| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
... | |
|
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 370485
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
Instead of recomputing information for call sites we now use the
function information directly. This is always valid and once we have
call site specific information we can improve here.
This patch also bootstraps attributes that are created on-demand through
an initial update call. Information that is known will then directly be
available in the new attribute without causing an iteration delay.
The tests show how this improves the iteration count.
Reviewers: sstefan1, uenoku
Subscribers: hiraditya, bollu, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66781
llvm-svn: 370480
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
Any pointer could have load/store users not only floating ones so we
move the manifest logic for alignment into the AAAlignImpl class.
Reviewers: uenoku, sstefan1
Subscribers: hiraditya, bollu, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66922
llvm-svn: 370479
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary: Add missing tbuffer loads intrinsics in SimplifyDemandedVectorElts.
Reviewers: arsenm, nhaehnle
Reviewed By: arsenm
Subscribers: kzhuravl, jvesely, wdng, nhaehnle, yaxunl, dstuttard, tpr, t-tye, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66926
llvm-svn: 370475
|
|
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 370465
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary: This patch adds an appropriate `initialize` method for `AANoAliasCallSiteArgument`.
Reviewers: jdoerfert, sstefan1
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66927
llvm-svn: 370456
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
@mclow.lists brought up this issue up in IRC.
It is a reasonably common problem to compare some two values for equality.
Those may be just some integers, strings or arrays of integers.
In C, there is `memcmp()`, `bcmp()` functions.
In C++, there exists `std::equal()` algorithm.
One can also write that function manually.
libstdc++'s `std::equal()` is specialized to directly call `memcmp()` for
various types, but not `std::byte` from C++2a. https://godbolt.org/z/mx2ejJ
libc++ does not do anything like that, it simply relies on simple C++'s
`operator==()`. https://godbolt.org/z/er0Zwf (GOOD!)
So likely, there exists a certain performance opportunities.
Let's compare performance of naive `std::equal()` (no `memcmp()`) with one that
is using `memcmp()` (in this case, compiled with modified compiler). {F8768213}
```
#include <algorithm>
#include <cmath>
#include <cstdint>
#include <iterator>
#include <limits>
#include <random>
#include <type_traits>
#include <utility>
#include <vector>
#include "benchmark/benchmark.h"
template <class T>
bool equal(T* a, T* a_end, T* b) noexcept {
for (; a != a_end; ++a, ++b) {
if (*a != *b) return false;
}
return true;
}
template <typename T>
std::vector<T> getVectorOfRandomNumbers(size_t count) {
std::random_device rd;
std::mt19937 gen(rd());
std::uniform_int_distribution<T> dis(std::numeric_limits<T>::min(),
std::numeric_limits<T>::max());
std::vector<T> v;
v.reserve(count);
std::generate_n(std::back_inserter(v), count,
[&dis, &gen]() { return dis(gen); });
assert(v.size() == count);
return v;
}
struct Identical {
template <typename T>
static std::pair<std::vector<T>, std::vector<T>> Gen(size_t count) {
auto Tmp = getVectorOfRandomNumbers<T>(count);
return std::make_pair(Tmp, std::move(Tmp));
}
};
struct InequalHalfway {
template <typename T>
static std::pair<std::vector<T>, std::vector<T>> Gen(size_t count) {
auto V0 = getVectorOfRandomNumbers<T>(count);
auto V1 = V0;
V1[V1.size() / size_t(2)]++; // just change the value.
