diff options
author | Philip Reames <listmail@philipreames.com> | 2019-10-20 23:38:02 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | Philip Reames <listmail@philipreames.com> | 2019-10-20 23:38:02 +0000 |
commit | 8cbcd2f484a2bc6720d9fd66b71aeaf50a49bc70 (patch) | |
tree | 5ef8241712111c4392c23e33ab64ba5c3bf2f275 /llvm/test/Transforms/IndVarSimplify/loop-predication.ll | |
parent | 7015a5c54b53d8d2297a3aa38bc32aab167bdcfc (diff) | |
download | bcm5719-llvm-8cbcd2f484a2bc6720d9fd66b71aeaf50a49bc70.tar.gz bcm5719-llvm-8cbcd2f484a2bc6720d9fd66b71aeaf50a49bc70.zip |
[IndVars] Eliminate loop exits with equivalent exit counts
We can end up with two loop exits whose exit counts are equivalent, but whose textual representation is different and non-obvious. For the sub-case where we have a series of exits which dominate one another (common), eliminate any exits which would iterate *after* a previous exit on the exiting iteration.
As noted in the TODO being removed, I'd always thought this was a good idea, but I've now seen this in a real workload as well.
Interestingly, in review, Nikita pointed out there's let another oppurtunity to leverage SCEV's reasoning. If we kept track of the min of dominanting exits so far, we could discharge exits with EC >= MDE. This is less powerful than the existing transform (since later exits aren't considered), but potentially more powerful for any case where SCEV can prove a >= b, but neither a == b or a > b. I don't have an example to illustrate that oppurtunity, but won't be suprised if we find one and return to handle that case as well.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69009
llvm-svn: 375379
Diffstat (limited to 'llvm/test/Transforms/IndVarSimplify/loop-predication.ll')
-rw-r--r-- | llvm/test/Transforms/IndVarSimplify/loop-predication.ll | 9 |
1 files changed, 4 insertions, 5 deletions
diff --git a/llvm/test/Transforms/IndVarSimplify/loop-predication.ll b/llvm/test/Transforms/IndVarSimplify/loop-predication.ll index 94363706b5b..77c18ef23d7 100644 --- a/llvm/test/Transforms/IndVarSimplify/loop-predication.ll +++ b/llvm/test/Transforms/IndVarSimplify/loop-predication.ll @@ -464,7 +464,6 @@ define i32 @duplicate_checks(i32* %array.1, i32* %array.2, i32* %array.3, i32 %l ; CHECK-NEXT: [[TMP2:%.*]] = icmp ult i32 [[LENGTH:%.*]], [[TMP1]] ; CHECK-NEXT: [[UMIN:%.*]] = select i1 [[TMP2]], i32 [[LENGTH]], i32 [[TMP1]] ; CHECK-NEXT: [[TMP3:%.*]] = icmp ne i32 [[LENGTH]], [[UMIN]] -; CHECK-NEXT: [[TMP4:%.*]] = icmp ne i32 [[LENGTH]], [[UMIN]] ; CHECK-NEXT: br label [[LOOP:%.*]] ; CHECK: loop: ; CHECK-NEXT: [[LOOP_ACC:%.*]] = phi i32 [ [[LOOP_ACC_NEXT:%.*]], [[GUARDED1:%.*]] ], [ 0, [[LOOP_PREHEADER:%.*]] ] @@ -478,7 +477,7 @@ define i32 @duplicate_checks(i32* %array.1, i32* %array.2, i32* %array.3, i32 %l ; CHECK-NEXT: [[ARRAY_1_I_PTR:%.*]] = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* [[ARRAY_1:%.*]], i64 [[I_I64]] ; CHECK-NEXT: [[ARRAY_1_I:%.*]] = load i32, i32* [[ARRAY_1_I_PTR]], align 4 ; CHECK-NEXT: [[LOOP_ACC_1:%.*]] = add i32 [[LOOP_ACC]], [[ARRAY_1_I]] -; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 [[TMP4]], label [[GUARDED1]], label [[DEOPT2:%.*]], !prof !0 +; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 true, label [[GUARDED1]], label [[DEOPT2:%.*]], !prof !0 ; CHECK: deopt2: ; CHECK-NEXT: call void @prevent_merging() ; CHECK-NEXT: ret i32 -1 @@ -784,7 +783,7 @@ exit: ; If we have a dominating exit (exit1) which can't be itself rewritten, we ; can't rewrite a later exit (exit2). Doing so would cause the loop to exit ; from the exit2 when it should have exited from exit1. -define i32 @neg_dominating_exit(i32* %array, i32 %length, i32 %n) { +define i32 @neg_dominating_exit(i32* %array, i32 %length, i32 %length2, i32 %n) { ; CHECK-LABEL: @neg_dominating_exit( ; CHECK-NEXT: loop.preheader: ; CHECK-NEXT: br label [[LOOP:%.*]] @@ -798,7 +797,7 @@ define i32 @neg_dominating_exit(i32* %array, i32 %length, i32 %n) { ; CHECK-NEXT: call void @prevent_merging() ; CHECK-NEXT: ret i32 [[RESULT]] ; CHECK: guarded: -; CHECK-NEXT: [[WITHIN_BOUNDS2:%.*]] = icmp ult i32 [[I]], [[LENGTH]] +; CHECK-NEXT: [[WITHIN_BOUNDS2:%.*]] = icmp ult i32 [[I]], [[LENGTH2:%.*]] ; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 [[WITHIN_BOUNDS2]], label [[GUARDED2]], label [[DEOPT2:%.*]], !prof !0 ; CHECK: deopt2: ; CHECK-NEXT: call void @prevent_merging() @@ -830,7 +829,7 @@ deopt: ; preds = %loop ret i32 %result guarded: ; preds = %loop - %within.bounds2 = icmp ult i32 %i, %length + %within.bounds2 = icmp ult i32 %i, %length2 br i1 %within.bounds2, label %guarded2, label %deopt2, !prof !0 deopt2: ; preds = %loop |