Skip to content
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 5 commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
11 changes: 11 additions & 0 deletions llvm/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/VPlanUtils.cpp
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -66,6 +66,17 @@ bool vputils::isHeaderMask(const VPValue *V, const VPlan &Plan) {
m_One(), m_Specific(&Plan.getVF()))) ||
IsWideCanonicalIV(A));

// For scalar plans, the header mask uses the scalar steps.
if (match(V,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
if (match(V,
// For scalar plans, the header mask uses the scalar steps.
if (match(V,

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done in 23bce03

m_ICmp(m_ScalarIVSteps(
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks like this pattern is now used twice in this function, i.e.

m_ScalarIVSteps(m_Specific(Plan.getVectorLoopRegion()->getCanonicalIV()),
                m_One(), m_Specific(&Plan.getVF()))

Is it worth creating a specific pattern match for this? Something like

  m_CanonicalScalarIVSteps(Plan)

?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good point, I've added a helper in efca5e5

m_Specific(Plan.getVectorLoopRegion()->getCanonicalIV()),
m_One(), m_Specific(&Plan.getVF())),
m_Specific(Plan.getBackedgeTakenCount())))) {
assert(Plan.hasScalarVFOnly() &&
"Non-scalar VF using scalar IV steps for header mask?");
return true;
}

return match(V, m_ICmp(m_VPValue(A), m_VPValue(B))) && IsWideCanonicalIV(A) &&
B == Plan.getBackedgeTakenCount();
}
Expand Down
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
; NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_test_checks.py UTC_ARGS: --check-globals none --version 6
; RUN: opt -p loop-vectorize -prefer-predicate-over-epilogue=predicate-else-scalar-epilogue -force-vector-width=1 -force-vector-interleave=2 -S %s | FileCheck %s

define i64 @live_out_scalar_vf(i64 %n) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

if possible, might be good to add this to llvm/test/Transforms/LoopVectorize/tail-folding-vectorization-factor-1.ll, which already contains a set of test cases for interleaving only with tail-folding.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done in c29428f

; CHECK-LABEL: define i64 @live_out_scalar_vf(
; CHECK-SAME: i64 [[N:%.*]]) {
; CHECK-NEXT: [[ENTRY:.*]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: [[TMP0:%.*]] = add i64 [[N]], 1
; CHECK-NEXT: [[MIN_ITERS_CHECK:%.*]] = icmp ult i64 [[TMP0]], 2
; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 [[MIN_ITERS_CHECK]], label %[[SCALAR_PH:.*]], label %[[VECTOR_PH:.*]]
; CHECK: [[VECTOR_PH]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: [[N_MOD_VF:%.*]] = urem i64 [[TMP0]], 2
; CHECK-NEXT: [[N_VEC:%.*]] = sub i64 [[TMP0]], [[N_MOD_VF]]
; CHECK-NEXT: br label %[[VECTOR_BODY:.*]]
; CHECK: [[VECTOR_BODY]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: [[INDEX:%.*]] = phi i64 [ 0, %[[VECTOR_PH]] ], [ [[INDEX_NEXT:%.*]], %[[VECTOR_BODY]] ]
; CHECK-NEXT: [[TMP2:%.*]] = add i64 [[INDEX]], 1
; CHECK-NEXT: [[INDEX_NEXT]] = add nuw i64 [[INDEX]], 2
; CHECK-NEXT: [[TMP5:%.*]] = icmp eq i64 [[INDEX_NEXT]], [[N_VEC]]
; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 [[TMP5]], label %[[MIDDLE_BLOCK:.*]], label %[[VECTOR_BODY]], !llvm.loop [[LOOP0:![0-9]+]]
; CHECK: [[MIDDLE_BLOCK]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: [[CMP_N:%.*]] = icmp eq i64 [[TMP0]], [[N_VEC]]
; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 [[CMP_N]], label %[[EXIT:.*]], label %[[SCALAR_PH]]
; CHECK: [[SCALAR_PH]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: [[BC_RESUME_VAL:%.*]] = phi i64 [ [[N_VEC]], %[[MIDDLE_BLOCK]] ], [ 0, %[[ENTRY]] ]
; CHECK-NEXT: [[SCALAR_RECUR_INIT:%.*]] = phi i64 [ [[TMP2]], %[[MIDDLE_BLOCK]] ], [ 0, %[[ENTRY]] ]
; CHECK-NEXT: br label %[[LOOP:.*]]
; CHECK: [[LOOP]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: [[IV:%.*]] = phi i64 [ [[BC_RESUME_VAL]], %[[SCALAR_PH]] ], [ [[IV_NEXT:%.*]], %[[LOOP]] ]
; CHECK-NEXT: [[EXITVAL:%.*]] = phi i64 [ [[SCALAR_RECUR_INIT]], %[[SCALAR_PH]] ], [ [[IV]], %[[LOOP]] ]
; CHECK-NEXT: [[IV_NEXT]] = add i64 [[IV]], 1
; CHECK-NEXT: [[EC:%.*]] = icmp eq i64 [[IV]], [[N]]
; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 [[EC]], label %[[EXIT]], label %[[LOOP]], !llvm.loop [[LOOP3:![0-9]+]]
; CHECK: [[EXIT]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: [[TMP19:%.*]] = phi i64 [ [[EXITVAL]], %[[LOOP]] ], [ [[INDEX]], %[[MIDDLE_BLOCK]] ]
; CHECK-NEXT: ret i64 [[TMP19]]
;
entry:
br label %loop

loop:
%iv = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %iv.next, %loop ]
; Need to use a phi otherwise the header mask will use a
; VPWidenCanonicalIVRecipe instead of a VPScalarIVStepsRecipe.
%exitval = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %iv, %loop ]
%iv.next = add i64 %iv, 1
%ec = icmp eq i64 %iv, %n
br i1 %ec, label %exit, label %loop

exit:
ret i64 %exitval
}

Loading