm-svn: 249581
With this patch, clang -O3 optimizes correctly providing > 1000x speedup on this artificial benchmark):
for (a=0; a<n; a++)
for (b=0; b<n; b++)
for (c=0; c<n; c++)
for (d=0; d<n; d++)
for (e=0; e<n; e++)
for (f=0; f<n; f++)
x++;
From test-suite/SingleSource/Benchmarks/Shootout/nestedloop.c
Reviewers: sanjoyd
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13390
From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com>
llvm-svn: 249431
This time by lifting the lambda's in `createNodeFromSelectLikePHI` to
the file scope. Looks like there are differences in capture rules
between clang and MSVC?
llvm-svn: 249222
Summary:
This change teaches SCEV that to prove `A u< B` it is sufficient to
prove each of these facts individually:
- B >= 0
- A s< B
- A >= 0
In practice, SCEV sometimes finds it easier to prove these facts
individually than to prove `A u< B` as one atomic step.
Reviewers: reames, atrick, nlewycky, hfinkel
Subscribers: sanjoy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13042
llvm-svn: 249168
`ScalarEvolution::isImpliedCondOperandsViaNoOverflow` tries to cast the
operand type of the comparison it is given to an `IntegerType`. This is
incorrect because it could actually be simplifying a comparison between
two pointers. Switch it to using `getTypeSizeInBits` instead, which
does the right thing for both pointers and integers.
Fixed PR24956.
llvm-svn: 248743
Before this change `HasSameValue` would return true for distinct
`alloca` instructions if they happened to be allocating the same
type (`alloca` instructions are not specified as reading memory). This
change adds an explicit whitelist of instruction types for which
"identical" instructions compute the same value.
Fixes PR24952.
llvm-svn: 248690
Summary:
If the trip count of a specific backedge is `N`, then we know that
backedge is effectively guarded by the condition `{0,+,1} u< N`. This
change teaches SCEV to use this condition to prove things in
`isLoopBackedgeGuardedByCond`.
Depends on D12948
Depends on D12949
The original checkin, r248608 had to be backed out due to an issue with
a ObjCXX unit test. That issue is now fixed, so re-landing.
Reviewers: atrick, reames, majnemer, hfinkel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12950
llvm-svn: 248638
Summary:
This change teaches SCEV's `isImpliedCond` two new identities:
A u< B u< -C => (A + C) u< (B + C)
A s< B s< INT_MIN - C => (A + C) s< (B + C)
While these are useful on their own, they're really intended to support
D12950.
The original checkin, r248606 had to be backed out due to an issue with
a ObjCXX unit test. That issue is now fixed, so re-landing.
Reviewers: atrick, reames, majnemer, nlewycky, hfinkel
Subscribers: aadg, sanjoy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12948
llvm-svn: 248637
Summary:
If the trip count of a specific backedge is `N`, then we know that
backedge is effectively guarded by the condition `{0,+,1} u< N`. This
change teaches SCEV to use this condition to prove things in
`isLoopBackedgeGuardedByCond`.
Depends on D12948
Depends on D12949
Reviewers: atrick, reames, majnemer, hfinkel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12950
llvm-svn: 248608
Summary:
This new helper routine will be used in a subsequent change.
Reviewers: hfinkel
Subscribers: hfinkel, sanjoy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12949
llvm-svn: 248607
Summary:
This change teaches SCEV's `isImpliedCond` two new identities:
A u< B u< -C => (A + C) u< (B + C)
A s< B s< INT_MIN - C => (A + C) s< (B + C)
While these are useful on their own, they're really intended to support
D12950.
Reviewers: atrick, reames, majnemer, nlewycky, hfinkel
Subscribers: aadg, sanjoy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12948
llvm-svn: 248606
Summary:
It is fairly common to call SE->getConstant(Ty, 0) or
SE->getConstant(Ty, 1); this change makes such uses a little bit
briefer.
I've refactored the call sites I could find easily to use getZero /
getOne.
Reviewers: hfinkel, majnemer, reames
Subscribers: sanjoy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12947
llvm-svn: 248362
Summary:
For loop destroyed current instance before invoking next.
Temporary variable added to prevent use-after-dtor when invoke
destructor on current instance.
