[llvm-dev] GVN / Alias Analysis issue with llvm.masked.scatter/gather intrinsics

Daniel Berlin via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Wed Sep 7 07:43:53 PDT 2016 

I'm in favor of that, but i'm going to be slammed for the next few weeks,
so you may have to submit it to the repo yourself.


On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 1:33 AM, Chris Sakalis <chrissakalis at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I have gone ahead and created a request to merge this into 3.9.1, I hope
> that's okay.
>
> https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=30307
>
> /Chris
>
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Chris Sakalis <chrissakalis at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Great, thank you!
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> *From: *"Chris Sakalis" <chrissakalis at gmail.com>
>>> *To: *"Daniel Berlin" <dberlin at dberlin.org>
>>> *Cc: *"Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>, "David Majnemer" <
>>> david.majnemer at gmail.com>, "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>,
>>> "Philip Reames" <listmail at philipreames.com>, "Davide Italiano" <
>>> davide at freebsd.org>, "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at gmail.com>
>>> *Sent: *Wednesday, August 31, 2016 3:58:56 AM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [llvm-dev] GVN / Alias Analysis issue with
>>> llvm.masked.scatter/gather intrinsics
>>>
>>> Thank you for the quick fix, I can no longer reproduce the issue. As far
>>> a releases go, I am guessing that this is going to be in 4.0?
>>>
>>> Yes, and we can consider it for 3.9.1 as well.
>>>
>>>  -Hal
>>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 9:26 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yeah, i just hope it doesn't regress scatter/gather vector code badly.
>>>> But at least it's correct now?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> *From: *"Daniel Berlin" <dberlin at dberlin.org>
>>>>> *To: *"Philip Reames" <listmail at philipreames.com>, "Davide Italiano" <
>>>>> davide at freebsd.org>, "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at gmail.com>
>>>>> *Cc: *"Chris Sakalis" <chrissakalis at gmail.com>, "David Majnemer" <
>>>>> david.majnemer at gmail.com>, "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>, "llvm-dev"
>>>>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, August 30, 2016 3:07:01 PM
>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [llvm-dev] GVN / Alias Analysis issue with
>>>>> llvm.masked.scatter/gather intrinsics
>>>>>
>>>>> This is now committed and a test added to GVN.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>> I suspect that, in practice, we'll get little benefit from handling
>>>>> this until our AA passes learn how to deal with (i.e. look back through)
>>>>> pointer vectors.
>>>>>
>>>>>  -Hal
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Okay, so then it sounds like, for now, the right fix is to stop
>>>>>> marking masked.gather and masked.scatter with intrarg* options.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 1:26 PM Philip Reames <
>>>>>> listmail at philipreames.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We might have specification bug here, but we appear to implement
>>>>>>> what we specified.  argmemonly is specified as only considering pointer
>>>>>>> typed arguments.  It's behavior on vector-of-pointers is unspecified, but
>>>>>>> would seem to fall into the same case as inttoptr of an integer argument
>>>>>>> (i.e. explicitly undefined).  We could consider changing that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 08/29/2016 11:59 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> + a few others.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After following this rabbit hole a bit, there are a lot of mutually
>>>>>>> recursive calls, etc, that may or may not do the right thing with vectors
>>>>>>> of pointers.
>>>>>>> I can fix *this* particular bug with the attached patch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, it's mostly papering over stuff.  Nothing seems to know
>>>>>>> what to do with a memorylocation that is a vector of pointers. They all
>>>>>>> expect memorylocation to be a single pointer location.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would chalk it up to "luck" that this patch fixes the bug.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's pretty clear that MemoryLocation doesn't fit the needs of a lot
>>>>>>> of stuff anymore (we hacked AA nodes into it, and lots of stuff now tries
>>>>>>> to figure out the invariantess of the locations, blah blah blah), but it
>>>>>>> seems like a big job to figure out what to replace it with that will work
>>>>>>> for these cases.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (I'm pretty positive if we just make it MemoryLocations, and have
>>>>>>> everything loop over the locations, the compiler will get a lot larger and
>>>>>>> a lot slower)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> it would also, for that matter, say the same about an array of
>>>>>>>> pointers.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's not clear to me what will break if you change this to
>>>>>>>> isPtrOrPtrVectorTy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In fact, i know it doesn't fix this bug.
