| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This file lists every pass in LLVM, and is included by Pass.h, which is
very popular. Every time we add, remove, or rename a pass in LLVM, it
caused lots of recompilation.
I found this fact by looking at this table, which is sorted by the
number of times a file was changed over the last 100,000 git commits
multiplied by the number of object files that depend on it in the
current checkout:
recompiles touches affected_files header
342380 95 3604 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/STLExtras.h
314730 234 1345 llvm/include/llvm/InitializePasses.h
307036 118 2602 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/APInt.h
213049 59 3611 llvm/include/llvm/Support/MathExtras.h
170422 47 3626 llvm/include/llvm/Support/Compiler.h
162225 45 3605 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/Optional.h
158319 63 2513 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/Triple.h
140322 39 3598 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/StringRef.h
137647 59 2333 llvm/include/llvm/Support/Error.h
131619 73 1803 llvm/include/llvm/Support/FileSystem.h
Before this change, touching InitializePasses.h would cause 1345 files
to recompile. After this change, touching it only causes 550 compiles in
an incremental rebuild.
Reviewers: bkramer, asbirlea, bollu, jdoerfert
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70211
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This removes unused includes (and forward declarations) as
suggested by include-what-you-use. If a transitive include of a removed
include is required to compile a file, I added the required header (or
forward declaration if suggested by include-what-you-use).
This should reduce compilation time and reduce the number of iterative
recompilations when a header was changed.
llvm-svn: 357209
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 337243
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Reviewers: Meinersbur, grosser, bollu, cs15btech11044, jdoerfert
Reviewed By: grosser
Subscribers: pollydev, llvm-commits
Tags: #polly
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47786
llvm-svn: 334092
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 331126
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 331122
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 331118
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 328005
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 318988
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
polly-check-format has been failing since at least r318517,
due to more than one cause.
llvm-svn: 318795
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Polly version of r315249 on LLVM trunk.
llvm-svn: 315253
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 312755
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
This fixes the following failures in the reverse iteration builder:
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/reverse-iteration/builds/25
Polly :: MaximalStaticExpansion/working_deps_between_inners.ll
Polly :: MaximalStaticExpansion/working_expansion_multiple_dependences_per_statement.ll
Polly :: MaximalStaticExpansion/working_expansion_multiple_instruction_per_statement.ll
Polly :: MaximalStaticExpansion/working_phi_expansion.ll
Reviewers: simbuerg, Eugene.Zelenko, grosser, zinob, bollu
Reviewed By: grosser
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37349
llvm-svn: 312273
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
other minor fixes (NFC).
llvm-svn: 311802
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
This patch comes directly after https://reviews.llvm.org/D34982 which allows fully indexed expansion of MemoryKind::Array. This patch allows expansion for MemoryKind::Value and MemoryKind::PHI.
MemoryKind::Value seems to be working with no majors modifications of D34982. A test case has been added. Unfortunatly, no "run time" checks can be done for now because as @Meinersbur explains in a comment on D34982, DependenceInfo need to be cleared and reset to take expansion into account in the remaining part of the Polly pipeline. There is no way to do that in Polly for now.
MemoryKind::PHI is not working. Test case is in place, but not working. To expand MemoryKind::Array, we expand first the write and then after the reads. For MemoryKind::PHI, the idea of the current implementation is to exchange the "roles" of the read and write and expand first the read according to its domain and after the writes.
But with this strategy, I still encounter the problem of union_map in new access map.
For example with the following source code (source code of the test case) :
```
void mse(double A[Ni], double B[Nj]) {
int i,j;
double tmp = 6;
for (i = 0; i < Ni; i++) {
for (int j = 0; j<Nj; j++) {
tmp = tmp + 2;
}
B[i] = tmp;
}
}
```
Polly gives us the following statements and memory accesses :
```
Statements {
Stmt_for_body
