Skip to content

[VPlan] Split VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe (NFCI). #87411

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
Apr 17, 2024
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
114 changes: 63 additions & 51 deletions llvm/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/LoopVectorize.cpp
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -8028,7 +8028,7 @@ void VPRecipeBuilder::createBlockInMask(BasicBlock *BB) {
BlockMaskCache[BB] = BlockMask;
}

VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe *
VPWidenMemoryRecipe *
VPRecipeBuilder::tryToWidenMemory(Instruction *I, ArrayRef<VPValue *> Operands,
VFRange &Range) {
assert((isa<LoadInst>(I) || isa<StoreInst>(I)) &&
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -8073,12 +8073,12 @@ VPRecipeBuilder::tryToWidenMemory(Instruction *I, ArrayRef<VPValue *> Operands,
Ptr = VectorPtr;
}
if (LoadInst *Load = dyn_cast<LoadInst>(I))
return new VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe(*Load, Ptr, Mask, Consecutive,
Reverse, I->getDebugLoc());
return new VPWidenLoadRecipe(*Load, Ptr, Mask, Consecutive, Reverse,
I->getDebugLoc());

StoreInst *Store = cast<StoreInst>(I);
return new VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe(
*Store, Ptr, Operands[0], Mask, Consecutive, Reverse, I->getDebugLoc());
return new VPWidenStoreRecipe(*Store, Operands[0], Ptr, Mask, Consecutive,
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nit: worth retaining the parameters in their order as operands? I.e., Ptr as first operand, before stored value.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Updated, thanks!

Reverse, I->getDebugLoc());
}

/// Creates a VPWidenIntOrFpInductionRecpipe for \p Phi. If needed, it will also
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -8710,13 +8710,12 @@ LoopVectorizationPlanner::tryToBuildVPlanWithVPRecipes(VFRange &Range) {
// for this VPlan, replace the Recipes widening its memory instructions with a
// single VPInterleaveRecipe at its insertion point.
for (const auto *IG : InterleaveGroups) {
auto *Recipe = cast<VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe>(
RecipeBuilder.getRecipe(IG->getInsertPos()));
auto *Recipe =
cast<VPWidenMemoryRecipe>(RecipeBuilder.getRecipe(IG->getInsertPos()));
SmallVector<VPValue *, 4> StoredValues;
for (unsigned i = 0; i < IG->getFactor(); ++i)
if (auto *SI = dyn_cast_or_null<StoreInst>(IG->getMember(i))) {
auto *StoreR =
cast<VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe>(RecipeBuilder.getRecipe(SI));
auto *StoreR = cast<VPWidenStoreRecipe>(RecipeBuilder.getRecipe(SI));
StoredValues.push_back(StoreR->getStoredValue());
}

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -9307,16 +9306,9 @@ void VPReplicateRecipe::execute(VPTransformState &State) {
State.ILV->scalarizeInstruction(UI, this, VPIteration(Part, Lane), State);
}

void VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe::execute(VPTransformState &State) {
VPValue *StoredValue = isStore() ? getStoredValue() : nullptr;

void VPWidenLoadRecipe::execute(VPTransformState &State) {
// Attempt to issue a wide load.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
void VPWidenLoadRecipe::execute(VPTransformState &State) {
// Attempt to issue a wide load.
void VPWidenLoadRecipe::execute(VPTransformState &State) {

nit: redundant?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

removed, thanks

LoadInst *LI = dyn_cast<LoadInst>(&Ingredient);
StoreInst *SI = dyn_cast<StoreInst>(&Ingredient);

assert((LI || SI) && "Invalid Load/Store instruction");
assert((!SI || StoredValue) && "No stored value provided for widened store");
assert((!LI || !StoredValue) && "Stored value provided for widened load");
LoadInst *LI = cast<LoadInst>(&Ingredient);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
LoadInst *LI = cast<LoadInst>(&Ingredient);
auto *LI = cast<LoadInst>(&Ingredient);

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done, thanks!


Type *ScalarDataTy = getLoadStoreType(&Ingredient);

Expand All @@ -9338,38 +9330,6 @@ void VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe::execute(VPTransformState &State) {
}
}

// Handle Stores:
if (SI) {
State.setDebugLocFrom(getDebugLoc());

for (unsigned Part = 0; Part < State.UF; ++Part) {
Instruction *NewSI = nullptr;
Value *StoredVal = State.get(StoredValue, Part);
if (CreateGatherScatter) {
Value *MaskPart = isMaskRequired ? BlockInMaskParts[Part] : nullptr;
Value *VectorGep = State.get(getAddr(), Part);
NewSI = Builder.CreateMaskedScatter(StoredVal, VectorGep, Alignment,
MaskPart);
} else {
if (isReverse()) {
// If we store to reverse consecutive memory locations, then we need
// to reverse the order of elements in the stored value.
StoredVal = Builder.CreateVectorReverse(StoredVal, "reverse");
// We don't want to update the value in the map as it might be used in
// another expression. So don't call resetVectorValue(StoredVal).
}
auto *VecPtr = State.get(getAddr(), Part, /*IsScalar*/ true);
if (isMaskRequired)
NewSI = Builder.CreateMaskedStore(StoredVal, VecPtr, Alignment,
BlockInMaskParts[Part]);
else
NewSI = Builder.CreateAlignedStore(StoredVal, VecPtr, Alignment);
}
State.addMetadata(NewSI, SI);
}
return;
}

// Handle loads.
assert(LI && "Must have a load instruction");
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
// Handle loads.
assert(LI && "Must have a load instruction");

Only loads are handled, and LI is asserted to be non-null by the non-dynamic cast.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

removed, thanks!

