diff options
author | Max Kazantsev <max.kazantsev@azul.com> | 2017-03-24 07:04:31 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | Max Kazantsev <max.kazantsev@azul.com> | 2017-03-24 07:04:31 +0000 |
commit | 7696a7edf9dceab386cec496646e169b43eb490d (patch) | |
tree | 61913af82d0eb726b393dc3650351b21fc2e989d /llvm/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp | |
parent | ffc30781f4a83632969ff26ad6fa41fcf39f1f35 (diff) | |
download | bcm5719-llvm-7696a7edf9dceab386cec496646e169b43eb490d.tar.gz bcm5719-llvm-7696a7edf9dceab386cec496646e169b43eb490d.zip |
Revert "[ScalarEvolution] Re-enable Predicate implication from operations"
This reverts commit rL298690
Causes failures on clang.
llvm-svn: 298693
Diffstat (limited to 'llvm/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp')
-rw-r--r-- | llvm/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp | 175 |
1 files changed, 16 insertions, 159 deletions
diff --git a/llvm/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp b/llvm/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp index afa4e464ed3..58634064d09 100644 --- a/llvm/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp +++ b/llvm/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp @@ -137,11 +137,6 @@ static cl::opt<unsigned> MaxSCEVCompareDepth( cl::desc("Maximum depth of recursive SCEV complexity comparisons"), cl::init(32)); -static cl::opt<unsigned> MaxSCEVOperationsImplicationDepth( - "scalar-evolution-max-scev-operations-implication-depth", cl::Hidden, - cl::desc("Maximum depth of recursive SCEV operations implication analysis"), - cl::init(4)); - static cl::opt<unsigned> MaxValueCompareDepth( "scalar-evolution-max-value-compare-depth", cl::Hidden, cl::desc("Maximum depth of recursive value complexity comparisons"), @@ -3423,10 +3418,6 @@ Type *ScalarEvolution::getEffectiveSCEVType(Type *Ty) const { return getDataLayout().getIntPtrType(Ty); } -Type *ScalarEvolution::getWiderType(Type *T1, Type *T2) const { - return getTypeSizeInBits(T1) >= getTypeSizeInBits(T2) ? T1 : T2; -} - const SCEV *ScalarEvolution::getCouldNotCompute() { return CouldNotCompute.get(); } @@ -8568,149 +8559,19 @@ static bool IsKnownPredicateViaMinOrMax(ScalarEvolution &SE, llvm_unreachable("covered switch fell through?!"); } -bool ScalarEvolution::isImpliedViaOperations(ICmpInst::Predicate Pred, - const SCEV *LHS, const SCEV *RHS, - const SCEV *FoundLHS, - const SCEV *FoundRHS, - unsigned Depth) { - // We want to avoid hurting the compile time with analysis of too big trees. - if (Depth > MaxSCEVOperationsImplicationDepth) - return false; - // We only want to work with ICMP_SGT comparison so far. - // TODO: Extend to ICMP_UGT? - if (Pred == ICmpInst::ICMP_SLT) { - Pred = ICmpInst::ICMP_SGT; - std::swap(LHS, RHS); - std::swap(FoundLHS, FoundRHS); - } - if (Pred != ICmpInst::ICMP_SGT) - return false; - - auto GetOpFromSExt = [&](const SCEV *S) { - if (auto *Ext = dyn_cast<SCEVSignExtendExpr>(S)) - return Ext->getOperand(); - // TODO: If S is a SCEVConstant then you can cheaply "strip" the sext off - // the constant in some cases. - return S; - }; - - // Acquire values from extensions. - auto *OrigFoundLHS = FoundLHS; - LHS = GetOpFromSExt(LHS); - FoundLHS = GetOpFromSExt(FoundLHS); - - // Is the SGT predicate can be proved trivially or using the found context. - auto IsSGTViaContext = [&](const SCEV *S1, const SCEV *S2) { - assert(S1->getType() == S2->getType() && "Proving for wrong types?"); - return isKnownViaSimpleReasoning(ICmpInst::ICMP_SGT, S1, S2) || - isImpliedViaOperations(ICmpInst::ICMP_SGT, S1, S2, OrigFoundLHS, - FoundRHS, Depth + 1); - }; - - if (auto *LHSAddExpr = dyn_cast<SCEVAddExpr>(LHS)) { - // We want to avoid creation of any new non-constant SCEV. Since we are - // going to compare the operands to RHS, we should be certain that we don't - // need any type conversions for this. So let's decline all cases when the - // types of LHS and RHS do not match. - // TODO: Maybe try to get RHS from sext to catch more cases? - if (LHSAddExpr->getType() != RHS->getType()) - return false; - - // Should not overflow. - if (!LHSAddExpr->hasNoSignedWrap()) - return false; - - auto *LL = LHSAddExpr->getOperand(0); - auto *LR = LHSAddExpr->getOperand(1); - auto *MinusOne = getNegativeSCEV(getOne(RHS->getType())); - - // Checks that S1 >= 0 && S2 > RHS, trivially or using the found context. - auto IsSumGreaterThanRHS = [&](const SCEV *S1, const SCEV *S2) { - return IsSGTViaContext(S1, MinusOne) && IsSGTViaContext(S2, RHS); - }; - // Try to prove the following rule: - // (LHS = LL + LR) && (LL >= 0) && (LR > RHS) => (LHS > RHS). - // (LHS = LL + LR) && (LR >= 0) && (LL > RHS) => (LHS > RHS). - if (IsSumGreaterThanRHS(LL, LR) || IsSumGreaterThanRHS(LR, LL)) - return true; - } else if (auto *LHSUnknownExpr = dyn_cast<SCEVUnknown>(LHS)) { - Value *LL, *LR; - // FIXME: Once we have SDiv implemented, we can get rid of this matching. - using namespace llvm::PatternMatch; - if (match(LHSUnknownExpr->getValue(), m_SDiv(m_Value(LL), m_Value(LR)))) { - // Rules for division. - // We are going to perform some comparisons with Denominator and its - // derivative expressions. In general case, creating a SCEV for it may - // lead to a complex analysis of the entire graph, and in particular it - // can request trip count recalculation for the same loop. This would - // cache as SCEVCouldNotCompute to avoid the infinite recursion. This is a - // sad thing. To avoid this, we only want to create SCEVs that are - // constants in this section. So we bail if Denominator is not a constant. - if (!isa<ConstantInt>(LR)) - return false; - - auto *Denominator = cast<SCEVConstant>(getSCEV(LR)); - - // We want to make sure that LHS = FoundLHS / Denominator. If it is so, - // then a SCEV for the numerator already exists and matches with FoundLHS. - auto *Numerator = getExistingSCEV(LL); - - // Make sure that it exists and has the same type. - if (!Numerator || Numerator->getType() != FoundLHS->getType()) - return false; - - // Make sure that the numerator matches with FoundLHs and the denominator - // is positive. - if (!HasSameValue(Numerator, FoundLHS) || !isKnownPositive(Denominator)) - return false; - - // Given that: - // FoundLHS > FoundRHS, LHS = FoundLHS / Denominator, Denominator > 0. - auto *Ty2 = getWiderType(Denominator->getType(), FoundRHS->getType()); - auto *DenominatorExt = getNoopOrSignExtend(Denominator, Ty2); - auto *FoundRHSExt = getNoopOrSignExtend(FoundRHS, Ty2); - - // Try to prove the following rule: - // (FoundRHS > Denominator - 2) && (RHS <= 0) => (LHS > RHS). - // For example, given that FoundLHS > 2. It means that FoundLHS is at - // least 3. If we divide it by