[LLVMbugs] [Bug 17809] New: Reordering IR-level optimization passes.

bugzilla-daemon at llvm.org bugzilla-daemon at llvm.org
Mon Nov 4 17:47:01 PST 2013


            Bug ID: 17809
           Summary: Reordering IR-level optimization passes.
           Product: new-bugs
           Version: trunk
          Hardware: PC
                OS: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P
         Component: new bugs
          Assignee: unassignedbugs at nondot.org
          Reporter: atrick at apple.com
                CC: llvmbugs at cs.uiuc.edu
    Classification: Unclassified

In July, I proposed a new pass order pipeline that was fairly well received

(There is a natural conflict between loop-nest-optimization and an otherwise
efficient optimization pipieline, which this proposal does not solve).

However, the work is stalled. To make progress, we would need to begin taking
incremental steps. It might be helpful if the new PassManager design is
introduced first, but that isn't a requirement.

I'm filing a bug report now so people can add test cases or relate this to
other bugs. That will help motivate the work.

Here is the original proposal:

Canonicalization passes are designed to normalize the IR in order to expose
opportunities to subsequent machine independent passes. This simplifies writing
machine independent optimizations and improves the quality of the compiler.

An important property of these passes is that they are repeatable. The may be
invoked multiple times after inlining and should converge to a canonical form.
They should not destructively transform the IR in a way that defeats subsequent

Canonicalization passes can make use of data layout, but are otherwise target
independent. Adding target specific hooks to these passes can defeat the
purpose of canonical IR.

IR Canonicalization Pipeline:

Function Passes {
Call-Graph SCC Passes {
  Function Passes {
    Early Loop Opts {
      Rotate (when obvious)
      Full-Unroll (when obvious)
    Generic Loop Opts {
      LICM (Rotate on-demand)

IR optimizations that require target information or destructively modify the IR
can run in a separate pipeline. This helps make a more a clean distinction
between passes that may and may not use TargetTransformInfo.

TargetTransformInfo encapsultes legal types and operation costs. IR instruction
costs are approximate and relative. They do not represent def-use latencies nor
do they distinguish between latency and cpu resources requirements--that level
of machine modeling needs to be done in MI passes.

IR Lowering Pipeline:

Function Passes {
  Target SimplifyCFG (OptimizeCFG?)
  Target InstCombine (InstOptimize?)
  Target Loop Opts {
    IndvarSimplify (mainly sxt/zxt elimination)
    LSR (move LFTR here too)
  SLP Vectorize

The above pass ordering is roughly something I think we can live
with. Notice that I have:
  Full-Unroll -> SROA-2 -> GVN -> Loop-Opts
since that solves some issues we have today.

I don't currently have any reason to reorder the "late" IR optimization passes
(those after generic loop opts). We do either need a GVN-util that late loops
opts and lowering passes may call on-demand after code motion, or we can rerun
a non-iterative GVN-lite as a cleanup after lowering passes.

If anyone can think of important dependencies between IR passes, this would be
good time to point it out.

We could probably make a minor adjustment to the opt driver so that the user
can specify any mix of canonical and lowering passes. The first lowering pass
and subsequent passes would run in the lowering function pass manager.

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-bugs/attachments/20131105/6752a933/attachment.html>

More information about the llvm-bugs mailing list