>>>>>>>> It's a pretty deep rabbit hole of things not quite prepared to
>>>>>>>> understand vectors of pointers.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (we prepare memorylocations of them, but memory locations expect to
>>>>>>>> be one thing, not a group of things, etc).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 8:58 AM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org
>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> this is definitely a bug in AA.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>   225      for (auto I = CS2.arg_begin(), E = CS2.arg_end(); I !=
>>>>>>>>> E; ++I) {
>>>>>>>>>    226        const Value *Arg = *I;
>>>>>>>>>    227        if (!Arg->getType()->isPointerTy())
>>>>>>>>> -> 228          continue;
>>>>>>>>>    229        unsigned CS2ArgIdx = std::distance(CS2.arg_begin(),
>>>>>>>>> I);
>>>>>>>>>    230        auto CS2ArgLoc = MemoryLocation::getForArgument(CS2,
>>>>>>>>> CS2ArgIdx, TLI);
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  AliasAnalysis.cpp:228
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It ignores every argument because they are vectors of pointers,
>>>>>>>>> not pointers.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm surprised this has not broken anything before. It will never
>>>>>>>>> say two intrinsics with vectors of pointers mod/ref each other.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 7:36 AM, Davide Italiano <
>>>>>>>>> davide at freebsd.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> + Daniel Berlin
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 3:42 PM, Chris Sakalis via llvm-dev
>>>>>>>>>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> > Hello everyone,
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > I think I have found an gvn / alias analysis related bug, but
>>>>>>>>>> before opening
>>>>>>>>>> > an issue on the tracker I wanted to see if I am missing
>>>>>>>>>> something. I have
>>>>>>>>>> > the following testcase:
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >> define spir_kernel void @test(<2 x i32*> %in1, <2 x i32*>
>>>>>>>>>> %in2, i32* %out)
>>>>>>>>>> >> {
>>>>>>>>>> >> entry:
>>>>>>>>>> >>   ; Just some temporary storage
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %tmp.0 = alloca i32
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %tmp.1 = alloca i32
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %tmp.i = insertelement <2 x i32*> undef, i32* %tmp.0, i32 0
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %tmp = insertelement <2 x i32*> %tmp.i, i32* %tmp.1, i32 1
>>>>>>>>>> >>   ; Read from in1 and in2
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %in1.v = call <2 x i32> @llvm.masked.gather.v2i32(<2 x i32*>
>>>>>>>>>> %in1, i32
>>>>>>>>>> >> 1, <2 x i1> <i1 true, i1 true>, <2 x i32> undef) #1
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %in2.v = call <2 x i32> @llvm.masked.gather.v2i32(<2 x i32*>
>>>>>>>>>> %in2, i32
>>>>>>>>>> >> 1, <2 x i1> <i1 true, i1 true>, <2 x i32> undef) #1
>>>>>>>>>> >>   ; Store in1 to the allocas
>>>>>>>>>> >>   call void @llvm.masked.scatter.v2i32(<2 x i32> %in1.v, <2 x
>>>>>>>>>> i32*> %tmp,
>>>>>>>>>> >> i32 1, <2 x i1> <i1 true, i1 true>);
>>>>>>>>>> >>   ; Read in1 from the allocas
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %tmp.v.0 = call <2 x i32> @llvm.masked.gather.v2i32(<2 x
>>>>>>>>>> i32*> %tmp, i32
>>>>>>>>>> >> 1, <2 x i1> <i1 true, i1 true>, <2 x i32> undef) #1
>>>>>>>>>> >>   ; Store in2 to the allocas
>>>>>>>>>> >>   call void @llvm.masked.scatter.v2i32(<2 x i32> %in2.v, <2 x
>>>>>>>>>> i32*> %tmp,
>>>>>>>>>> >> i32 1, <2 x i1> <i1 true, i1 true>);
>>>>>>>>>> >>   ; Read in2 from the allocas
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %tmp.v.1 = call <2 x i32> @llvm.masked.gather.v2i32(<2 x
>>>>>>>>>> i32*> %tmp, i32
>>>>>>>>>> >> 1, <2 x i1> <i1 true, i1 true>, <2 x i32> undef) #1
>>>>>>>>>> >>   ; Store in2 to out for good measure
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %tmp.v.1.0 = extractelement <2 x i32> %tmp.v.1, i32 0
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %tmp.v.1.1 = extractelement <2 x i32> %tmp.v.1, i32 1
>>>>>>>>>> >>   store i32 %tmp.v.1.0, i32* %out
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %out.1 = getelementptr i32, i32* %out, i32 1
>>>>>>>>>> >>   store i32 %tmp.v.1.1, i32* %out.1
>>>>>>>>>> >>   ret void
>>>>>>>>>> >> }
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > It uses a masked scatter operation to store a value to the two
>>>>>>>>>> allocas and
>>>>>>>>>> > then uses a masked gather operation to read that same value.