Domain :=
{ Stmt_for_body[i0] : 0 <= i0 <= 9999 };
Schedule :=
{ Stmt_for_body[i0] -> [i0, 0, 0] };
ReadAccess := [Reduction Type: NONE] [Scalar: 1]
{ Stmt_for_body[i0] -> MemRef_tmp_04__phi[] };
MustWriteAccess := [Reduction Type: NONE] [Scalar: 1]
{ Stmt_for_body[i0] -> MemRef_tmp_11__phi[] };
Instructions {
%tmp.04 = phi double [ 6.000000e+00, %entry.split ], [ %add.lcssa, %for.end ]
}
Stmt_for_inc
Domain :=
{ Stmt_for_inc[i0, i1] : 0 <= i0 <= 9999 and 0 <= i1 <= 9999 };
Schedule :=
{ Stmt_for_inc[i0, i1] -> [i0, 1, i1] };
MustWriteAccess := [Reduction Type: NONE] [Scalar: 1]
{ Stmt_for_inc[i0, i1] -> MemRef_tmp_11__phi[] };
ReadAccess := [Reduction Type: NONE] [Scalar: 1]
{ Stmt_for_inc[i0, i1] -> MemRef_tmp_11__phi[] };
MustWriteAccess := [Reduction Type: NONE] [Scalar: 1]
{ Stmt_for_inc[i0, i1] -> MemRef_add_lcssa__phi[] };
Instructions {
%tmp.11 = phi double [ %tmp.04, %for.body ], [ %add, %for.inc ]
%add = fadd double %tmp.11, 2.000000e+00
%exitcond = icmp ne i32 %inc, 10000
}
Stmt_for_end
Domain :=
{ Stmt_for_end[i0] : 0 <= i0 <= 9999 };
Schedule :=
{ Stmt_for_end[i0] -> [i0, 2, 0] };
MustWriteAccess := [Reduction Type: NONE] [Scalar: 1]
{ Stmt_for_end[i0] -> MemRef_tmp_04__phi[] };
ReadAccess := [Reduction Type: NONE] [Scalar: 1]
{ Stmt_for_end[i0] -> MemRef_add_lcssa__phi[] };
MustWriteAccess := [Reduction Type: NONE] [Scalar: 0]
{ Stmt_for_end[i0] -> MemRef_B[i0] };
Instructions {
%add.lcssa = phi double [ %add, %for.inc ]
store double %add.lcssa, double* %arrayidx, align 8
%exitcond5 = icmp ne i64 %indvars.iv.next, 10000
}
}
```
and the following dependences :
```
{ Stmt_for_inc[i0, 9999] -> Stmt_for_end[i0] : 0 <= i0 <= 9999;
Stmt_for_inc[i0, i1] -> Stmt_for_inc[i0, 1 + i1] : 0 <= i0 <= 9999 and 0 <= i1 <= 9998;
Stmt_for_body[i0] -> Stmt_for_inc[i0, 0] : 0 <= i0 <= 9999;
Stmt_for_end[i0] -> Stmt_for_body[1 + i0] : 0 <= i0 <= 9998 }
```
When trying to expand this memory access :
```
{ Stmt_for_inc[i0, i1] -> MemRef_tmp_11__phi[] };
```
The new access map would look like this :
```
{ Stmt_for_inc[i0, 9999] -> MemRef_tmp_11__phi_exp[i0] : 0 <= i0 <= 9999; Stmt_for_inc[i0, i1] ->MemRef_tmp_11__phi_exp[i0, 1 + i1] : 0 <= i0 <= 9999 and 0 <= i1 <= 9998 }
```
The idea to implement the expansion for PHI access is an idea from @Meinersbur and I don't understand why my implementation does not work. I should have miss something in the understanding of the idea.
Contributed by: Nicolas Bonfante <nicolas.bonfante@gmail.com>
Reviewers: Meinersbur, simbuerg, bollu
Reviewed By: Meinersbur
Subscribers: llvm-commits, pollydev, Meinersbur
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36647
llvm-svn: 311619
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Conditionally compile function only used in an assert().
llvm-svn: 311549
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
When trying to expand memory accesses, the current version of Polly uses statement Level dependences. The actual implementation is not working in case of multiple dependences per statement. For example in the following source code :
```
void mse(double A[Ni], double B[Nj], double C[Nj], double D[Nj]) {
int i,j;
for (j = 0; j < Ni; j++) {
for (int i = 0; i<Nj; i++)
S: B[i] = i;
for (int i = 0; i<Nj; i++)
T: D[i] = i;
U: A[j] = B[j];
C[j] = D[j];
}
}
```
The statement U has two dependences with S and T. The current version of polly fails during expansion.
This patch aims to fix this bug. For that, we use Reference Level dependences to be able to filter dependences according to statement and memory ref. The principle of expansion remains the same as before.
We also noticed that we need to bail out if load come after store (at the same position) in same statement. So a check was added to isExpandable.
Contributed by: Nicholas Bonfante <nicolas.bonfante@insa-lyon.fr>
Reviewers: Meinersbur, simbuerg, bollu
Reviewed By: Meinersbur, simbuerg
Subscribers: pollydev, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36791
llvm-svn: 311165
|
|
|
This commit implements the initial version of fully-indexed static
expansion.
```
for(int i = 0; i<Ni; i++)
for(int j = 0; j<Ni; j++)
S: B[j] = j;
T: A[i] = B[i]
```
After the pass, we want this :
```
for(int i = 0; i<Ni; i++)
for(int j = 0; j<Ni; j++)
S: B[i][j] = j;
T: A[i] = B[i][i]
```
For now we bail (fail) in the following cases:
- Scalar access
- Multiple writes per SAI
- MayWrite Access
- Expansion that leads to an access to the original array
Furthermore: We still miss checks for escaping references to the array
base pointers. A future commit will add the missing escape-checks to
stay correct in those cases. The expansion is still locked behind a
CLI-Option and should not yet be used.
Patch contributed by: Nicholas Bonfante <bonfante.nicolas@gmail.com>
Reviewers: simbuerg, Meinersbur, bollu
Reviewed By: Meinersbur
Subscribers: mgorny, llvm-commits, pollydev
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34982
llvm-svn: 310304
|
