[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm-branch] r164530 - in /llvm/branches/R600: lib/Transforms/Scalar/SROA.cpp test/Transforms/SROA/basictest.ll
Tom Stellard
thomas.stellard at amd.com
Mon Sep 24 08:54:17 PDT 2012
Author: tstellar
Date: Mon Sep 24 10:52:36 2012
New Revision: 164530
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=164530&view=rev
Log:
Address one of the original FIXMEs for the new SROA pass by implementing
integer promotion analogous to vector promotion. When there is an
integer alloca being accessed both as its integer type and as a narrower
integer type, promote the narrower access to "insert" and "extract" the
smaller integer from the larger one, and make the integer alloca
a candidate for promotion.
In the new formulation, we don't care about target legal integer or use
thresholds to control things. Instead, we only perform this promotion to
an integer type which the frontend has already emitted a load or store
for. This bounds the scope and prevents optimization passes from
coalescing larger and larger entities into a single integer.
Modified:
llvm/branches/R600/lib/Transforms/Scalar/SROA.cpp
llvm/branches/R600/test/Transforms/SROA/basictest.ll
Modified: llvm/branches/R600/lib/Transforms/Scalar/SROA.cpp
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/branches/R600/lib/Transforms/Scalar/SROA.cpp?rev=164530&r1=164529&r2=164530&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- llvm/branches/R600/lib/Transforms/Scalar/SROA.cpp (original)
+++ llvm/branches/R600/lib/Transforms/Scalar/SROA.cpp Mon Sep 24 10:52:36 2012
@@ -1723,6 +1723,54 @@
return true;
}
+/// \brief Test whether the given alloca partition can be promoted to an int.
+///
+/// This is a quick test to check whether we can rewrite a particular alloca
+/// partition (and its newly formed alloca) into an integer alloca suitable for
+/// promotion to an SSA value. We only can ensure this for a limited set of
+/// operations, and we don't want to do the rewrites unless we are confident
+/// that the result will be promotable, so we have an early test here.
+static bool isIntegerPromotionViable(const TargetData &TD,
+ Type *AllocaTy,
+ AllocaPartitioning &P,
+ AllocaPartitioning::const_use_iterator I,
+ AllocaPartitioning::const_use_iterator E) {
+ IntegerType *Ty = dyn_cast<IntegerType>(AllocaTy);
+ if (!Ty)
+ return false;
+
+ // Check the uses to ensure the uses are (likely) promoteable integer uses.
+ // Also ensure that the alloca has a covering load or store. We don't want
+ // promote because of some other unsplittable entry (which we may make
+ // splittable later) and lose the ability to promote each element access.
+ bool WholeAllocaOp = false;
+ for (; I != E; ++I) {
+ if (LoadInst *LI = dyn_cast<LoadInst>(&*I->User)) {
+ if (LI->isVolatile() || !LI->getType()->isIntegerTy())
+ return false;
+ if (LI->getType() == Ty)
+ WholeAllocaOp = true;
+ } else if (StoreInst *SI = dyn_cast<StoreInst>(&*I->User)) {
+ if (SI->isVolatile() || !SI->getValueOperand()->getType()->isIntegerTy())
+ return false;
+ if (SI->getValueOperand()->getType() == Ty)
+ WholeAllocaOp = true;
+ } else if (MemIntrinsic *MI = dyn_cast<MemIntrinsic>(&*I->User)) {
+ if (MI->isVolatile())
+ return false;
+ if (MemTransferInst *MTI = dyn_cast<MemTransferInst>(&*I->User)) {
+ const AllocaPartitioning::MemTransferOffsets &MTO
+ = P.getMemTransferOffsets(*MTI);
+ if (!MTO.IsSplittable)
+ return false;
+ }
+ } else {
+ return false;
+ }
+ }
+ return WholeAllocaOp;
+}
+
namespace {
/// \brief Visitor to rewrite instructions using a partition of an alloca to
/// use a new alloca.
@@ -1754,6 +1802,12 @@
Type *ElementTy;
uint64_t ElementSize;
+ // This is a convenience and flag variable that will be null unless the new
+ // alloca has a promotion-targeted integer type due to passing
+ // isIntegerPromotionViable above. If it is non-null does, the desired
+ // integer type will be stored here for easy access during rewriting.
