diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'test/Transforms/LoopInterchange/loop-interchange-optimization-remarks.ll')
| -rw-r--r-- | test/Transforms/LoopInterchange/loop-interchange-optimization-remarks.ll | 220 |
1 files changed, 220 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/test/Transforms/LoopInterchange/loop-interchange-optimization-remarks.ll b/test/Transforms/LoopInterchange/loop-interchange-optimization-remarks.ll new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000..e14598cfdd609 --- /dev/null +++ b/test/Transforms/LoopInterchange/loop-interchange-optimization-remarks.ll @@ -0,0 +1,220 @@ +; Test optimization remarks generated by the LoopInterchange pass. +; +; RUN: opt < %s -basicaa -loop-interchange -pass-remarks-output=%t -pass-remarks-missed='loop-interchange' \ +; RUN: -pass-remarks='loop-interchange' -S +; RUN: cat %t | FileCheck %s + +@A = common global [100 x [100 x i32]] zeroinitializer +@B = common global [100 x [100 x i32]] zeroinitializer +@C = common global [100 x i32] zeroinitializer + +;;---------------------------------------Test case 01--------------------------------- +;; Loops interchange is not profitable. +;; for(int i=1;i<N;i++) +;; for(int j=1;j<N;j++) +;; A[i-1][j-1] = A[i - 1][j-1] + B[i][j]; + +define void @test01(i32 %N){ +entry: + %cmp31 = icmp sgt i32 %N, 1 + br i1 %cmp31, label %for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph, label %for.end19 + +for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph: + %0 = add i32 %N, -1 + br label %for.body3.lr.ph + +for.body3.lr.ph: + %indvars.iv34 = phi i64 [ 1, %for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph ], [ %indvars.iv.next35, %for.inc17 ] + %1 = add nsw i64 %indvars.iv34, -1 + br label %for.body3 + +for.body3: + %indvars.iv = phi i64 [ 1, %for.body3.lr.ph ], [ %indvars.iv.next, %for.body3 ] + %2 = add nsw i64 %indvars.iv, -1 + %arrayidx6 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @A, i64 0, i64 %1, i64 %2 + %3 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx6 + %arrayidx10 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @B, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv34, i64 %indvars.iv + %4 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx10 + %add = add nsw i32 %4, %3 + store i32 %add, i32* %arrayidx6 + %indvars.iv.next = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv, 1 + %lftr.wideiv = trunc i64 %indvars.iv to i32 + %exitcond = icmp eq i32 %lftr.wideiv, %0 + br i1 %exitcond, label %for.inc17, label %for.body3 + +for.inc17: + %indvars.iv.next35 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv34, 1 + %lftr.wideiv37 = trunc i64 %indvars.iv34 to i32 + %exitcond38 = icmp eq i32 %lftr.wideiv37, %0 + br i1 %exitcond38, label %for.end19, label %for.body3.lr.ph + +for.end19: + ret void +} + +; CHECK: --- !Missed +; CHECK-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange +; CHECK-NEXT: Name: InterchangeNotProfitable +; CHECK-NEXT: Function: test01 +; CHECK-NEXT: Args: +; CHECK-NEXT: - String: 'Interchanging loops is too costly (cost=' +; CHECK-NEXT: - Cost: '2' +; CHECK-NEXT: - String: ', threshold=' +; CHECK-NEXT: - Threshold: '0' +; CHECK-NEXT: - String: ') and it does not improve parallelism.' +; CHECK-NEXT: ... + +;;--------------------------------------Test case 02------------------------------------ +;; [FIXME] This loop though valid is currently not interchanged due to the +;; limitation that we cannot split the inner loop latch due to multiple use of inner induction +;; variable.(used to increment the loop counter and to access A[j+1][i+1] +;; for(int i=0;i<N-1;i++) +;; for(int j=1;j<N-1;j++) +;; A[j+1][i+1] = A[j+1][i+1] + k; + +define void @test02(i32 %k, i32 %N) { + entry: + %sub = add nsw i32 %N, -1 + %cmp26 = icmp sgt i32 %N, 1 + br i1 %cmp26, label %for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph, label %for.end17 + + for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph: + %cmp324 = icmp sgt i32 %sub, 1 + %0 = add i32 %N, -2 + %1 = sext i32 %sub to i64 + br label %for.cond1.preheader + + for.cond.loopexit: + %cmp = icmp slt i64 %indvars.iv.next29, %1 + br i1 %cmp, label %for.cond1.preheader, label %for.end17 + + for.cond1.preheader: + %indvars.iv28 = phi i64 [ 0, %for.cond1.preheader.lr.ph ], [ %indvars.iv.next29, %for.cond.loopexit ] + %indvars.iv.next29 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv28, 1 + br i1 %cmp324, label %for.body4, label %for.cond.loopexit + + for.body4: + %indvars.iv = phi i64 [ %indvars.iv.next, %for.body4 ], [ 1, %for.cond1.preheader ] + %indvars.iv.next = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv, 