return std::make_pair(std::move(V0), std::move(V1));
}
};
template <class T, class Gen>
void BM_bcmp(benchmark::State& state) {
const size_t Length = state.range(0);
const std::pair<std::vector<T>, std::vector<T>> Data =
Gen::template Gen<T>(Length);
const std::vector<T>& a = Data.first;
const std::vector<T>& b = Data.second;
assert(a.size() == Length && b.size() == a.size());
benchmark::ClobberMemory();
benchmark::DoNotOptimize(a);
benchmark::DoNotOptimize(a.data());
benchmark::DoNotOptimize(b);
benchmark::DoNotOptimize(b.data());
for (auto _ : state) {
const bool is_equal = equal(a.data(), a.data() + a.size(), b.data());
benchmark::DoNotOptimize(is_equal);
}
state.SetComplexityN(Length);
state.counters["eltcnt"] =
benchmark::Counter(Length, benchmark::Counter::kIsIterationInvariant);
state.counters["eltcnt/sec"] =
benchmark::Counter(Length, benchmark::Counter::kIsIterationInvariantRate);
const size_t BytesRead = 2 * sizeof(T) * Length;
state.counters["bytes_read/iteration"] =
benchmark::Counter(BytesRead, benchmark::Counter::kDefaults,
benchmark::Counter::OneK::kIs1024);
state.counters["bytes_read/sec"] = benchmark::Counter(
BytesRead, benchmark::Counter::kIsIterationInvariantRate,
benchmark::Counter::OneK::kIs1024);
}
template <typename T>
static void CustomArguments(benchmark::internal::Benchmark* b) {
const size_t L2SizeBytes = []() {
for (const benchmark::CPUInfo::CacheInfo& I :
benchmark::CPUInfo::Get().caches) {
if (I.level == 2) return I.size;
}
return 0;
}();
// What is the largest range we can check to always fit within given L2 cache?
const size_t MaxLen = L2SizeBytes / /*total bufs*/ 2 /
/*maximal elt size*/ sizeof(T) / /*safety margin*/ 2;
b->RangeMultiplier(2)->Range(1, MaxLen)->Complexity(benchmark::oN);
}
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_bcmp, uint8_t, Identical)
->Apply(CustomArguments<uint8_t>);
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_bcmp, uint16_t, Identical)
->Apply(CustomArguments<uint16_t>);
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_bcmp, uint32_t, Identical)
->Apply(CustomArguments<uint32_t>);
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_bcmp, uint64_t, Identical)
->Apply(CustomArguments<uint64_t>);
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_bcmp, uint8_t, InequalHalfway)
->Apply(CustomArguments<uint8_t>);
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_bcmp, uint16_t, InequalHalfway)
->Apply(CustomArguments<uint16_t>);
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_bcmp, uint32_t, InequalHalfway)
->Apply(CustomArguments<uint32_t>);
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_bcmp, uint64_t, InequalHalfway)
->Apply(CustomArguments<uint64_t>);
```
{F8768210}
```
$ ~/src/googlebenchmark/tools/compare.py --no-utest benchmarks build-{old,new}/test/llvm-bcmp-bench
RUNNING: build-old/test/llvm-bcmp-bench --benchmark_out=/tmp/tmpb6PEUx
2019-04-25 21:17:11
Running build-old/test/llvm-bcmp-bench
Run on (8 X 4000 MHz CPU s)
CPU Caches:
L1 Data 16K (x8)
L1 Instruction 64K (x4)
L2 Unified 2048K (x4)
L3 Unified 8192K (x1)
Load Average: 0.65, 3.90, 4.14
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark Time CPU Iterations UserCounters...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint8_t, Identical>/512000 432131 ns 432101 ns 1613 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=2.20706G/s eltcnt=825.856M eltcnt/sec=1.18491G/s
BM_bcmp<uint8_t, Identical>_BigO 0.86 N 0.86 N
BM_bcmp<uint8_t, Identical>_RMS 8 % 8 %
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint16_t, Identical>/256000 161408 ns 161409 ns 4027 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=5.90843G/s eltcnt=1030.91M eltcnt/sec=1.58603G/s
BM_bcmp<uint16_t, Identical>_BigO 0.67 N 0.67 N
BM_bcmp<uint16_t, Identical>_RMS 25 % 25 %