+ IntegerType *IntPromotionTy;
+
// The offset of the partition user currently being rewritten.
uint64_t BeginOffset, EndOffset;
Instruction *OldPtr;
@@ -1770,7 +1824,7 @@
OldAI(OldAI), NewAI(NewAI),
NewAllocaBeginOffset(NewBeginOffset),
NewAllocaEndOffset(NewEndOffset),
- VecTy(), ElementTy(), ElementSize(),
+ VecTy(), ElementTy(), ElementSize(), IntPromotionTy(),
BeginOffset(), EndOffset() {
}
@@ -1786,6 +1840,9 @@
assert((VecTy->getScalarSizeInBits() % 8) == 0 &&
"Only multiple-of-8 sized vector elements are viable");
ElementSize = VecTy->getScalarSizeInBits() / 8;
+ } else if (isIntegerPromotionViable(TD, NewAI.getAllocatedType(),
+ P, I, E)) {
+ IntPromotionTy = cast<IntegerType>(NewAI.getAllocatedType());
}
bool CanSROA = true;
for (; I != E; ++I) {
@@ -1830,6 +1887,43 @@
return IRB.getInt32(Index);
}
+ Value *extractInteger(IRBuilder<> &IRB, IntegerType *TargetTy,
+ uint64_t Offset) {
+ assert(IntPromotionTy && "Alloca is not an integer we can extract from");
+ Value *V = IRB.CreateLoad(&NewAI, getName(".load"));
+ assert(Offset >= NewAllocaBeginOffset && "Out of bounds offset");
+ uint64_t RelOffset = Offset - NewAllocaBeginOffset;
+ if (RelOffset)
+ V = IRB.CreateLShr(V, RelOffset*8, getName(".shift"));
+ if (TargetTy != IntPromotionTy) {
+ assert(TargetTy->getBitWidth() < IntPromotionTy->getBitWidth() &&
+ "Cannot extract to a larger integer!");
+ V = IRB.CreateTrunc(V, TargetTy, getName(".trunc"));
+ }
+ return V;
+ }
+
+ StoreInst *insertInteger(IRBuilder<> &IRB, Value *V, uint64_t Offset) {
+ IntegerType *Ty = cast<IntegerType>(V->getType());
+ if (Ty == IntPromotionTy)
+ return IRB.CreateStore(V, &NewAI);
+
+ assert(Ty->getBitWidth() < IntPromotionTy->getBitWidth() &&
+ "Cannot insert a larger integer!");
+ V = IRB.CreateZExt(V, IntPromotionTy, getName(".ext"));
+ assert(Offset >= NewAllocaBeginOffset && "Out of bounds offset");
+ uint64_t RelOffset = Offset - NewAllocaBeginOffset;
+ if (RelOffset)
+ V = IRB.CreateShl(V, RelOffset*8, getName(".shift"));
+
+ APInt Mask = ~Ty->getMask().zext(IntPromotionTy->getBitWidth())
+ .shl(RelOffset*8);
+ Value *Old = IRB.CreateAnd(IRB.CreateLoad(&NewAI, getName(".oldload")),
+ Mask, getName(".mask"));
+ return IRB.CreateStore(IRB.CreateOr(Old, V, getName(".insert")),
+ &NewAI);
+ }
+
void deleteIfTriviallyDead(Value *V) {
Instruction *I = cast<Instruction>(V);
if (isInstructionTriviallyDead(I))
@@ -1865,6 +1959,16 @@
return true;
}
+ bool rewriteIntegerLoad(IRBuilder<> &IRB, LoadInst &LI) {
+ assert(!LI.isVolatile());
+ Value *Result = extractInteger(IRB, cast<IntegerType>(LI.getType()),
+ BeginOffset);
+ LI.replaceAllUsesWith(Result);
+ Pass.DeadInsts.push_back(&LI);
+ DEBUG(dbgs() << " to: " << *Result << "\n");
+ return true;
+ }
+
bool visitLoadInst(LoadInst &LI) {
DEBUG(dbgs() << " original: " << LI << "\n");
Value *OldOp = LI.getOperand(0);
@@ -1873,6 +1977,8 @@
if (VecTy)
return rewriteVectorizedLoadInst(IRB, LI, OldOp);
+ if (IntPromotionTy)
+ return rewriteIntegerLoad(IRB, LI);
Value *NewPtr = getAdjustedAllocaPtr(IRB,
LI.getPointerOperand()->getType());
@@ -1904,6 +2010,15 @@
return true;
}
+ bool rewriteIntegerStore(IRBuilder<> &IRB, StoreInst &SI) {
+ assert(!SI.isVolatile());
+ StoreInst *Store = insertInteger(IRB, SI.getValueOperand(), BeginOffset);
+ Pass.DeadInsts.push_back(&SI);
+ (void)Store;
+ DEBUG(dbgs() << " to: " << *Store << "\n");
+ return true;
+ }
+
bool visitStoreInst(StoreInst &SI) {
DEBUG(dbgs() << " original: " << SI << "\n");
Value *OldOp = SI.getOperand(1);
@@ -1912,6 +2027,8 @@
if (VecTy)
return rewriteVectorizedStoreInst(IRB, SI, OldOp);
+ if (IntPromotionTy)
+ return rewriteIntegerStore(IRB, SI);
Value *NewPtr = getAdjustedAllocaPtr(IRB,
SI.getPointerOperand()->getType());
Modified: llvm/branches/R600/test/Transforms/SROA/basictest.ll
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/branches/R600/test/Transforms/SROA/basictest.ll?rev=164530&r1=164529&r2=164530&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- llvm/branches/R600/test/Transforms/SROA/basictest.ll (original)
+++ llvm/branches/R600/test/Transforms/SROA/basictest.ll Mon Sep 24 10:52:36 2012
@@ -553,30 +553,53 @@
ret i32 %Z2
}
-define i32 @test12() {
-; CHECK: @test12
-; CHECK: alloca i24
-;
-; FIXME: SROA should promote accesses to this into whole i24 operations instead
-; of i8 operations.
