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
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
|
; RUN: opt < %s -passes=loop-interchange -cache-line-size=64 -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
; RUN: opt < %s -passes=loop-interchange,loop-interchange -cache-line-size=64 \
; RUN: -pass-remarks-output=%t -pass-remarks='loop-interchange' -S
; RUN: cat %t | FileCheck --check-prefix=PROFIT %s
;; We test profitability model in these test cases.
target datalayout = "e-m:e-i64:64-f80:128-n8:16:32:64-S128"
@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 better cache locality 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];
; CHECK: Name: Interchanged
; 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]], ptr @A, i64 0, i64 %j.prev, i64 %i30
%lv1 = load i32, ptr %arrayidx5
%arrayidx9 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], ptr @B, i64 0, i64 %j, i64 %i30
%lv2 = load i32, ptr %arrayidx9
%add = add nsw i32 %lv1, %lv2
%arrayidx13 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], ptr @A, i64 0, i64 %j, i64 %i30
store i32 %add, ptr %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]], ptr @A, i64 0, i64 %j.prev, i64 %i.prev
%lv1 = load i32, ptr %arrayidx6
%arrayidx12 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], ptr @B, i64 0, i64 %j.prev, i64 %i.prev
%lv2 = load i32, ptr %arrayidx12
%add = add nsw i32 %lv1, %lv2
store i32 %add, ptr %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]], ptr @A, i64 0, i64 %i.prev, i64 %j.prev
%lv1 = load i32, ptr %arrayidx6
%arrayidx10 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], ptr @B, i64 0, i64 %i34, i64 %j
%lv2 = load i32, ptr %arrayidx10
%add = add nsw i32 %lv1, %lv2
store i32 %add, ptr %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]], ptr @A, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv21, i64 %indvars.iv
%0 = load i32, ptr %arrayidx5
%add = add nsw i32 %0, %k
store i32 %add, ptr %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
}
;;---------------------------------------Test case 05---------------------------------
;; This test is to make sure, that multiple invocations of loop interchange will not
;; undo previous interchange and will converge to a particular order determined by the
;; profitability analysis.
;; for(int i=1;i<100;i++)
;; for(int j=1;j<100;j++)
;; A[j][0] = A[j][0] + B[j][i];
; CHECK: Name: Interchanged
; CHECK-NEXT: Function: interchange_05
; PROFIT-LABEL: --- !Passed
; PROFIT-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange
; PROFIT-NEXT: Name: Interchanged
; PROFIT-LABEL: Function: interchange_05
; PROFIT-NEXT: Args:
; PROFIT-NEXT: - String: Loop interchanged with enclosing loop.
; PROFIT-NEXT: ...
; PROFIT: --- !Missed
; PROFIT-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange
; PROFIT-NEXT: Name: InterchangeNotProfitable
; PROFIT-NEXT: Function: interchange_05
; PROFIT-NEXT: Args:
; PROFIT-NEXT: - String: Interchanging loops is not considered to improve cache locality nor vectorization.
; PROFIT-NEXT: ...
define void @interchange_05() {
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]], ptr @A, i64 0, i64 %j, i64 0
%lv1 = load i32, ptr %arrayidx5
%arrayidx9 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], ptr @B, i64 0, i64 %j, i64 %i30
%lv2 = load i32, ptr %arrayidx9
%add = add nsw i32 %lv1, %lv2
%arrayidx13 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], ptr @A, i64 0, i64 %j, i64 0
store i32 %add, ptr %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
}
|