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint32_t, Identical>/128000 81497 ns 81488 ns 8415 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=11.7032G/s eltcnt=1077.12M eltcnt/sec=1.57078G/s
BM_bcmp<uint32_t, Identical>_BigO 0.71 N 0.71 N
BM_bcmp<uint32_t, Identical>_RMS 42 % 42 %
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint64_t, Identical>/64000 50138 ns 50138 ns 10909 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=19.0209G/s eltcnt=698.176M eltcnt/sec=1.27647G/s
BM_bcmp<uint64_t, Identical>_BigO 0.84 N 0.84 N
BM_bcmp<uint64_t, Identical>_RMS 27 % 27 %
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint8_t, InequalHalfway>/512000 192405 ns 192392 ns 3638 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=4.95694G/s eltcnt=1.86266G eltcnt/sec=2.66124G/s
BM_bcmp<uint8_t, InequalHalfway>_BigO 0.38 N 0.38 N
BM_bcmp<uint8_t, InequalHalfway>_RMS 3 % 3 %
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint16_t, InequalHalfway>/256000 127858 ns 127860 ns 5477 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=7.45873G/s eltcnt=1.40211G eltcnt/sec=2.00219G/s
BM_bcmp<uint16_t, InequalHalfway>_BigO 0.50 N 0.50 N
BM_bcmp<uint16_t, InequalHalfway>_RMS 0 % 0 %
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint32_t, InequalHalfway>/128000 49140 ns 49140 ns 14281 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=19.4072G/s eltcnt=1.82797G eltcnt/sec=2.60478G/s
BM_bcmp<uint32_t, InequalHalfway>_BigO 0.40 N 0.40 N
BM_bcmp<uint32_t, InequalHalfway>_RMS 18 % 18 %
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint64_t, InequalHalfway>/64000 32101 ns 32099 ns 21786 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=29.7101G/s eltcnt=1.3943G eltcnt/sec=1.99381G/s
BM_bcmp<uint64_t, InequalHalfway>_BigO 0.50 N 0.50 N
BM_bcmp<uint64_t, InequalHalfway>_RMS 1 % 1 %
RUNNING: build-new/test/llvm-bcmp-bench --benchmark_out=/tmp/tmpQ46PP0
2019-04-25 21:19:29
Running build-new/test/llvm-bcmp-bench
Run on (8 X 4000 MHz CPU s)
CPU Caches:
L1 Data 16K (x8)
L1 Instruction 64K (x4)
L2 Unified 2048K (x4)
L3 Unified 8192K (x1)
Load Average: 1.01, 2.85, 3.71
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark Time CPU Iterations UserCounters...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint8_t, Identical>/512000 18593 ns 18590 ns 37565 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=51.2991G/s eltcnt=19.2333G eltcnt/sec=27.541G/s
BM_bcmp<uint8_t, Identical>_BigO 0.04 N 0.04 N
BM_bcmp<uint8_t, Identical>_RMS 37 % 37 %
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint16_t, Identical>/256000 18950 ns 18948 ns 37223 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=50.3324G/s eltcnt=9.52909G eltcnt/sec=13.511G/s
BM_bcmp<uint16_t, Identical>_BigO 0.08 N 0.08 N
BM_bcmp<uint16_t, Identical>_RMS 34 % 34 %
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint32_t, Identical>/128000 18627 ns 18627 ns 37895 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=51.198G/s eltcnt=4.85056G eltcnt/sec=6.87168G/s
BM_bcmp<uint32_t, Identical>_BigO 0.16 N 0.16 N
BM_bcmp<uint32_t, Identical>_RMS 35 % 35 %
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint64_t, Identical>/64000 18855 ns 18855 ns 37458 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=50.5791G/s eltcnt=2.39731G eltcnt/sec=3.3943G/s
BM_bcmp<uint64_t, Identical>_BigO 0.32 N 0.32 N
BM_bcmp<uint64_t, Identical>_RMS 33 % 33 %
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint8_t, InequalHalfway>/512000 9570 ns 9569 ns 73500 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=99.6601G/s eltcnt=37.632G eltcnt/sec=53.5046G/s
BM_bcmp<uint8_t, InequalHalfway>_BigO 0.02 N 0.02 N
BM_bcmp<uint8_t, InequalHalfway>_RMS 29 % 29 %
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint16_t, InequalHalfway>/256000 9547 ns 9547 ns 74343 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=99.8971G/s eltcnt=19.0318G eltcnt/sec=26.8159G/s