Reviewers: eugenis
Subscribers: llvm-commits, sanjoy
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12912
Rename temp var.
llvm-svn: 247867
This patch addresses the issue of SCEV division asserting on some
input expressions (e.g., non-affine expressions) and quietly giving
up on others. When giving up, we set the quotient to be equal to
zero and the remainder to be equal to the numerator. With this
patch, we always quietly give up when we cannot perform the
division.
This patch also adds a test case for DependenceAnalysis that
previously caused an assertion.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11725
llvm-svn: 247314
Summary:
PR24757 was caused by some incorect math in
`ScalarEvolution::HowFarToZero` -- the smallest unsigned solution for X
in
2^N * A = 2^N * X
is not necessarily A.
Reviewers: atrick, majnemer, meheff
Subscribers: llvm-commits, sanjoy
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12721
llvm-svn: 247242
Rewrite some code to not use a lambda function. The non-lambda code is just
about as clean as the original, and not any longer. The lambda function causes
an internal compiler error in GCC 4.8.0, and it is not worth breaking support
for that compiler over this. NFC.
llvm-svn: 245466
Here we make ScalarEvolution::isKnownPredicate, indirectly, a little smarter.
Given some relational comparison operator OP, and two AddRec SCEVs, {I,+,S} OP
{J,+,T}, we can reduce this to the comparison I OP J when S == T, both AddRecs
are for the same loop, and both are known not to wrap.
As it turns out, because of the way that backedge-guard expressions can be
leveraged when computing known predicates, this allows indvars to simplify the
if-statement comparison in this loop:
void foo (int *a, int *b, int n) {
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
if (i > n)
a[i] = b[i] + 1;
}
}
which, somewhat surprisingly, we were not previously optimizing away.
llvm-svn: 245400
This change makes ScalarEvolution a stand-alone object and just produces
one from a pass as needed. Making this work well requires making the
object movable, using references instead of overwritten pointers in
a number of places, and other refactorings.
I've also wired it up to the new pass manager and added a RUN line to
a test to exercise it under the new pass manager. This includes basic
printing support much like with other analyses.
But there is a big and somewhat scary change here. Prior to this patch
ScalarEvolution was never *actually* invalidated!!! Re-running the pass
just re-wired up the various other analyses and didn't remove any of the
existing entries in the SCEV caches or clear out anything at all. This
might seem OK as everything in SCEV that can uses ValueHandles to track
updates to the values that serve as SCEV keys. However, this still means
that as we ran SCEV over each function in the module, we kept
accumulating more and more SCEVs into the cache. At the end, we would
have a SCEV cache with every value that we ever needed a SCEV for in the
entire module!!! Yowzers. The releaseMemory routine would dump all of
this, but that isn't realy called during normal runs of the pipeline as
far as I can see.
To make matters worse, there *is* actually a key that we don't update
with value handles -- there is a map keyed off of Loop*s. Because
LoopInfo *does* release its memory from run to run, it is entirely
possible to run SCEV over one function, then over another function, and
then lookup a Loop* from the second function but find an entry inserted
for the first function! Ouch.
To make matters still worse, there are plenty of updates that *don't*
trip a value handle. It seems incredibly unlikely that today GVN or
another pass that invalidates SCEV can update values in *just* such
a way that a subsequent run of SCEV will incorrectly find lookups in
a cache, but it is theoretically possible and would be a nightmare to
debug.
With this refactoring, I've fixed all this by actually destroying and
recreating the ScalarEvolution object from run to run. Technically, this
could increase the amount of malloc traffic we see, but then again it is
also technically correct. ;] I don't actually think we're suffering from
tons of malloc traffic from SCEV because if we were, the fact that we
never clear the memory would seem more likely to have come up as an
actual problem before now. So, I've made the simple fix here. If in fact
there are serious issues with too much allocation and deallocation,
I can work on a clever fix that preserves the allocations (while
clearing the data) between each run, but I'd prefer to do that kind of
optimization with a test case / benchmark that shows why we need such
cleverness (and that can test that we actually make it faster). It's
possible that this will make some things faster by making the SCEV
caches have higher locality (due to being significantly smaller) so
until there is a clear benchmark, I think the simple change is best.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12063
llvm-svn: 245193
Summary:
http://reviews.llvm.org/D11212 made Scalar Evolution able to propagate NSW and NUW flags from instructions to SCEVs for add instructions. This patch expands that to sub, mul and shl instructions.