>>>>>>>>>> This is done
>>>>>>>>>> > twice in a row, with two different values. If I run this code
>>>>>>>>>> through the
>>>>>>>>>> > GVN pass, the second gather (%tmp.v.1) will be deemed to be the
>>>>>>>>>> same as the
>>>>>>>>>> > first gather (%tmp.v.0) and it will be removed. After some
>>>>>>>>>> debugging, I
>>>>>>>>>> > realized that this is happening because the Memory Dependence
>>>>>>>>>> Analysis
>>>>>>>>>> > returns %tmp.v.0 as the Def dependency for %tmp.v.1, even
>>>>>>>>>> though the scatter
>>>>>>>>>> > call in between changes the value stored at %tmp. This, in
>>>>>>>>>> turn, is
>>>>>>>>>> > happening because the alias analysis is returning NoModRef for
>>>>>>>>>> the %tmp.v.1
>>>>>>>>>> > and second scatter callsites. The resulting IR produces the
>>>>>>>>>> wrong result:
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >> define spir_kernel void @test(<2 x i32*> %in1, <2 x i32*>
>>>>>>>>>> %in2, i32* %out)
>>>>>>>>>> >> {
>>>>>>>>>> >> entry:
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %tmp.0 = alloca i32
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %tmp.1 = alloca i32
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %tmp.i = insertelement <2 x i32*> undef, i32* %tmp.0, i32 0
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %tmp = insertelement <2 x i32*> %tmp.i, i32* %tmp.1, i32 1
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %in1.v = call <2 x i32> @llvm.masked.gather.v2i32(<2 x i32*>
>>>>>>>>>> %in1, i32
>>>>>>>>>> >> 1, <2 x i1> <i1 true, i1 true>, <2 x i32> undef) #1
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %in2.v = call <2 x i32> @llvm.masked.gather.v2i32(<2 x i32*>
>>>>>>>>>> %in2, i32
>>>>>>>>>> >> 1, <2 x i1> <i1 true, i1 true>, <2 x i32> undef) #1
>>>>>>>>>> >>   call void @llvm.masked.scatter.v2i32(<2 x i32> %in1.v, <2 x
>>>>>>>>>> i32*> %tmp,
>>>>>>>>>> >> i32 1, <2 x i1> <i1 true, i1 true>)
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %tmp.v.0 = call <2 x i32> @llvm.masked.gather.v2i32(<2 x
>>>>>>>>>> i32*> %tmp, i32
>>>>>>>>>> >> 1, <2 x i1> <i1 true, i1 true>, <2 x i32> undef) #1
>>>>>>>>>> >>   call void @llvm.masked.scatter.v2i32(<2 x i32> %in2.v, <2 x
>>>>>>>>>> i32*> %tmp,
>>>>>>>>>> >> i32 1, <2 x i1> <i1 true, i1 true>)
>>>>>>>>>> >>   ; The call to masked.gather is gone and now we are using the
>>>>>>>>>> old value
>>>>>>>>>> >> (%tmp.v.0)
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %tmp.v.1.0 = extractelement <2 x i32> %tmp.v.0, i32 0
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %tmp.v.1.1 = extractelement <2 x i32> %tmp.v.0, i32 1
>>>>>>>>>> >>   store i32 %tmp.v.1.0, i32* %out
>>>>>>>>>> >>   %out.1 = getelementptr i32, i32* %out, i32 1
>>>>>>>>>> >>   store i32 %tmp.v.1.1, i32* %out.1
>>>>>>>>>> >>   ret void
>>>>>>>>>> >> }
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > The old value read from %tmp is used, instead of the new one. I
>>>>>>>>>> tested this
>>>>>>>>>> > code using `opt -gvn`, with LLVM 3.8.1. I also tried tip
>>>>>>>>>> (84cb7f4) with the
>>>>>>>>>> > same result.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > I should mention that if I replace the second scatter with
>>>>>>>>>> stores, the issue
>>>>>>>>>> > persists. The only way to avoid it is to replace all
>>>>>>>>>> scatter/gather
>>>>>>>>>> > intrinsics with equivalent sets of store/load, in which case
>>>>>>>>>> the MemDep
>>>>>>>>>> > returns the correct dependencies and the GVN pass will not
>>>>>>>>>> remove the second
>>>>>>>>>> > set of loads.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > So, my question is, is this a bug or am I doing something that
>>>>>>>>>> I shouldn't
>>>>>>>>>> > be in the IR? And if it is a bug, is it the AA analyses that
>>>>>>>>>> return the
>>>>>>>>>> > wrong result (I presume so) or should GVN handle such cases
>>>>>>>>>> differently?
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Chris
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> > LLVM Developers mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>>>>>>>>> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Davide
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "There are no solved problems; there are only problems that are
>>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>>> or less solved" -- Henri Poincare
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Hal Finkel
>>>>> Assistant Computational Scientist
>>>>> Leadership Computing Facility
>>>>> Argonne National Laboratory
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Hal Finkel
>>> Assistant Computational Scientist
>>> Leadership Computing Facility
>>> Argonne National Laboratory
>>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160907/0f659842/attachment.html>

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list