BM_bcmp<uint16_t, InequalHalfway>_BigO 0.04 N 0.04 N
BM_bcmp<uint16_t, InequalHalfway>_RMS 29 % 29 %
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint32_t, InequalHalfway>/128000 9396 ns 9394 ns 73521 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=101.518G/s eltcnt=9.41069G eltcnt/sec=13.6255G/s
BM_bcmp<uint32_t, InequalHalfway>_BigO 0.08 N 0.08 N
BM_bcmp<uint32_t, InequalHalfway>_RMS 30 % 30 %
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint64_t, InequalHalfway>/64000 9499 ns 9498 ns 73802 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=100.405G/s eltcnt=4.72333G eltcnt/sec=6.73808G/s
BM_bcmp<uint64_t, InequalHalfway>_BigO 0.16 N 0.16 N
BM_bcmp<uint64_t, InequalHalfway>_RMS 28 % 28 %
Comparing build-old/test/llvm-bcmp-bench to build-new/test/llvm-bcmp-bench
Benchmark Time CPU Time Old Time New CPU Old CPU New
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint8_t, Identical>/512000 -0.9570 -0.9570 432131 18593 432101 18590
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint16_t, Identical>/256000 -0.8826 -0.8826 161408 18950 161409 18948
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint32_t, Identical>/128000 -0.7714 -0.7714 81497 18627 81488 18627
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint64_t, Identical>/64000 -0.6239 -0.6239 50138 18855 50138 18855
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint8_t, InequalHalfway>/512000 -0.9503 -0.9503 192405 9570 192392 9569
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint16_t, InequalHalfway>/256000 -0.9253 -0.9253 127858 9547 127860 9547
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint32_t, InequalHalfway>/128000 -0.8088 -0.8088 49140 9396 49140 9394
<...>
BM_bcmp<uint64_t, InequalHalfway>/64000 -0.7041 -0.7041 32101 9499 32099 9498
```
What can we tell from the benchmark?
* Performance of naive equality check somewhat improves with element size,
maxing out at eltcnt/sec=1.58603G/s for uint16_t, or bytes_read/sec=19.0209G/s
for uint64_t. I think, that instability implies performance problems.
* Performance of `memcmp()`-aware benchmark always maxes out at around
bytes_read/sec=51.2991G/s for every type. That is 2.6x the throughput of the
naive variant!
* eltcnt/sec metric for the `memcmp()`-aware benchmark maxes out at
eltcnt/sec=27.541G/s for uint8_t (was: eltcnt/sec=1.18491G/s, so 24x) and
linearly decreases with element size.
For uint64_t, it's ~4x+ the elements/second.
* The call obvious is more pricey than the loop, with small element count.
As it can be seen from the full output {F8768210}, the `memcmp()` is almost
universally worse, independent of the element size (and thus buffer size) when
element count is less than 8.
So all in all, bcmp idiom does indeed pose untapped performance headroom.
This diff does implement said idiom recognition. I think a reasonable test
coverage is present, but do tell if there is anything obvious missing.
Now, quality. This does succeed to build and pass the test-suite, at least
without any non-bundled elements. {F8768216} {F8768217}
This transform fires 91 times:
```
$ /build/test-suite/utils/compare.py -m loop-idiom.NumBCmp result-new.json
Tests: 1149
Metric: loop-idiom.NumBCmp
Program result-new
MultiSourc...Benchmarks/7zip/7zip-benchmark 79.00
MultiSource/Applications/d/make_dparser 3.00
SingleSource/UnitTests/vla 2.00
MultiSource/Applications/Burg/burg 1.00
MultiSourc.../Applications/JM/lencod/lencod 1.00
MultiSource/Applications/lemon/lemon 1.00
MultiSource/Benchmarks/Bullet/bullet 1.00
MultiSourc...e/Benchmarks/MallocBench/gs/gs 1.00
MultiSourc...gs-C/TimberWolfMC/timberwolfmc 1.00
MultiSourc...Prolangs-C/simulator/simulator 1.00
```
The size changes are:
I'm not sure what's going on with SingleSource/UnitTests/vla.test yet, did not look.
