[llvm] r329047 - [SCEV] Make computeExitLimit more simple and more powerful
Maxim Kazantsev via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Mon Apr 23 02:16:32 PDT 2018
Thanks Mikael!
As we've revealed recently, this patch starts triggering a bunch of underlying bugs that did not show up before because the code was accidentally correct. I am now working on tracking them down, one of fixes has been submitted as https://reviews.llvm.org/D45937 and I'm working on tracking down other places where it happens.
I'll take a look into your issue shortly!
Thanks,
Max
-----Original Message-----
From: Mikael Holmén [mailto:mikael.holmen at ericsson.com]
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2018 2:38 PM
To: Maxim Kazantsev <max.kazantsev at azul.com>
Cc: llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Subject: Re: [llvm] r329047 - [SCEV] Make computeExitLimit more simple and more powerful
Hi Max,
We've seen a crash that started happening with this commit. I wrote
PR37205 about it:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37205
Regards,
Mikael
On 04/03/2018 07:57 AM, Max Kazantsev via llvm-commits wrote:
> Author: mkazantsev
> Date: Mon Apr 2 22:57:19 2018
> New Revision: 329047
>
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=329047&view=rev
> Log:
> [SCEV] Make computeExitLimit more simple and more powerful
>
> Current implementation of `computeExitLimit` has a big piece of code
> the only purpose of which is to prove that after the execution of this
> block the latch will be executed. What it currently checks is actually
> a subset of situations where the exiting block dominates latch.
>
> This patch replaces all these checks for simple particular cases with
> domination check over loop's latch which is the only necessary
> condition of taking the exiting block into consideration. This change
> allows to calculate exact loop taken count for simple loops like
>
> for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
> if (cond) {...} else {...}
> if (i > 50) break;
> . . .
> }
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44677 Reviewed By:
> efriedma
>
> Modified:
> llvm/trunk/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp
> llvm/trunk/test/Analysis/ScalarEvolution/exact_iter_count.ll
>
> Modified: llvm/trunk/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp
> URL:
> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvol
> ution.cpp?rev=329047&r1=329046&r2=329047&view=diff
> ======================================================================
> ========
> --- llvm/trunk/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp (original)
> +++ llvm/trunk/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp Mon Apr 2 22:57:19
> +++ 2018
> @@ -6884,63 +6884,12 @@ ScalarEvolution::computeBackedgeTakenCou
> ScalarEvolution::ExitLimit
> ScalarEvolution::computeExitLimit(const Loop *L, BasicBlock *ExitingBlock,
> bool AllowPredicates) {
> - // Okay, we've chosen an exiting block. See what condition causes
> us to exit
> - // at this block and remember the exit block and whether all other
> targets
> - // lead to the loop header.
> - bool MustExecuteLoopHeader = true;
> - BasicBlock *Exit = nullptr;
> - for (auto *SBB : successors(ExitingBlock))
> - if (!L->contains(SBB)) {
> - if (Exit) // Multiple exit successors.
> - return getCouldNotCompute();
> - Exit = SBB;
> - } else if (SBB != L->getHeader()) {
> - MustExecuteLoopHeader = false;
> - }
> -
> - // At this point, we know we have a conditional branch that
> determines whether
> - // the loop is exited. However, we don't know if the branch is
> executed each
> - // time through the loop. If not, then the execution count of the
> branch will
> - // not be equal to the trip count of the loop.
> - //
> - // Currently we check for this by checking to see if the Exit
> branch goes to
> - // the loop header. If so, we know it will always execute the same
> number of
> - // times as the loop. We also handle the case where the exit block
> *is* the
> - // loop header. This is common for un-rotated loops.
> - //
> - // If both of those tests fail, walk up the unique predecessor
> chain to the
> - // header, stopping if there is an edge that doesn't exit the loop.
> If the
> - // header is reached, the execution count of the branch will be
> equal to the
> - // trip count of the loop.
> - //
> - // More extensive analysis could be done to handle more cases here.