This change makes LSR able to generate pointer induction variables for loops like these, where the index is 32 bit and the pointer is 64 bit:
for (int i = 0; i < numIterations; ++i)
sum += ptr[i - offset];
for (int i = 0; i < numIterations; ++i)
sum += ptr[i * stride];
for (int i = 0; i < numIterations; ++i)
sum += ptr[3 * (i << 7)];
Reviewers: atrick, sanjoy
Subscribers: sanjoy, majnemer, hfinkel, llvm-commits, meheff, jingyue, eliben
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11860
llvm-svn: 245118
After r244074, we now have a successors() method to iterate over
all the successors of a TerminatorInst. This commit changes a bunch
of eligible loops to use it.
llvm-svn: 244260
Summary:
Make Scalar Evolution able to propagate NSW and NUW flags from instructions to SCEVs in some cases. This is based on reasoning about when poison from instructions with these flags would trigger undefined behavior. This gives a 13% speed-up on some Eigen3-based Google-internal microbenchmarks for NVPTX.
There does not seem to be clear agreement about when poison should be considered to propagate through instructions. In this analysis, poison propagates only in cases where that should be uncontroversial.
This change makes LSR able to create induction variables for expressions like &ptr[i + offset] for loops like this:
for (int i = 0; i < limit; ++i) {
sum += ptr[i + offset];
}
Here ptr is a 64 bit pointer and offset is a 32 bit integer. For NVPTX, LSR currently creates an induction variable for i + offset instead, which is not as fast. Improving this situation is what brings the 13% speed-up on some Eigen3-based Google-internal microbenchmarks for NVPTX.
There are more details in this discussion on llvmdev.
June: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2015-June/thread.html#87234
July: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2015-July/thread.html#87392
Patch by Bjarke Roune
Reviewers: eliben, atrick, sanjoy
Subscribers: majnemer, hfinkel, jingyue, meheff, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11212
llvm-svn: 243460
Summary:
Was D9784: "Remove loop variant range check when induction variable is
strictly increasing"
This change re-implements D9784 with the two differences:
1. It does not use SCEVExpander and does not generate new
instructions. Instead, it does a quick local search for existing
`llvm::Value`s that it needs when modifying the `icmp`
instruction.
2. It is more general -- it deals with both increasing and decreasing
induction variables.
I've added all of the tests included with D9784, and two more.
As an example on what this change does (copied from D9784):
Given C code:
```
for (int i = M; i < N; i++) // i is known not to overflow
if (i < 0) break;
a[i] = 0;
}
```
This transformation produces:
```
for (int i = M; i < N; i++)
if (M < 0) break;
a[i] = 0;
}
```
Which can be unswitched into:
```
if (!(M < 0))
for (int i = M; i < N; i++)
a[i] = 0;
}
```
I went back and forth on whether the top level logic should live in
`SimplifyIndvar::eliminateIVComparison` or be put into its own
routine. Right now I've put it under `eliminateIVComparison` because
even though the `icmp` is not *eliminated*, it no longer is an IV
comparison. I'm open to putting it in its own helper routine if you
think that is better.
Reviewers: reames, nicholas, atrick
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11278
llvm-svn: 243331
The expressions we delinearize do not necessarily have to have a SCEVAddRecExpr
at the outermost level. At this moment, the additional flexibility is not
exploited in LLVM itself, but in Polly we will soon soonish use this
functionality. For LLVM, this change should not affect existing functionality
(which is covered by test/Analysis/Delinearization/)
llvm-svn: 240952
The patch is generated using this command:
tools/clang/tools/extra/clang-tidy/tool/run-clang-tidy.py -fix \
-checks=-*,llvm-namespace-comment -header-filter='llvm/.*|clang/.*' \
llvm/lib/
Thanks to Eugene Kosov for the original patch!
llvm-svn: 240137
Summary:
This allows other passes (such as SLSR) to compute the SCEV expression for an
imaginary GEP.
Test Plan: no regression
Reviewers: atrick, sanjoy
Reviewed By: sanjoy
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9786
llvm-svn: 237589