```
$ /build/test-suite/utils/compare.py -m size..text result-{old,new}.json --filter-hash
Tests: 1149
Same hash: 907 (filtered out)
Remaining: 242
Metric: size..text
Program result-old result-new diff
test-suite...ingleSource/UnitTests/vla.test 753.00 833.00 10.6%
test-suite...marks/7zip/7zip-benchmark.test 1001697.00 966657.00 -3.5%
test-suite...ngs-C/simulator/simulator.test 32369.00 32321.00 -0.1%
test-suite...plications/d/make_dparser.test 89585.00 89505.00 -0.1%
test-suite...ce/Applications/Burg/burg.test 40817.00 40785.00 -0.1%
test-suite.../Applications/lemon/lemon.test 47281.00 47249.00 -0.1%
test-suite...TimberWolfMC/timberwolfmc.test 250065.00 250113.00 0.0%
test-suite...chmarks/MallocBench/gs/gs.test 149889.00 149873.00 -0.0%
test-suite...ications/JM/lencod/lencod.test 769585.00 769569.00 -0.0%
test-suite.../Benchmarks/Bullet/bullet.test 770049.00 770049.00 0.0%
test-suite...HMARK_ANISTROPIC_DIFFUSION/128 NaN NaN nan%
test-suite...HMARK_ANISTROPIC_DIFFUSION/256 NaN NaN nan%
test-suite...CHMARK_ANISTROPIC_DIFFUSION/64 NaN NaN nan%
test-suite...CHMARK_ANISTROPIC_DIFFUSION/32 NaN NaN nan%
test-suite...ENCHMARK_BILATERAL_FILTER/64/4 NaN NaN nan%
Geomean difference nan%
result-old result-new diff
count 1.000000e+01 10.00000 10.000000
mean 3.152090e+05 311695.40000 0.006749
std 3.790398e+05 372091.42232 0.036605
min 7.530000e+02 833.00000 -0.034981
25% 4.243300e+04 42401.00000 -0.000866
50% 1.197370e+05 119689.00000 -0.000392
75% 6.397050e+05 639705.00000 -0.000005
max 1.001697e+06 966657.00000 0.106242
```
I don't have timings though.
And now to the code. The basic idea is to completely replace the whole loop.
If we can't fully kill it, don't transform.
I have left one or two comments in the code, so hopefully it can be understood.
Also, there is a few TODO's that i have left for follow-ups:
* widening of `memcmp()`/`bcmp()`
* step smaller than the comparison size
* Metadata propagation
* more than two blocks as long as there is still a single backedge?
* ???
Reviewers: reames, fhahn, mkazantsev, chandlerc, craig.topper, courbet
Reviewed By: courbet
Subscribers: hiraditya, xbolva00, nikic, jfb, gchatelet, courbet, llvm-commits, mclow.lists
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61144
llvm-svn: 370454
|
|
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 370399
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Breaks sanitizers bots.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58311
llvm-svn: 370397
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We can also apply the earlier updates to the lazy DTU, instead of
applying them directly.
Reviewers: kuhar, brzycki, asbirlea, SjoerdMeijer
Reviewed By: brzycki, asbirlea, SjoerdMeijer
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66918
llvm-svn: 370391
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
I'm not planning to check this in at the moment, but feedback is very welcome, in particular how this affects performance.
The feedback obtains here will guide the next steps towards enabling this.
This patch enables the use of MemorySSA in the loop pass manager.
Passes that currently use MemorySSA:
- EarlyCSE
Passes that use MemorySSA after this patch:
- EarlyCSE
- LICM
- SimpleLoopUnswitch
Loop passes that update MemorySSA (and do not use it yet, but could use it after this patch):
- LoopInstSimplify
- LoopSimplifyCFG
- LoopUnswitch
- LoopRotate
- LoopSimplify
- LCSSA
Loop passes that do *not* update MemorySSA:
- IndVarSimplify
- LoopDelete
- LoopIdiom
- LoopSink
- LoopUnroll
- LoopInterchange
- LoopUnrollAndJam
- LoopVectorize
- LoopReroll
- IRCE
Reviewers: chandlerc, george.burgess.iv, davide, sanjoy, gberry
Subscribers: jlebar, Prazek, dmgreen, jdoerfert, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58311
llvm-svn: 370384
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
- Similar to the workaround in fix of PR30188, skip sinking common
lifetime markers of `alloca`. They are mostly left there after
inlining functions in branches.