> - //
> - if (!MustExecuteLoopHeader && ExitingBlock != L->getHeader()) {
> - // The simple checks failed, try climbing the unique predecessor chain
> - // up to the header.
> - bool Ok = false;
> - for (BasicBlock *BB = ExitingBlock; BB; ) {
> - BasicBlock *Pred = BB->getUniquePredecessor();
> - if (!Pred)
> - return getCouldNotCompute();
> - TerminatorInst *PredTerm = Pred->getTerminator();
> - for (const BasicBlock *PredSucc : PredTerm->successors()) {
> - if (PredSucc == BB)
> - continue;
> - // If the predecessor has a successor that isn't BB and isn't
> - // outside the loop, assume the worst.
> - if (L->contains(PredSucc))
> - return getCouldNotCompute();
> - }
> - if (Pred == L->getHeader()) {
> - Ok = true;
> - break;
> - }
> - BB = Pred;
> - }
> - if (!Ok)
> - return getCouldNotCompute();
> - }
> + assert(L->contains(ExitingBlock) && "Exit count for non-loop
> + block?"); // If our exiting block does not dominate the latch, then
> + its connection with // loop's exit limit may be far from trivial.
> + const BasicBlock *Latch = L->getLoopLatch(); if (!Latch ||
> + !DT.dominates(ExitingBlock, Latch))
> + return getCouldNotCompute();
>
> bool IsOnlyExit = (L->getExitingBlock() != nullptr);
> TerminatorInst *Term = ExitingBlock->getTerminator(); @@ -6955,9
> +6904,19 @@ ScalarEvolution::computeExitLimit(const
> /*ControlsExit=*/IsOnlyExit, AllowPredicates);
> }
>
> - if (SwitchInst *SI = dyn_cast<SwitchInst>(Term))
> + if (SwitchInst *SI = dyn_cast<SwitchInst>(Term)) {
> + // For switch, make sure that there is a single exit from the loop.
> + BasicBlock *Exit = nullptr;
> + for (auto *SBB : successors(ExitingBlock))
> + if (!L->contains(SBB)) {
> + if (Exit) // Multiple exit successors.
> + return getCouldNotCompute();
> + Exit = SBB;
> + }
> + assert(Exit && "Exiting block must have at least one exit");
> return computeExitLimitFromSingleExitSwitch(L, SI, Exit,
>
> /*ControlsExit=*/IsOnlyExit);
> + }
>
> return getCouldNotCompute();
> }
>
> Modified: llvm/trunk/test/Analysis/ScalarEvolution/exact_iter_count.ll
> URL:
> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/test/Analysis/ScalarEvo
> lution/exact_iter_count.ll?rev=329047&r1=329046&r2=329047&view=diff
> ======================================================================
> ========
> --- llvm/trunk/test/Analysis/ScalarEvolution/exact_iter_count.ll
> (original)
> +++ llvm/trunk/test/Analysis/ScalarEvolution/exact_iter_count.ll Mon
> +++ Apr 2 22:57:19 2018
> @@ -25,3 +25,37 @@ exit:
> side.exit:
> ret void
> }
> +
> +define void @test_02(i1 %c) {
> +
> +; CHECK-LABEL: Determining loop execution counts for: @test_02 ;
> +CHECK-NEXT: Loop %loop: <multiple exits> backedge-taken count is 50
> +
> +entry:
> + br label %loop
> +
> +loop:
> + %iv = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %iv.next, %backedge ]
> + br i1 %c, label %if.true, label %if.false
> +
> +if.true:
> + br label %merge
> +
> +if.false:
> + br label %merge
> +
> +merge:
> + %side.cond = icmp slt i32 %iv, 50
> + br i1 %side.cond, label %backedge, label %side.exit
> +
> +backedge:
> + %iv.next = add i32 %iv, 1
> + %loop.cond = icmp slt i32 %iv, 100
> + br i1 %loop.cond, label %loop, label %exit
> +
> +exit:
> + ret void
> +
> +side.exit:
> + ret void
> +}
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> llvm-commits mailing list
> llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>
More information about the llvm-commits
mailing list