result
Summary:
If the same value is used several times as an extra value, SLP
vectorizer takes it into account only once instead of actual number of
using.
For example:
```
int val = 1;
for (int y = 0; y < 8; y++) {
for (int x = 0; x < 8; x++) {
val = val + input[y * 8 + x] + 3;
}
}
```
We have 2 extra rguments: `1` - initial value of horizontal reduction
and `3`, which is added 8*8 times to the reduction. Before the patch we
added `1` to the reduction value and added once `3`, though it must be
added 64 times.
Reviewers: mkuper, mzolotukhin
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30262
llvm-svn: 295956
result
Summary:
If the same value is used several times as an extra value, SLP
vectorizer takes it into account only once instead of actual number of
using.
For example:
```
int val = 1;
for (int y = 0; y < 8; y++) {
for (int x = 0; x < 8; x++) {
val = val + input[y * 8 + x] + 3;
}
}
```
We have 2 extra rguments: `1` - initial value of horizontal reduction
and `3`, which is added 8*8 times to the reduction. Before the patch we
added `1` to the reduction value and added once `3`, though it must be
added 64 times.
Reviewers: mkuper, mzolotukhin
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30262
llvm-svn: 295949
Summary:
If the same value is used several times as an extra value, SLP
vectorizer takes it into account only once instead of actual number of
using.
For example:
```
int val = 1;
for (int y = 0; y < 8; y++) {
for (int x = 0; x < 8; x++) {
val = val + input[y * 8 + x] + 3;
}
}
```
We have 2 extra rguments: `1` - initial value of horizontal reduction
and `3`, which is added 8*8 times to the reduction. Before the patch we
added `1` to the reduction value and added once `3`, though it must be
added 64 times.
Reviewers: mkuper, mzolotukhin
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30262
llvm-svn: 295868
back into a vector
Previously the cost of the existing ExtractElement/ExtractValue
instructions was considered as a dead cost only if it was detected that
they have only one use. But these instructions may be considered
dead also if users of the instructions are also going to be vectorized,
like:
```
%x0 = extractelement <2 x float> %x, i32 0
%x1 = extractelement <2 x float> %x, i32 1
%x0x0 = fmul float %x0, %x0
%x1x1 = fmul float %x1, %x1
%add = fadd float %x0x0, %x1x1
```
This can be transformed to
```
%1 = fmul <2 x float> %x, %x
%2 = extractelement <2 x float> %1, i32 0
%3 = extractelement <2 x float> %1, i32 1
%add = fadd float %2, %3
```
because though `%x0` and `%x1` have 2 users each other, these users are
part of the vectorized tree and we can consider these `extractelement`
instructions as dead.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29900
llvm-svn: 295056
reductions.
Currently, LLVM supports vectorization of horizontal reduction
instructions with initial value set to 0. Patch supports vectorization
of reduction with non-zero initial values. Also, it supports a
vectorization of instructions with some extra arguments, like:
```
float f(float x[], int a, int b) {
float p = a % b;
p += x[0] + 3;
for (int i = 1; i < 32; i++)
p += x[i];
return p;
}
```
Patch allows vectorization of this kind of horizontal reductions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29727
llvm-svn: 294934
This breaks when one of the extra values is also a scalar that
participates in the same vectorization tree which we'll end up
reducing.
llvm-svn: 294245
Currently LLVM supports vectorization of horizontal reduction
instructions with initial value set to 0. Patch supports vectorization
of reduction with non-zero initial values. Also it supports a
vectorization of instructions with some extra arguments, like:
float f(float x[], int a, int b) {
float p = a % b;
p += x[0] + 3;
for (int i = 1; i < 32; i++)
p += x[i];
return p;
}
Patch allows vectorization of this kind of horizontal reductions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28961
llvm-svn: 293994
The jumbled scalar loads will be sorted while building the tree and these accesses will be marked to generate shufflevector after the vectorized load with proper mask.
Reviewers: hfinkel, mssimpso, mkuper
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26905
Change-Id: I9c0c8e6f91a00076a7ee1465440a3f6ae092f7ad
llvm-svn: 293386
Some checks in SLP horizontal reduction analysis function are performed
several times, though it is enough to perform these checks only once
during an initial attempt at adding candidate for the reduction
instruction/reduced value.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29175
llvm-svn: 293274
instructions.
If number of instructions in horizontal reduction list is not power of 2
then only PowerOf2Floor(NumberOfInstructions) last elements are actually
vectorized, other instructions remain scalar. Patch tries to vectorize
the remaining elements either.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28959
llvm-svn: 293042
Removed data members ReduxWidth and MinVecRegSize + some C++11 stylish
improvements.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29010
llvm-svn: 292899
a function's CFG when that CFG is unchanged.
This allows transformation passes to simply claim they preserve the CFG
and analysis passes to check for the CFG being preserved to remove the
fanout of all analyses being listed in all passes.
I've gone through and removed or cleaned up as many of the comments
reminding us to do this as I could.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28627
llvm-svn: 292054
The removed assert seems bogus - it's perfectly legal for the roots of the
vectorized subtrees to be equal even if the original scalar values aren't,
if the original scalars happen to be equivalent.