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66950
llvm-svn: 370376
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
hoist a 'not' from incoming values
Summary:
As it can be seen in the tests in D65143/D65144, even though we have formed an '@llvm.umul.with.overflow'
and got rid of potential for division-by-zero, the control flow remains, we still have that branch.
We have this condition:
```
// Don't fold i1 branches on PHIs which contain binary operators
// These can often be turned into switches and other things.
if (PN->getType()->isIntegerTy(1) &&
(isa<BinaryOperator>(PN->getIncomingValue(0)) ||
isa<BinaryOperator>(PN->getIncomingValue(1)) ||
isa<BinaryOperator>(IfCond)))
return false;
```
which was added back in rL121764 to help with `select` formation i think?
That check prevents us to flatten the CFG here, even though we know
we no longer need that guard and will be able to drop everything
but the '@llvm.umul.with.overflow' + `not`.
As it can be seen from tests, we end here because the `not` is being
sinked into the PHI's incoming values by InstCombine,
so we can't workaround this by hoisting it to after PHI.
Thus i suggest that we relax that check to not bailout if we'd get to hoist the `not`.
Reviewers: craig.topper, spatel, fhahn, nikic
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65147
llvm-svn: 370349
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
overflow bit extraction
Summary:
`((%x * %y) u/ %x) != %y` is one of (3?) common ways to check that
some unsigned multiplication (will not) overflow.
Currently, we don't catch it. We could:
```
$ /repositories/alive2/build-Clang-unknown/alive -root-only ~/llvm-patch1.ll
Processing /home/lebedevri/llvm-patch1.ll..
----------------------------------------
Name: no overflow
%o0 = mul i4 %y, %x
%o1 = udiv i4 %o0, %x
%r = icmp ne i4 %o1, %y
ret i1 %r
=>
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%o0 = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 0
%o1 = udiv %o0, %x
%r = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
ret %r
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
----------------------------------------
Name: no overflow
%o0 = mul i4 %y, %x
%o1 = udiv i4 %o0, %x
%r = icmp eq i4 %o1, %y
ret i1 %r
=>
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%o0 = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 0
%o1 = udiv %o0, %x
%n1 = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
%r = xor %n1, -1
ret i1 %r
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
```
Reviewers: nikic, spatel, efriedma, xbolva00, RKSimon
Reviewed By: nikic
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65144
llvm-svn: 370348
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
overflow bit extraction
Summary:
`(-1 u/ %x) u< %y` is one of (3?) common ways to check that
some unsigned multiplication (will not) overflow.
Currently, we don't catch it. We could:
```
----------------------------------------
Name: no overflow
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp ult i4 %o0, %y
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%r = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
----------------------------------------
Name: no overflow, swapped
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp ugt i4 %y, %o0
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%r = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
----------------------------------------
Name: overflow
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp uge i4 %o0, %y
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%n1 = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
%r = xor %n1, -1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
----------------------------------------
Name: overflow
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp ule i4 %y, %o0
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%n1 = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
%r = xor %n1, -1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
```
As it can be observed from tests, while simply forming the `@llvm.umul.with.overflow`
is easy, if we were looking for the inverted answer, then more work needs to be done
to cleanup the now-pointless control-flow that was guarding against division-by-zero.
This is being addressed in follow-up patches.
Reviewers: nikic, spatel, efriedma, xbolva00, RKSimon
Reviewed By: nikic, xbolva00
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65143
llvm-svn: 370347
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
Finally, the fold i was looking forward to :)
The legality check is muddy, i doubt i've groked the full generalization,
but it handles all the cases i care about, and can come up with:
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/26j
I.e. we can perform the fold if **any** of the following is true:
* The shift amount is either zero or one less than widest bitwidth
* Either of the values being shifted has at most lowest bit set
* The value that is being shifted by `shl` (which is not truncated) should have no less leading zeros than the total shift amount;
* The value that is being shifted by `lshr` (which **is** truncated) should have no less leading zeros than the widest bit width minus total shift amount minus one
I strongly suspect there is some better generalization, but i'm not aware of it as of right now.