-; CHECK: store i8 0
-; CHECK: store i8 0
-; CHECK: store i8 0
+define i8 @test12() {
+; We fully promote these to the i24 load or store size, resulting in just masks
+; and other operations that instcombine will fold, but no alloca.
;
-; CHECK: load i24*
+; CHECK: @test12
entry:
%a = alloca [3 x i8]
- %b0ptr = getelementptr [3 x i8]* %a, i64 0, i32 0
- store i8 0, i8* %b0ptr
- %b1ptr = getelementptr [3 x i8]* %a, i64 0, i32 1
- store i8 0, i8* %b1ptr
- %b2ptr = getelementptr [3 x i8]* %a, i64 0, i32 2
- store i8 0, i8* %b2ptr
- %iptr = bitcast [3 x i8]* %a to i24*
- %i = load i24* %iptr
- %ret = zext i24 %i to i32
- ret i32 %ret
+ %b = alloca [3 x i8]
+; CHECK-NOT: alloca
+
+ %a0ptr = getelementptr [3 x i8]* %a, i64 0, i32 0
+ store i8 0, i8* %a0ptr
+ %a1ptr = getelementptr [3 x i8]* %a, i64 0, i32 1
+ store i8 0, i8* %a1ptr
+ %a2ptr = getelementptr [3 x i8]* %a, i64 0, i32 2
+ store i8 0, i8* %a2ptr
+ %aiptr = bitcast [3 x i8]* %a to i24*
+ %ai = load i24* %aiptr
+; CHCEK-NOT: store
+; CHCEK-NOT: load
+; CHECK: %[[mask0:.*]] = and i24 undef, -256
+; CHECK-NEXT: %[[mask1:.*]] = and i24 %[[mask0]], -65281
+; CHECK-NEXT: %[[mask2:.*]] = and i24 %[[mask1]], 65535
+
+ %biptr = bitcast [3 x i8]* %b to i24*
+ store i24 %ai, i24* %biptr
+ %b0ptr = getelementptr [3 x i8]* %b, i64 0, i32 0
+ %b0 = load i8* %b0ptr
+ %b1ptr = getelementptr [3 x i8]* %b, i64 0, i32 1
+ %b1 = load i8* %b1ptr
+ %b2ptr = getelementptr [3 x i8]* %b, i64 0, i32 2
+ %b2 = load i8* %b2ptr
+; CHCEK-NOT: store
+; CHCEK-NOT: load
+; CHECK: %[[trunc0:.*]] = trunc i24 %[[mask2]] to i8
+; CHECK-NEXT: %[[shift1:.*]] = lshr i24 %[[mask2]], 8
+; CHECK-NEXT: %[[trunc1:.*]] = trunc i24 %[[shift1]] to i8
+; CHECK-NEXT: %[[shift2:.*]] = lshr i24 %[[mask2]], 16
+; CHECK-NEXT: %[[trunc2:.*]] = trunc i24 %[[shift2]] to i8
+
+ %bsum0 = add i8 %b0, %b1
+ %bsum1 = add i8 %bsum0, %b2
+ ret i8 %bsum1
+; CHECK: %[[sum0:.*]] = add i8 %[[trunc0]], %[[trunc1]]
+; CHECK-NEXT: %[[sum1:.*]] = add i8 %[[sum0]], %[[trunc2]]
+; CHECK-NEXT: ret i8 %[[sum1]]
}
define i32 @test13() {
More information about the llvm-branch-commits
mailing list