mirror of
https://github.com/RPCS3/llvm-mirror.git
synced 2025-02-19 19:52:00 +00:00
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7d1f2/7d1f232ca48a1ce620eb70a6728fbe1e5d53418e" alt="Sebastian Pop"
Patch from Preston Briggs <preston.briggs@gmail.com>. This is an updated version of the dependence-analysis patch, including an MIV test based on Banerjee's inequalities. It's a fairly complete implementation of the paper Practical Dependence Testing Gina Goff, Ken Kennedy, and Chau-Wen Tseng PLDI 1991 It cannot yet propagate constraints between coupled RDIV subscripts (discussed in Section 5.3.2 of the paper). It's organized as a FunctionPass with a single entry point that supports testing for dependence between two instructions in a function. If there's no dependence, it returns null. If there's a dependence, it returns a pointer to a Dependence which can be queried about details (what kind of dependence, is it loop independent, direction and distance vector entries, etc). I haven't included every imaginable feature, but there's a good selection that should be adequate for supporting many loop transformations. Of course, it can be extended as necessary. Included in the patch file are many test cases, commented with C code showing the loops and array references. llvm-svn: 165708
Analysis Opportunities: //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// In test/Transforms/LoopStrengthReduce/quadradic-exit-value.ll, the ScalarEvolution expression for %r is this: {1,+,3,+,2}<loop> Outside the loop, this could be evaluated simply as (%n * %n), however ScalarEvolution currently evaluates it as (-2 + (2 * (trunc i65 (((zext i64 (-2 + %n) to i65) * (zext i64 (-1 + %n) to i65)) /u 2) to i64)) + (3 * %n)) In addition to being much more complicated, it involves i65 arithmetic, which is very inefficient when expanded into code. //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// In formatValue in test/CodeGen/X86/lsr-delayed-fold.ll, ScalarEvolution is forming this expression: ((trunc i64 (-1 * %arg5) to i32) + (trunc i64 %arg5 to i32) + (-1 * (trunc i64 undef to i32))) This could be folded to (-1 * (trunc i64 undef to i32)) //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//