For now i also avoided using actual `computeKnownBits()`, but restricted it to constants.
Reviewers: spatel, nikic, xbolva00
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66383
llvm-svn: 370324
|
|
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 370319
|
|
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 370317
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
This patch adds very basic deduction for noalias.
Reviewers: jdoerfert, sstefan1
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Tags: LLVM
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66207
llvm-svn: 370295
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We do not access the DT in the loop, so we do not have to apply updates
eagerly. We can apply them lazyly and flush them after we are done
merging blocks.
As follow-up work, we might be able to use the DTU above as well,
instead of manually updating the DT.
This brings the example from PR43134 from ~100s to ~4s for a relase +
assertions build on my machine.
Reviewers: efriedma, kuhar, asbirlea, brzycki
Reviewed By: kuhar, brzycki
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66911
llvm-svn: 370292
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
When we now verify the iteration count we will see the actual count
and the expected count before the assertion is triggered.
llvm-svn: 370285
|
|
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 370283
|
|
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 370282
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
...cloning a function from a different module
Currently when a function with debug info is cloned from a different module, the
cloned function may have hanging DICompileUnits, so that the module with the
cloned function fails debug info verification.
The proposed fix inserts all DICompileUnits reachable from the cloned function
to "llvm.dbg.cu" metadata operands of the cloned function module.
Reviewed By: aprantl, efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66510
Patch by Oleg Pliss (Oleg.Pliss@azul.com)
llvm-svn: 370265
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
By default ASan calls a versioned function
`__asan_version_mismatch_check_vXXX` from the ASan module constructor to
check that the compiler ABI version and runtime ABI version are
compatible. This ensures that we get a predictable linker error instead
of hard-to-debug runtime errors.
Sometimes, however, we want to skip this safety guard. This new command
line option allows us to do just that.
rdar://47891956
Reviewed By: kubamracek
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66826
llvm-svn: 370258
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Always true/false checks were flagged by static analysis;
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43143
I have not confirmed the logic difference in propagating nsw vs. nuw,
but presumably we would have noticed a bug by now if that was wrong.
llvm-svn: 370248
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
This functionality was added when Mapper::mapMetadata was recursive. It
is no longer needed after r265456, which switched it to be iterative.
Reviewers: dexonsmith, srhines
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66860
llvm-svn: 370236
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
As dependences between abstract attributes can become stale, e.g., if
one was sufficient to imply another one at some point but it has since
been wakened to the point it is not usable for the formerly implied one.
To weed out spurious dependences, and thereby eliminate unneeded
updates, we introduce an option to determine how often the dependence
cache is cleared and recomputed during the fixpoint iteration.
Note that the initial value was determined such that we see a positive
result on our tests.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63315
llvm-svn: 370230
|
|
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 370224
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Due to missing vector support in this function, recursion can
generate worse code in some cases.
llvm-svn: 370221
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
InstCombiner::MaxArraySizeForCombine is set outside the constructor so we need to ensure it has a default initialization value.
llvm-svn: 370220
|
|
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 370217
|
|
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 370212
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
Until we have proper call-site information we should not recompute
liveness and return information for each call site. This patch directly
uses the function versions and introduces TODOs at the usage sites.
The required iterations to get to the fixpoint are most of the time
reduced by this change and we always avoid work duplication.
Reviewers: sstefan1, uenoku
Subscribers: hiraditya, bollu, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66562
llvm-svn: 370208
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
variable warning. NFCI.
We have a lot of Predicate variables, all similarly named....
llvm-svn: 370207
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Allow vectorizing loops that have reductions when tail is folded by masking.
A select is introduced in VPlan, choosing between the last value carried by the
loop-exit/live-out instruction of the reduction, and the penultimate value
carried by the reduction phi, according to the "i < n" mask of fold-tail.
