1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
| ; RUN: opt < %s -loop-interchange -pass-remarks-output=%t -verify-dom-info -verify-loop-info \
; RUN: -pass-remarks=loop-interchange -pass-remarks-missed=loop-interchange
; RUN: FileCheck -input-file %t %s
;; We test profitability model in these test cases.
target datalayout = "e-m:e-i64:64-f80:128-n8:16:32:64-S128"
target triple = "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu"
@A = common global [100 x [100 x i32]] zeroinitializer
@B = common global [100 x [100 x i32]] zeroinitializer
;;---------------------------------------Test case 01---------------------------------
;; Loops interchange will result in code vectorization and hence profitable. Check for interchange.
;; for(int i=1;i<100;i++)
;; for(int j=1;j<100;j++)
;; A[j][i] = A[j - 1][i] + B[j][i];
;; FIXME: DA misses this case after D35430
; CHECK: Name: Dependence
; CHECK-NEXT: Function: interchange_01
define void @interchange_01() {
entry:
br label %for2.preheader
for2.preheader:
%i30 = phi i64 [ 1, %entry ], [ %i.next31, %for1.inc14 ]
br label %for2
for2:
%j = phi i64 [ %i.next, %for2 ], [ 1, %for2.preheader ]
%j.prev = add nsw i64 %j, -1
%arrayidx5 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @A, i64 0, i64 %j.prev, i64 %i30
%lv1 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx5
%arrayidx9 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @B, i64 0, i64 %j, i64 %i30
%lv2 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx9
%add = add nsw i32 %lv1, %lv2
%arrayidx13 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @A, i64 0, i64 %j, i64 %i30
store i32 %add, i32* %arrayidx13
%i.next = add nuw nsw i64 %j, 1
%exitcond = icmp eq i64 %j, 99
br i1 %exitcond, label %for1.inc14, label %for2
for1.inc14:
%i.next31 = add nuw nsw i64 %i30, 1
%exitcond33 = icmp eq i64 %i30, 99
br i1 %exitcond33, label %for.end16, label %for2.preheader
for.end16:
ret void
}
;; ---------------------------------------Test case 02---------------------------------
;; Check loop interchange profitability model.
;; This tests profitability model when operands of getelementpointer and not exactly the induction variable but some
;; arithmetic operation on them.
;; for(int i=1;i<N;i++)
;; for(int j=1;j<N;j++)
;; A[j-1][i-1] = A[j - 1][i-1] + B[j-1][i-1];
; CHECK: Name: Interchanged
; CHECK-NEXT: Function: interchange_02
define void @interchange_02() {
entry:
br label %for1.header
for1.header:
%i35 = phi i64 [ 1, %entry ], [ %i.next36, %for1.inc19 ]
%i.prev = add nsw i64 %i35, -1
br label %for2
for2:
%j = phi i64 [ 1, %for1.header ], [ %i.next, %for2 ]
%j.prev = add nsw i64 %j, -1
%arrayidx6 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @A, i64 0, i64 %j.prev, i64 %i.prev
%lv1 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx6
%arrayidx12 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @B, i64 0, i64 %j.prev, i64 %i.prev
%lv2 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx12
%add = add nsw i32 %lv1, %lv2
store i32 %add, i32* %arrayidx6
%i.next = add nuw nsw i64 %j, 1
%exitcond = icmp eq i64 %j, 99
br i1 %exitcond, label %for1.inc19, label %for2
for1.inc19:
%i.next36 = add nuw nsw i64 %i35, 1
%exitcond39 = icmp eq i64 %i35, 99
br i1 %exitcond39, label %for.end21, label %for1.header
for.end21:
ret void
}
;;---------------------------------------Test case 03---------------------------------
;; Loops interchange is not profitable.
;; for(int i=1;i<100;i++)
;; for(int j=1;j<100;j++)
;; A[i-1][j-1] = A[i - 1][j-1] + B[i][j];
; CHECK: Name: InterchangeNotProfitable
; CHECK-NEXT: Function: interchange_03
define void @interchange_03(){
entry:
br label %for1.header
for1.header:
%i34 = phi i64 [ 1, %entry ], [ %i.next35, %for1.inc17 ]
%i.prev = add nsw i64 %i34, -1
br label %for2
for2:
%j = phi i64 [ 1, %for1.header ], [ %i.next, %for2 ]
%j.prev = add nsw i64 %j, -1
%arrayidx6 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @A, i64 0, i64 %i.prev, i64 %j.prev
%lv1 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx6
%arrayidx10 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @B, i64 0, i64 %i34, i64 %j
%lv2 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx10
%add = add nsw i32 %lv1, %lv2
store i32 %add, i32* %arrayidx6
%i.next = add nuw nsw i64 %j, 1
%exitcond = icmp eq i64 %j, 99
br i1 %exitcond, label %for1.inc17, label %for2
for1.inc17:
%i.next35 = add nuw nsw i64 %i34, 1
%exitcond38 = icmp eq i64 %i34, 99
br i1 %exitcond38, label %for.end19, label %for1.header
for.end19:
ret void
}
;; Loops should not be interchanged in this case as it is not profitable.
;; for(int i=0;i<100;i++)
;; for(int j=0;j<100;j++)
;; A[i][j] = A[i][j]+k;
; CHECK: Name: InterchangeNotProfitable
; CHECK-NEXT: Function: interchange_04
define void @interchange_04(i32 %k) {
entry:
br label %for.cond1.preheader
for.cond1.preheader:
%indvars.iv21 = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %indvars.iv.next22, %for.inc10 ]
br label %for.body3
for.body3:
%indvars.iv = phi i64 [ 0, %for.cond1.preheader ], [ %indvars.iv.next, %for.body3 ]
%arrayidx5 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @A, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv21, i64 %indvars.iv
%0 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx5
%add = add nsw i32 %0, %k
store i32 %add, i32* %arrayidx5
%indvars.iv.next = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv, 1
%exitcond = icmp eq i64 %indvars.iv.next, 100
br i1 %exitcond, label %for.inc10, label %for.body3
for.inc10:
%indvars.iv.next22 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv21, 1
%exitcond23 = icmp eq i64 %indvars.iv.next22, 100
br i1 %exitcond23, label %for.end12, label %for.cond1.preheader
for.end12:
ret void
}
|