[llvm-dev] GVN removing loads that are affected by call

Ryan Taylor via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Thu Jan 14 11:03:11 PST 2021


Ok, thanks. I'll try to come up with a more generic test case.

On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 2:00 PM Johannes Doerfert <
johannesdoerfert at gmail.com> wrote:

> Nothing comes to mind given the information.
>
> ~ Johannes
>
>
> On 1/14/21 12:56 PM, Ryan Taylor wrote:
> > argmemonly, nounwind, writeonly
> >
> > -fno-strict-aliasing did not help.
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 1:29 PM Johannes Doerfert <
> > johannesdoerfert at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Can you share the attributes of the intrinsic declaration,
> >> assuming removing `!tbaa` didn't help.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 1/14/21 11:43 AM, Ryan Taylor wrote:
> >>> Yes, this is for downstream/out of tree target so I'm not sure how you
> >>> could reproduce it either but I thought the IR might help a bit.
> >>>
> >>> My guess is it's not a bug in GVN as much as an issue with the
> intrinsic
> >>> properties, or lack thereof. I put this in the first post but the Alias
> >>> Sets show:
> >>>
> >>> AliasSet[0x75fbd0, 9] may alias, Mod/Ref   Pointers: (i8* %1, 8), (i16*
> >>> %arrayidx, 2), (i16* %arrayidx1, 2), (i16* %arrayidx5, 2), (i16* %19,
> 2),
> >>> (i16* %arrayidx6, 2), (i16* %arrayidx14, 2), (i16* %arrayidx19, 2)
> >>>       4 Unknown instructions: void <badref>, <4 x i16>* %6, <4 x i16>*
> >> %22,
> >>> void <badref>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 12:37 PM Johannes Doerfert <
> >>> johannesdoerfert at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> There is still not enough information here.
> >>>>
> >>>> My first guess. The `!tbaa` annotation on the `XXX.intrinsic` and the
> >>>> `load`
> >>>> basically encode there is no alias. Easy to verify, remove the ones on
> >> the
> >>>> intrinsic.
> >>>>
> >>>> ~ Johannes
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> P.S. If this was a bug in GVN, and I assume it is not, a reproducer
> >>>> would help
> >>>>         a lot. So a small IR sample that shows the problem and which
> we
> >>>> can run.
> >>>>         This is a "redacted?" IR fragment in which I don't know what
> >>>> transformation
> >>>>         is problematic. I also can not run it through GVN, which
> makes it
> >>>> impossible
> >>>>         to reproduce.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 1/14/21 11:27 AM, Ryan Taylor via llvm-dev wrote:
> >>>>> This is right before GVN:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> define i32 @foo(<4 x i16> %p, <4 x i16> %p1, i16* nocapture %res)
> >>>>> local_unnamed_addr #0 !dbg !6 {
> >>>>> entry:
> >>>>>      %temp = alloca i64, align 8
> >>>>>      %tmpcast = bitcast i64* %temp to [4 x i16]*
> >>>>>      %0 = bitcast i64* %temp to i8*, !dbg !8
> >>>>>      call void @llvm.lifetime.start.p0i8(i64 8, i8* nonnull %0) #3,
> >> !dbg !8
> >>>>>      store i64 0, i64* %temp, align 8, !dbg !9
> >>>>>      %1 = bitcast i64* %temp to <4 x i16>*, !dbg !10
> >>>>>      %2 = call <4 x i16>* @llvm.XXX.intrinsic(<4 x i16>* nonnull %1,
> <4
> >> x
> >>>> i16>
> >>>>> %p, i32 0), !dbg !11, !tbaa !12
> >>>>>      %arrayidx = bitcast i64* %temp to i16*, !dbg !16
> >>>>>      %3 = load i16, i16* %arrayidx, align 8, !dbg !16, !tbaa !17
> >>>>>      br label %for.body, !dbg !19
> >>>>>
> >>>>> for.body:                                         ; preds = %entry
> >>>>>      %arrayidx1 = getelementptr inbounds [4 x i16], [4 x i16]*
> %tmpcast,
> >>>> i32
> >>>>> 0, i32 1, !dbg !20
> >>>>>      %4 = load i16, i16* %arrayidx1, align 2, !dbg !20, !tbaa !17
> >>>>>      %cmp3 = icmp sgt i16 %3, %4, !dbg !21
> >>>>>      %spec.select = select i1 %cmp3, i16 %4, i16 %3, !dbg !22