This select replaces the last value as the live-out value of the loop.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66720
llvm-svn: 370173
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
Example
define dso_local noalias i8* @_Z6maixxnv() local_unnamed_addr #0 {
entry:
%call = tail call noalias dereferenceable_or_null(64) i8* @malloc(i64 64) #6
ret i8* %call
}
Reviewers: jdoerfert
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Subscribers: aaron.ballman, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66651
llvm-svn: 370168
|
|
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 370156
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
vector of pointers. Fix other portions.
llvm-svn: 370114
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
process
The code we had isSafeToLoadUnconditionally was blatantly wrong. This function takes a "Size" argument which is supposed to describe the span loaded from. Instead, the code use the size of the pointer passed (which may be unrelated!) and only checks that span. For any Size > LoadSize, this can and does lead to miscompiles.
Worse, the generic code just a few lines above correctly handles the cases which *are* valid. So, let's delete said code.
Removing this code revealed two issues:
1) As noted by jdoerfert the removed code incorrectly handled external globals. The test update in SROA is to stop testing incorrect behavior.
2) SROA was confusing bytes and bits, but this wasn't obvious as the Size parameter was being essentially ignored anyway. Fixed.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66778
llvm-svn: 370102
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
Handle pattern [0]:
int ctz(unsigned int a)
{
int c = __clz(a & -a);
return a ? 31 - c : c;
}
In reality, the compiler can generate much better code for cttz, so fold away this pattern.
https://godbolt.org/z/c5kPtV
[0] https://community.arm.com/community-help/f/discussions/2114/count-trailing-zeros
Reviewers: spatel, nikic, lebedev.ri, dmgreen, hfinkel
Reviewed By: hfinkel
Subscribers: hfinkel, javed.absar, kristof.beyls, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66308
llvm-svn: 370037
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
During the fixpoint iteration, including the manifest stage, we should
not delete stuff as other abstract attributes might have a reference to
the value. Through the API this can now be done safely at the very end.
Reviewers: uenoku, sstefan1
Subscribers: hiraditya, bollu, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66779
llvm-svn: 370014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Reviewers: eugenis
Subscribers: hiraditya, cfe-commits, #sanitizers, llvm-commits
Tags: #clang, #sanitizers, #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66695
llvm-svn: 369979
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Try harder to emulate "old runtime" in the test.
To get the old behavior with the new runtime library, we need both
disable personality function wrapping and enable landing pad
instrumentation.
llvm-svn: 369977
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Extracted from D66688 as requested.
llvm-svn: 369962
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
for vectors
Extend the transform introduced in https://reviews.llvm.org/D66608 to work for vector geps as well.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66671
llvm-svn: 369949
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
Try to verify how many iterations we need for a fixpoint in our tests.
This patch adjust the way we count to make it easier to follow. It also
adjusts the bounds to actually account for a fixpoint and not only the
minimum number to pass all checks.
Reviewers: uenoku, sstefan1
Subscribers: hiraditya, bollu, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66757
llvm-svn: 369945
|
|
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 369936
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
By default, the Attributor tracks potential dependences between abstract
attributes based on the issued Attributor::getAAFor queries. This
simplifies the development of new abstract attributes but it can also
lead to spurious dependences that might increase compile time and make
internalization harder (D63312). With this patch, abstract attributes
can opt-out of implicit dependence tracking and instead register
dependences explicitly. It is up to the implementation to make sure all
existing dependences are registered.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63314
llvm-svn: 369935
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
When reconstructing the CFG of the loop after unrolling,
LoopUnroll could in some cases remove the phi operands of
loop-carried values instead of preserving them, resulting
in undef phi values after loop unrolling.
When doing this reconstruction, avoid removing incoming
phi values for phis in the successor blocks if the successor
is the block we are jumping to anyway.
Patch-by: ebevhan
Reviewers: fhahn, efriedma
Reviewed By: fhahn
Subscribers: bjope, lebedev.ri, zzheng, dmgreen, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66334
llvm-svn: 369886
|