This fixes PR31599.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28539
llvm-svn: 291692
After r289755, the AssumptionCache is no longer needed. Variables affected by
assumptions are now found by using the new operand-bundle-based scheme. This
new scheme is more computationally efficient, and also we need much less
code...
llvm-svn: 289756
This patch ensures the correct minimum bit width during type-shrinking.
Previously when type-shrinking, we always sign-extended values back to their
original width. However, if we are going to sign-extend, and the sign bit is
unknown, we have to increase the minimum bit width by one bit so the
sign-extend will fill the upper bits correctly. If the sign bit is known to be
zero, we can perform a zero-extend instead. This should fix PR31243.
Reference: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=31243
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27466
llvm-svn: 289470
When trying to vectorize trees that start at insertelement instructions
function tryToVectorizeList() uses vectorization factor calculated as
MinVecRegSize/ScalarTypeSize. But sometimes it does not work as tree
cost for this fixed vectorization factor is too high.
Patch tries to improve the situation. It tries different vectorization
factors from max(PowerOf2Floor(NumberOfVectorizedValues),
MinVecRegSize/ScalarTypeSize) to MinVecRegSize/ScalarTypeSize and tries
to choose the best one.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27215
llvm-svn: 289043
This reverts commit r288497, as it broke the AArch64 build of Compiler-RT's
builtins (twice: once in r288412 and once in r288497). We should investigate
this offline.
llvm-svn: 288508
When trying to vectorize trees that start at insertelement instructions
function tryToVectorizeList() uses vectorization factor calculated as
MinVecRegSize/ScalarTypeSize. But sometimes it does not work as tree
cost for this fixed vectorization factor is too high.
Patch tries to improve the situation. It tries different vectorization
factors from max(PowerOf2Floor(NumberOfVectorizedValues),
MinVecRegSize/ScalarTypeSize) to MinVecRegSize/ScalarTypeSize and tries
to choose the best one.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27215
llvm-svn: 288497
When trying to vectorize trees that start at insertelement instructions
function tryToVectorizeList() uses vectorization factor calculated as
MinVecRegSize/ScalarTypeSize. But sometimes it does not work as tree
cost for this fixed vectorization factor is too high.
Patch tries to improve the situation. It tries different vectorization
factors from max(PowerOf2Floor(NumberOfVectorizedValues),
MinVecRegSize/ScalarTypeSize) to MinVecRegSize/ScalarTypeSize and tries
to choose the best one.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27215
llvm-svn: 288412
Currently when cost of scalar operations is evaluated the vector type is
used for scalar operations. Patch fixes this issue and fixes evaluation
of the vector operations cost.
Several test showed that vector cost model is too optimistic. It
allowed vectorization of 8 or less add/fadd operations, though scalar
code is faster. Actually, only for 16 or more operations vector code
provides better performance.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26277
llvm-svn: 288398
Currently SLP vectorizer tries to vectorize a binary operation and dies
immediately after unsuccessful the first unsuccessfull attempt. Patch
tries to improve the situation, trying to vectorize all binary
operations of all children nodes in the binop tree.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25517
llvm-svn: 288115
After successfull horizontal reduction vectorization attempt for PHI node
vectorizer tries to update root binary op by combining vectorized tree
and the ReductionPHI node. But during vectorization this ReductionPHI
can be vectorized itself and replaced by the `undef` value, while the
instruction itself is marked for deletion. This 'marked for deletion'
PHI node then can be used in new binary operation, causing "Use still
stuck around after Def is destroyed" crash upon PHI node deletion.
Also the test is fixed to make it perform actual testing.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25671
llvm-svn: 285286
unrolling.
The next code is not vectorized by the SLPVectorizer:
```
int test(unsigned int *p) {
int sum = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < 8; i++)
sum += p[i];
return sum;
}
```
During optimization this loop is fully unrolled and SLPVectorizer is
unable to vectorize it. Patch tries to fix this problem.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24796
llvm-svn: 283535
Inheriting from std::iterator uses more boiler-plate than manual
typedefs. Avoid that in both ilist_iterator and
MachineInstrBundleIterator.
This has the side effect of removing ilist_iterator from certain ADL
lookups in namespace std; calls to std::next need to be qualified by
"std::" that didn't have to before. The one case of this in-tree was
operating on a temporary, so I used the more compact operator++.
llvm-svn: 280570
Passing the types/opcode check still doesn't guarantee we'll actually vectorize.
Therefore, just make it clear we're attempting to vectorize.
llvm-svn: 280263
Reverse iterators to doubly-linked lists can be simpler (and cheaper)
than std::reverse_iterator. Make it so.
In particular, change ilist<T>::reverse_iterator so that it is *never*
invalidated unless the node it references is deleted. This matches the
guarantees of ilist<T>::iterator.
(Note: MachineBasicBlock::iterator is *not* an ilist iterator, but a
MachineInstrBundleIterator<MachineInstr>. This commit does not change
MachineBasicBlock::reverse_iterator, but it does update
MachineBasicBlock::reverse_instr_iterator. See note at end of commit
message for details on bundle iterators.)