> >>>>>      %arrayidx1.1 = getelementptr inbounds [4 x i16], [4 x i16]*
> >> %tmpcast,
> >>>> i32
> >>>>> 0, i32 2, !dbg !20
> >>>>>      %5 = load i16, i16* %arrayidx1.1, align 2, !dbg !20, !tbaa !17
> >>>>>      %cmp3.1 = icmp sgt i16 %spec.select, %5, !dbg !21
> >>>>>      %spec.select.1 = select i1 %cmp3.1, i16 %5, i16 %spec.select,
> !dbg
> >> !22
> >>>>>      %arrayidx1.2 = getelementptr inbounds [4 x i16], [4 x i16]*
> >> %tmpcast,
> >>>> i32
> >>>>> 0, i32 3, !dbg !20
> >>>>>      %6 = load i16, i16* %arrayidx1.2, align 2, !dbg !20, !tbaa !17
> >>>>>      %cmp3.2 = icmp sgt i16 %spec.select.1, %6, !dbg !21
> >>>>>      %spec.select.2 = select i1 %cmp3.2, i16 %6, i16 %spec.select.1,
> >> !dbg
> >>>> !22
> >>>>>      store i16 %spec.select.2, i16* %res, align 2, !dbg !23, !tbaa
> !17
> >>>>>      %7 = tail call <4 x i16>* @llvm.XXX.intrinsic(<4 x i16>* %2, <4
> x
> >> i16>
> >>>>> %p1, i32 0), !dbg !24, !tbaa !12
> >>>>>      %8 = load i16, i16* %arrayidx, align 8, !dbg !25, !tbaa !17
> >>>>>      br label %for.body12, !dbg !26
> >>>>>
> >>>>> for.body12:                                       ; preds = %for.body
> >>>>>      %arrayidx14 = getelementptr inbounds [4 x i16], [4 x i16]*
> >> %tmpcast,
> >>>> i32
> >>>>> 0, i32 1, !dbg !27
> >>>>>      %9 = load i16, i16* %arrayidx14, align 2, !dbg !27, !tbaa !17
> >>>>>      %cmp16 = icmp sgt i16 %8, %9, !dbg !28
> >>>>>      %spec.select39 = select i1 %cmp16, i16 %9, i16 %8, !dbg !29
> >>>>>      %arrayidx14.1 = getelementptr inbounds [4 x i16], [4 x i16]*
> >> %tmpcast,
> >>>>> i32 0, i32 2, !dbg !27
> >>>>>      %10 = load i16, i16* %arrayidx14.1, align 2, !dbg !27, !tbaa !17
> >>>>>      %cmp16.1 = icmp sgt i16 %spec.select39, %10, !dbg !28
> >>>>>      %spec.select39.1 = select i1 %cmp16.1, i16 %10, i16
> %spec.select39,
> >>>> !dbg
> >>>>> !29
> >>>>>      %arrayidx14.2 = getelementptr inbounds [4 x i16], [4 x i16]*
> >> %tmpcast,
> >>>>> i32 0, i32 3, !dbg !27
> >>>>>      %11 = load i16, i16* %arrayidx14.2, align 2, !dbg !27, !tbaa !17
> >>>>>      %cmp16.2 = icmp sgt i16 %spec.select39.1, %11, !dbg !28
> >>>>>      %spec.select39.2 = select i1 %cmp16.2, i16 %11, i16
> >> %spec.select39.1,
> >>>>> !dbg !29
> >>>>>      %conv24 = sext i16 %spec.select39.2 to i32, !dbg !30
> >>>>>      call void @llvm.lifetime.end.p0i8(i64 8, i8* nonnull %0) #3,
> !dbg
> >> !31
> >>>>>      ret i32 %conv24, !dbg !32
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 11:54 AM Roman Lebedev <lebedev.ri at gmail.com
> >
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> It would be good to have an actual IR reproducer here.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 7:51 PM Ryan Taylor via llvm-dev
> >>>>>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>> So given an intrinsic that has a pointer as in/out and IntrWriteMem
> >>>>>> property.
> >>>>>>> call intrinsic(address a, ....);
> >>>>>>> loop over address a
> >>>>>>>      load from address a + offset
> >>>>>>> call intrinsic (address a, ...);
> >>>>>>> loop over address a
> >>>>>>>      load from address a + offset
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> GVN is removing the second loads, despite the second call
> overwriting
> >>>>>> the memory starting at address a. AA has the intrinsics marked as
> >>>> unknown
> >>>>>> instructions but has all of these as mayAlias in a set. I'm not
> seeing
> >>>> this
> >>>>>> issue with -fno-unroll-loops.
> >>>>>>> Thanks.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
> >>>>>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >>>>>>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
> >>>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >>>>> https://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/20210114/f700149c/attachment.html>


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list