[PATCH] D137537: [SLP] Extend reordering data of tree entry to support PHI nodes
Alexey Bataev via Phabricator via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Mon Nov 7 06:26:35 PST 2022
ABataev added inline comments.
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/SLPVectorizer.cpp:289-304
static Optional<unsigned> getInsertIndex(const Value *InsertInst,
unsigned Offset = 0) {
int Index = Offset;
if (const auto *IE = dyn_cast<InsertElementInst>(InsertInst)) {
if (const auto *CI = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(IE->getOperand(2))) {
- auto *VT = cast<FixedVectorType>(IE->getType());
- if (CI->getValue().uge(VT->getNumElements()))
+ if (const auto *VT = dyn_cast<FixedVectorType>(IE->getType())) {
+ if (CI->getValue().uge(VT->getNumElements()))
----------------
Could precommit this change as a separate NFC change?
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/SLPVectorizer.cpp:292-302
if (const auto *IE = dyn_cast<InsertElementInst>(InsertInst)) {
if (const auto *CI = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(IE->getOperand(2))) {
- auto *VT = cast<FixedVectorType>(IE->getType());
- if (CI->getValue().uge(VT->getNumElements()))
+ if (const auto *VT = dyn_cast<FixedVectorType>(IE->getType())) {
+ if (CI->getValue().uge(VT->getNumElements()))
+ return None;
+ Index *= VT->getNumElements();
+ Index += CI->getZExtValue();
----------------
Could you rework this to reduce structured complexity?
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/SLPVectorizer.cpp:301
+ } else
return None;
}
----------------
No need for `else` and `return ` substatement here.
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/SLPVectorizer.cpp:3800-3801
+/// Check if two insertelement instructions are from the same buildvector.
+static bool areTwoInsertFromSameBuildVector(
+ InsertElementInst *VU, InsertElementInst *V,
----------------
Could precommit this change as a separate NFC change?
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/SLPVectorizer.cpp:3910-3911
+ auto PHICompare = [](llvm::Value *V1, llvm::Value *V2) {
+ if (V1->user_empty() || V2->user_empty())
+ return false;
+ if (!V1->hasOneUse() || !V2->hasOneUse())
----------------
you can remove this check, since immediately after you check for exactly one use.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D137537/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D137537
More information about the llvm-commits
mailing list