Given the list (with the Sentinel showing twice for simplicity):
[Sentinel] <-> A <-> B <-> [Sentinel]
the following is now true:
1. begin() represents A.
2. begin() holds the pointer for A.
3. end() represents [Sentinel].
4. end() holds the poitner for [Sentinel].
5. rbegin() represents B.
6. rbegin() holds the pointer for B.
7. rend() represents [Sentinel].
8. rend() holds the pointer for [Sentinel].
The changes are #6 and #8. Here are some properties from the old
scheme (which used std::reverse_iterator):
- rbegin() held the pointer for [Sentinel] and rend() held the pointer
for A;
- operator*() cost two dereferences instead of one;
- converting from a valid iterator to its valid reverse_iterator
involved a confusing increment; and
- "RI++->erase()" left RI invalid. The unintuitive replacement was
"RI->erase(), RE = end()".
With vector-like data structures these properties are hard to avoid
(since past-the-beginning is not a valid pointer), and don't impose a
real cost (since there's still only one dereference, and all iterators
are invalidated on erase). But with lists, this was a poor design.
Specifically, the following code (which obviously works with normal
iterators) now works with ilist::reverse_iterator as well:
for (auto RI = L.rbegin(), RE = L.rend(); RI != RE;)
fooThatMightRemoveArgFromList(*RI++);
Converting between iterator and reverse_iterator for the same node uses
the getReverse() function.
reverse_iterator iterator::getReverse();
iterator reverse_iterator::getReverse();
Why doesn't iterator <=> reverse_iterator conversion use constructors?
In order to catch and update old code, reverse_iterator does not even
have an explicit conversion from iterator. It wouldn't be safe because
there would be no reasonable way to catch all the bugs from the changed
semantic (see the changes at call sites that are part of this patch).
Old code used this API:
std::reverse_iterator::reverse_iterator(iterator);
iterator std::reverse_iterator::base();
Here's how to update from old code to new (that incorporates the
semantic change), assuming I is an ilist<>::iterator and RI is an
ilist<>::reverse_iterator:
[Old] ==> [New]
reverse_iterator(I) (--I).getReverse()
reverse_iterator(I) ++I.getReverse()
--reverse_iterator(I) I.getReverse()
reverse_iterator(++I) I.getReverse()
RI.base() (--RI).getReverse()
RI.base() ++RI.getReverse()
--RI.base() RI.getReverse()
(++RI).base() RI.getReverse()
delete &*RI, RE = end() delete &*RI++
RI->erase(), RE = end() RI++->erase()
=======================================
Note: bundle iterators are out of scope
=======================================
MachineBasicBlock::iterator, also known as
MachineInstrBundleIterator<MachineInstr>, is a wrapper to represent
MachineInstr bundles. The idea is that each operator++ takes you to the
beginning of the next bundle. Implementing a sane reverse iterator for
this is harder than ilist. Here are the options:
- Use std::reverse_iterator<MBB::i>. Store a handle to the beginning of
the next bundle. A call to operator*() runs a loop (usually
operator--() will be called 1 time, for unbundled instructions).
Increment/decrement just works. This is the status quo.
- Store a handle to the final node in the bundle. A call to operator*()
still runs a loop, but it iterates one time fewer (usually
operator--() will be called 0 times, for unbundled instructions).
Increment/decrement just works.
- Make the ilist_sentinel<MachineInstr> *always* store that it's the
sentinel (instead of just in asserts mode). Then the bundle iterator
can sniff the sentinel bit in operator++().
I initially tried implementing the end() option as part of this commit,
but updating iterator/reverse_iterator conversion call sites was
error-prone. I have a WIP series of patches that implements the final
option.
llvm-svn: 280032
The test case included with r279125 exposed an existing signed integer
overflow. Since getTreeCost can return INT_MAX, we can't sum this cost together
with other costs, such as getReductionCost.
This patch removes the possibility of assigning a cost of INT_MAX. Since we
were previously using INT_MAX as an indicator for "should not vectorize", we
now explicitly check this condition with "isTreeTinyAndNotFullyVectorizable"
before computing a cost.
This patch adds a run-line to the test case used for r279125 that ensures we
don't vectorize. Previously, this line would vectorize the test case by chance
due to undefined behavior in the cost calculation.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23723
llvm-svn: 279562
The test case included in r279125 exposed existing undefined behavior in the
SLP vectorizer that it did not introduce. This patch reapplies the original
patch, but modifies the test case to avoid hitting the undefined behavior. This
allows us to close PR28330 while keeping the UBSan bot happy. The undefined
behavior the original test uncovered will be addressed in a follow-on patch.
Reference: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=28330
llvm-svn: 279370
We abort building vectorizable trees in some cases (e.g., if the maximum
recursion depth is reached, if the region size is too large, etc.). If this
happens for a reduction, we can be left with a root entry that needs to be
gathered. For these cases, we need make sure we actually set VectorizedValue to
the resulting vector.
This patch ensures we properly set VectorizedValue, and it also ensures the
insertelement sequence generated for the gathers is inserted at the correct
location.
Reference: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=28330
Differential Revison: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23410
llvm-svn: 279125
