[llvm-dev] DiagnosticInfo and SCEV

[Michael Zolotukhin via llvm-dev]

> On Jun 4, 2018, at 9:33 PM, Alexandre Isoard via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> Ah, yes, I should have provided an example:
> 
> 1: for(int i = 0; i < n/2; ++i)
> 2:   for(int j = 0; j < n; ++j)
> 3:     A[2*i+n*j] += A[2*i+1+n*j];
> 
> Let say, I have a loop interchange pass that decide it is better for spacial locality, to exchange those two loops.
> It might print a diagnostic message:
> 
> Deciding to perform loop interchange between outer-loop at line 1 and inner-loop at line 2. Accesses on A at line 3 have a stride of 2 along the outer-loop, which is shorter than the stride of %17 along the inner-loop.
> 
> The reason why it says 2 and %17 is because that is the textual representation of SCEV representing the stride. Ideally, %17 would be expressed in terms of the original code, here "n". I could translate the "leaves" into their debug info, but what about {0,+,1}<%loop1> that I would like to spell, as a block: "i”?
I think the best we can do here is to point to the corresponding loop (i.e. "{0,+,1}<%loop1>” ==> “iteration number of loop ‘at line 1: for(int i = 0’ i < n/2; ++i)’ ”). In general, we can not map SCEV expressions to some existing variables/constants in the source code, but in some cases we probably can recognize the meaning of a SCEV expression: e.g. iteration number or (maximum/minimum) trip count.

For example, for a bubble-sort loop, looking like this:
1: for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {
2:   for (int j = 0; j < i; j++) {
3:     ...
4:   }
5: }
Some diagnostic might look like this:
Deciding to optimize loop at line 2 iterating up to loop at line 1 iteration number of times.

However, I admit it might look a bit clunky though :/

Michael

> 
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 8:52 PM, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com <mailto:sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com>> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 6:14 PM, Alexandre Isoard via llvm-dev
> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
> > - I would like to print meaningful expressions that does not involve llvm-ir
> > variables.
> 
> I don't quite understand what you mean by this -- are you saying you
> want to print SCEV expressions that have only constants at the leaves?
> 
> In any case, some examples will be helpful.
> 
> -- Sanjoy
> 
> >
> > I think the second problem is hard, how would you suggest to proceed?
> >
> > --
> > 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 <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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 <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180605/3376f556/attachment.html>