[llvm-dev] SCEV LoopTripCount

Sanjoy Das via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Aug 9 19:12:11 PDT 2016


(Hit reply-all this time :) )

I'm doing this on a old clang/llvm build (from June 29), but if I
generate IR by

clang -mllvm -unroll-threshold=0 -O3 -S -emit-llvm -fno-vectorize x.c -o 
x.ll

(loop unrolling and vectorization both tend to obscure trip count
computation)

then we are able to compute the trip counts in whatever loops that
remain:

Loop %for.cond8.preheader: backedge-taken count is {(-1 + 
%h),+,-1}<nw><%for.cond2.preheader>
Loop %for.cond8.preheader: max backedge-taken count is -1
Loop %for.cond2.preheader: backedge-taken count is (-1 + %w)
Loop %for.cond2.preheader: max backedge-taken count is -1



It isn't clear to me why indvars does not fold way all the loops out
of existence (it is "clearly profitable" in this case).  I'll try to
take a closer look tonight.

-- Sanjoy


Michael Zolotukhin via llvm-dev wrote:
 >
 > unsigned long kernel(long w, long h, long d) {
 > unsigned long count = 0;
 > for(int i = 0; i < w; ++i)
 > for(int j = i; j < h; ++j)
 > for(int k = j; k < d; ++k)
 > ++count;
 > return count;
 > }

Michael Zolotukhin via llvm-dev wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> On Aug 9, 2016, at 6:39 PM, Alexandre Isoard via llvm-dev
>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I was doing some experiments with SCEV and especially the loop trip count.
>> Sorry for the dumb question, what is the easiest way to dump SCEV
>> analysis results on a .bc file?
> opt -analyze -scalar-evolution < file.bc
>
>>
>> On a side note, I wanted to see if we could optimize this function:
>>
>> unsigned long kernel(long w, long h, long d) {
>> unsigned long count = 0;
>> for(int i = 0; i < w; ++i)
>> for(int j = i; j < h; ++j)
>> for(int k = j; k < d; ++k)
>> ++count;
>> return count;
>> }
>>
>> into this (it might not take into account overflows, it was generated
>> using the barvinok library):
> Looks like we can not, but I haven’t examined why. Overflows might
> indeed get into the way.
>
> Michael
>
>> unsigned long kernel2(long w, long h, long d) {
>> return
>> (-1 + w >= 0 && -1 - w + h >= 0 && -1 - h + d >= 0)
>> ? (((((2 * w - 3 * w*w + w*w*w) + 3 * w * h + -3 * w * h*h) + ((3 * w
>> - 3 * w*w) + 6 * w * h) * d))/6)
>> : (-1 + w >= 0 && -1 - w + d >= 0 && h - d >= 0)
>> ? ((((2 * w - 3 * w*w + w*w*w) + (6 * w - 3 * w*w) * d + 3 * w * d*d))/6)
>> : (-1 + h >= 0 && w - h >= 0 && -1 - h + d >= 0)
>> ? ((((2 * h - 2 * h*h*h) + (3 * h + 3 * h*h) * d))/6)
>> : (-1 + d >= 0 && h - d >= 0 && w - d >= 0)
>> ? (((2 * d + 3 * d*d + d*d*d))/6)
>> : 0;
>> }
>>
>> I am not sure how advanced are SCEV-based trip counts.
>>
>> Best regards.
>>
>> --
>> *Alexandre Isoard*
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list