1 + %arrayidx7 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @A, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv.next, i64 %indvars.iv.next29 + %2 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx7 + %add8 = add nsw i32 %2, %k + store i32 %add8, i32* %arrayidx7 + %lftr.wideiv = trunc i64 %indvars.iv to i32 + %exitcond = icmp eq i32 %lftr.wideiv, %0 + br i1 %exitcond, label %for.cond.loopexit, label %for.body4 + + for.end17: + ret void +} + +; CHECK: --- !Missed +; CHECK-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange +; CHECK-NEXT: Name: UnsupportedInsBetweenInduction +; CHECK-NEXT: Function: test02 +; CHECK-NEXT: Args: +; CHECK-NEXT: - String: Found unsupported instruction between induction variable increment and branch. +; CHECK-NEXT: ... + +;;-----------------------------------Test case 03------------------------------- +;; Test to make sure we can handle output dependencies. +;; +;; for (int i = 0; i < 2; ++i) +;; for(int j = 0; j < 3; ++j) { +;; A[j][i] = i; +;; A[j][i+1] = j; +;; } + +@A10 = local_unnamed_addr global [3 x [3 x i32]] zeroinitializer, align 16 + +define void @test03() { +entry: + br label %for.cond1.preheader + +for.cond.loopexit: ; preds = %for.body4 + %exitcond28 = icmp ne i64 %indvars.iv.next27, 2 + br i1 %exitcond28, label %for.cond1.preheader, label %for.cond.cleanup + +for.cond1.preheader: ; preds = %for.cond.loopexit, %entry + %indvars.iv26 = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %indvars.iv.next27, %for.cond.loopexit ] + %indvars.iv.next27 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv26, 1 + br label %for.body4 + +for.cond.cleanup: ; preds = %for.cond.loopexit + ret void + +for.body4: ; preds = %for.body4, %for.cond1.preheader + %indvars.iv = phi i64 [ 0, %for.cond1.preheader ], [ %indvars.iv.next, %for.body4 ] + %arrayidx6 = getelementptr inbounds [3 x [3 x i32]], [3 x [3 x i32]]* @A10, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv, i64 %indvars.iv26 + %tmp = trunc i64 %indvars.iv26 to i32 + store i32 %tmp, i32* %arrayidx6, align 4 + %arrayidx10 = getelementptr inbounds [3 x [3 x i32]], [3 x [3 x i32]]* @A10, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv, i64 %indvars.iv.next27 + %tmp1 = trunc i64 %indvars.iv to i32 + store i32 %tmp1, i32* %arrayidx10, align 4 + %indvars.iv.next = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv, 1 + %exitcond = icmp ne i64 %indvars.iv.next, 3 + br i1 %exitcond, label %for.body4, label %for.cond.loopexit +} + +; CHECK: --- !Passed +; CHECK-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange +; CHECK-NEXT: Name: Interchanged +; CHECK-NEXT: Function: test03 +; CHECK-NEXT: Args: +; CHECK-NEXT: - String: Loop interchanged with enclosing loop. +; CHECK-NEXT: ... + +;;--------------------------------------Test case 04------------------------------------- +;; Loops not tightly nested are not interchanged +;; for(int j=0;j<N;j++) { +;; B[j] = j+k; +;; for(int i=0;i<N;i++) +;; A[j][i] = A[j][i]+B[j]; +;; } + +define void @test04(i32 %k, i32 %N){ +entry: + %cmp30 = icmp sgt i32 %N, 0 + br i1 %cmp30, label %for.body.lr.ph, label %for.end17 + +for.body.lr.ph: + %0 = add i32 %N, -1 + %1 = zext i32 %k to i64 + br label %for.body + +for.body: + %indvars.iv32 = phi i64 [ 0, %for.body.lr.ph ], [ %indvars.iv.next33, %for.inc15 ] + %2 = add nsw i64 %indvars.iv32, %1 + %arrayidx = getelementptr inbounds [100 x i32], [100 x i32]* @C, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv32 + %3 = trunc i64 %2 to i32 + store i32 %3, i32* %arrayidx + br label %for.body3 + +for.body3: + %indvars.iv = phi i64 [ 0, %for.body ], [ %indvars.iv.next, %for.body3 ] + %arrayidx7 = getelementptr inbounds [100 x [100 x i32]], [100 x [100 x i32]]* @A, i64 0, i64 %indvars.iv32, i64 %indvars.iv + %4 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx7 + %add10 = add nsw i32 %3, %4 + store i32 %add10, i32* %arrayidx7 + %indvars.iv.next = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv, 1 + %lftr.wideiv = trunc i64 %indvars.iv to i32 + %exitcond = icmp eq i32 %lftr.wideiv, %0 + br i1 %exitcond, label %for.inc15, label %for.body3 + +for.inc15: + %indvars.iv.next33 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv32, 1 + %lftr.wideiv35 = trunc i64 %indvars.iv32 to i32 + %exitcond36 = icmp eq i32 %lftr.wideiv35, %0 + br i1 %exitcond36, label %for.end17, label %for.body + +for.end17: + ret void +} + +; CHECK: --- !Missed +; CHECK-NEXT: Pass: loop-interchange +; CHECK-NEXT: Name: NotTightlyNested +; CHECK-NEXT: Function: test04 +; CHECK-NEXT: Args: +; CHECK-NEXT: - String: Cannot interchange loops because they are not tightly nested. +; CHECK-NEXT: ... |