Denominator < 4, we will have at least 1. - auto *DenomMinusTwo = getMinusSCEV(DenominatorExt, getConstant(Ty2, 2)); - if (isKnownNonPositive(RHS) && - IsSGTViaContext(FoundRHSExt, DenomMinusTwo)) - return true; - - // Try to prove the following rule: - // (FoundRHS > -1 - Denominator) && (RHS < 0) => (LHS > RHS). - // For example, given that FoundLHS > -3. Then FoundLHS is at least -2. - // If we divide it by Denominator > 2, then: - // 1. If FoundLHS is negative, then the result is 0. - // 2. If FoundLHS is non-negative, then the result is non-negative. - // Anyways, the result is non-negative. - auto *MinusOne = getNegativeSCEV(getOne(Ty2)); - auto *NegDenomMinusOne = getMinusSCEV(MinusOne, DenominatorExt); - if (isKnownNegative(RHS) && - IsSGTViaContext(FoundRHSExt, NegDenomMinusOne)) - return true; - } - } - - return false; -} - -bool -ScalarEvolution::isKnownViaSimpleReasoning(ICmpInst::Predicate Pred, - const SCEV *LHS, const SCEV *RHS) { - return isKnownPredicateViaConstantRanges(Pred, LHS, RHS) || - IsKnownPredicateViaMinOrMax(*this, Pred, LHS, RHS) || - IsKnownPredicateViaAddRecStart(*this, Pred, LHS, RHS) || - isKnownPredicateViaNoOverflow(Pred, LHS, RHS); -} - bool ScalarEvolution::isImpliedCondOperandsHelper(ICmpInst::Predicate Pred, const SCEV *LHS, const SCEV *RHS, const SCEV *FoundLHS, const SCEV *FoundRHS) { + auto IsKnownPredicateFull = + [this](ICmpInst::Predicate Pred, const SCEV *LHS, const SCEV *RHS) { + return isKnownPredicateViaConstantRanges(Pred, LHS, RHS) || + IsKnownPredicateViaMinOrMax(*this, Pred, LHS, RHS) || + IsKnownPredicateViaAddRecStart(*this, Pred, LHS, RHS) || + isKnownPredicateViaNoOverflow(Pred, LHS, RHS); + }; + switch (Pred) { default: llvm_unreachable("Unexpected ICmpInst::Predicate value!"); case ICmpInst::ICMP_EQ: @@ -8720,34 +8581,30 @@ ScalarEvolution::isImpliedCondOperandsHelper(ICmpInst::Predicate Pred, break; case ICmpInst::ICMP_SLT: case ICmpInst::ICMP_SLE: - if (isKnownViaSimpleReasoning(ICmpInst::ICMP_SLE, LHS, FoundLHS) && - isKnownViaSimpleReasoning(ICmpInst::ICMP_SGE, RHS, FoundRHS)) + if (IsKnownPredicateFull(ICmpInst::ICMP_SLE, LHS, FoundLHS) && + IsKnownPredicateFull(ICmpInst::ICMP_SGE, RHS, FoundRHS)) return true; break; case ICmpInst::ICMP_SGT: case ICmpInst::ICMP_SGE: - if (isKnownViaSimpleReasoning(ICmpInst::ICMP_SGE, LHS, FoundLHS) && - isKnownViaSimpleReasoning(ICmpInst::ICMP_SLE, RHS, FoundRHS)) + if (IsKnownPredicateFull(ICmpInst::ICMP_SGE, LHS, FoundLHS) && + IsKnownPredicateFull(ICmpInst::ICMP_SLE, RHS, FoundRHS)) return true; break; case ICmpInst::ICMP_ULT: case ICmpInst::ICMP_ULE: - if (isKnownViaSimpleReasoning(ICmpInst::ICMP_ULE, LHS, FoundLHS) && - isKnownViaSimpleReasoning(ICmpInst::ICMP_UGE, RHS, FoundRHS)) + if (IsKnownPredicateFull(ICmpInst::ICMP_ULE, LHS, FoundLHS) && + IsKnownPredicateFull(ICmpInst::ICMP_UGE, RHS, FoundRHS)) return true; break; case ICmpInst::ICMP_UGT: case ICmpInst::ICMP_UGE: - if (isKnownViaSimpleReasoning(ICmpInst::ICMP_UGE, LHS, FoundLHS) && - isKnownViaSimpleReasoning(ICmpInst::ICMP_ULE, RHS, FoundRHS)) + if (IsKnownPredicateFull(ICmpInst::ICMP_UGE, LHS, FoundLHS) && + IsKnownPredicateFull(ICmpInst::ICMP_ULE, RHS, FoundRHS)) return true; break; } - // Maybe it can be proved via operations? - if (isImpliedViaOperations(Pred, LHS, RHS, FoundLHS, FoundRHS)) - return true; - return false; } |