[llvm-dev] [RFC] Add TargetTransformInfo::isAllocaPtrValueNonZero and let ValueTracking depend on TargetTransformInfo

Thu Dec 14 18:31:24 PST 2017

This should work for me. I will check with Nuno Lopes whether this works for him.

Thanks.

Sam

From: Hal Finkel [mailto:hfinkel at anl.gov]
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2017 8:29 PM
To: Liu, Yaxun (Sam) <Yaxun.Liu at amd.com>; llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Add TargetTransformInfo::isAllocaPtrValueNonZero and let ValueTracking depend on TargetTransformInfo

On 12/14/2017 03:49 PM, Liu, Yaxun (Sam) wrote:
Hal,

Thanks for your suggestion. I think that makes sense.

Currently, non-zero alloca address space is already represented by data layout, e.g., the last component of the data layout of amdgcn---amdgiz target is -A5, which means alloca is in address space 5. How about adding a letter z to -A5 to indicate alloca may have zero value? i.e. -A5 means alloca is in address space 5 and always has non-zero value, -A5z means alloca is in address space 5 and may have zero value.

Then we can add function DataLayout::isAllocaPtrValueNonZero() to check whether alloca always has non-zero value.

I believe that we should phrase this in a way not directly connected to alloca, but to dereferenceability. We currently assume that dereferenceable pointers can't be null in address space 0, but we don't make that assumption about other address spaces (where null might be a valid address). I think that we should address this problem, and then simply apply the result to alloca.

We currently have, for address spaces:

p[n]:<size>:<abi>:<pref>
This specifies the size of a pointer and its <abi> and <pref>erred alignments for address space n. All sizes are in bits. The address space, n, is optional, and if not specified, denotes the default address space 0. The value of n must be in the range [1,2^23).

How about we allow the addition of 'n' (for non-zero) after the address-space number. This, implied by default for address space zero but not others, will imply that dereferenceable address are non-null. We can then apply this in isKnownNonZero in the places where we currently check for address space zero.

Would that address your use case? Or can you have null dereferenceable pointers in that address space, just not ones from alloca?

 -Hal

Sam

From: Hal Finkel [mailto:hfinkel at anl.gov]
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2017 4:06 PM
To: Liu, Yaxun (Sam) <Yaxun.Liu at amd.com><mailto:Yaxun.Liu at amd.com>; llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org><mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Add TargetTransformInfo::isAllocaPtrValueNonZero and let ValueTracking depend on TargetTransformInfo

Hi, Sam,

Our general design has been that TTI is for cost modeling, not for providing semantic information. This piece of information can go in DataLayout, and I think we should put it there. Especially given that this affects our canonicalization process, or preference should be to avoid TTI. The more than TTI affects our canonical form, the more fragmented it becomes, and the harder it is to understand. Putting it in DataLayout also prevents us from having to propagate TTI into a bunch of ValueTracking functions (and maximally retains our ability to process IR without backends compiled in).
Thanks again,
Hal
On 12/14/2017 02:32 PM, Liu, Yaxun (Sam) via llvm-dev wrote:
Some optimizations depend on whether alloca instruction always has non-zero value. Currently, this checking is done by isKnownNonZero() in ValueTracking, and it assumes alloca in address space 0 always has non-zero value but alloca in non-zero address spaces does not always have non-zero value.

However, this assumption is incorrect for certain targets. For example, amdgcn---amdgiz target has alloca in address space 5, and its alloca always has non-zero value. This assumption causes some optimizations disabled for amdgcn---amdgiz target.

After discussions at https://reviews.llvm.org/D40670, I propose to introduce TargetTransformInfo::isAllocaPtrValueNonZero for representing whether alloca instruction always has non-zero value, and add a TargetTransformInfo argument to ValueTracking functions e.g. isKnownNonZero().

As a result, passes using ValueTracking will require TargetTransformInfo.

Comments are welcome.

Thanks.

Sam

_______________________________________________

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

--

Hal Finkel

Lead, Compiler Technology and Programming Languages

Leadership Computing Facility

Argonne National Laboratory

--

Hal Finkel

Lead, Compiler Technology and Programming Languages

Leadership Computing Facility

Argonne National Laboratory
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171215/b150c1fc/attachment.html>