State.setDebugLocFrom(getDebugLoc());
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -9397,7 +9357,59 @@ void VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe::execute(VPTransformState &State) {
NewLI = Builder.CreateVectorReverse(NewLI, "reverse");
}

State.set(getVPSingleValue(), NewLI, Part);
State.set(this, NewLI, Part);
}
}

void VPWidenStoreRecipe::execute(VPTransformState &State) {
VPValue *StoredValue = getStoredValue();
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
VPValue *StoredValue = getStoredValue();
VPValue *StoredVPValue = getStoredValue();

nit: clarify the distinction between Stored Value and Stored VPValue, as in Mask and VPMask.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done, thanks!


// Attempt to issue a wide load.
StoreInst *SI = cast<StoreInst>(&Ingredient);

const Align Alignment = getLoadStoreAlignment(&Ingredient);
bool CreateGatherScatter = !isConsecutive();

auto &Builder = State.Builder;
InnerLoopVectorizer::VectorParts BlockInMaskParts(State.UF);
bool isMaskRequired = getMask();
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
bool isMaskRequired = getMask();
bool IsMaskRequired = getMask();

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done, thanks!

if (isMaskRequired) {
// Mask reversal is only needed for non-all-one (null) masks, as reverse of
// a null all-one mask is a null mask.
for (unsigned Part = 0; Part < State.UF; ++Part) {
Value *Mask = State.get(getMask(), Part);
if (isReverse())
Mask = Builder.CreateVectorReverse(Mask, "reverse");
BlockInMaskParts[Part] = Mask;
}
}

State.setDebugLocFrom(getDebugLoc());

for (unsigned Part = 0; Part < State.UF; ++Part) {
Instruction *NewSI = nullptr;
Value *StoredVal = State.get(StoredValue, Part);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
Value *StoredVal = State.get(StoredValue, Part);
Value *StoredVal = State.get(StoredValue, Part);
if (isReverse()) {
// If we store to reverse consecutive memory locations, then we need
// to reverse the order of elements in the stored value.
StoredVal = Builder.CreateVectorReverse(StoredVal, "reverse");
// We don't want to update the value in the map as it might be used in
// another expression. So don't call resetVectorValue(StoredVal).
}

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hoisted, thanks!

if (CreateGatherScatter) {
Value *MaskPart = isMaskRequired ? BlockInMaskParts[Part] : nullptr;
Value *VectorGep = State.get(getAddr(), Part);
NewSI = Builder.CreateMaskedScatter(StoredVal, VectorGep, Alignment,
MaskPart);
} else {
if (isReverse()) {
// If we store to reverse consecutive memory locations, then we need
// to reverse the order of elements in the stored value.
StoredVal = Builder.CreateVectorReverse(StoredVal, "reverse");
// We don't want to update the value in the map as it might be used in
// another expression. So don't call resetVectorValue(StoredVal).
}
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
if (isReverse()) {
// If we store to reverse consecutive memory locations, then we need
// to reverse the order of elements in the stored value.
StoredVal = Builder.CreateVectorReverse(StoredVal, "reverse");
// We don't want to update the value in the map as it might be used in
// another expression. So don't call resetVectorValue(StoredVal).
}

nit: better fix StoredVal above, when set. Can assert that reverse implies !State.EVL. The assert that reverse implies !CreateScatter == isConsecutive is already there.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hoisted, thanks!

auto *VecPtr = State.get(getAddr(), Part, /*IsScalar*/ true);
if (isMaskRequired)
NewSI = Builder.CreateMaskedStore(StoredVal, VecPtr, Alignment,
BlockInMaskParts[Part]);
else
NewSI = Builder.CreateAlignedStore(StoredVal, VecPtr, Alignment);
}
State.addMetadata(NewSI, SI);
}
}

Expand Down
6 changes: 3 additions & 3 deletions llvm/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/VPRecipeBuilder.h
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -69,9 +69,9 @@ class VPRecipeBuilder {
/// Check if the load or store instruction \p I should widened for \p
/// Range.Start and potentially masked. Such instructions are handled by a
/// recipe that takes an additional VPInstruction for the mask.
VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe *tryToWidenMemory(Instruction *I,
ArrayRef<VPValue *> Operands,
VFRange &Range);
VPWidenMemoryRecipe *tryToWidenMemory(Instruction *I,
ArrayRef<VPValue *> Operands,
VFRange &Range);

/// Check if an induction recipe should be constructed for \p Phi. If so build
/// and return it. If not, return null.
Expand Down
132 changes: 91 additions & 41 deletions llvm/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/VPlan.h
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -870,7 +870,8 @@ class VPSingleDefRecipe : public VPRecipeBase, public VPValue {
return true;
case VPRecipeBase::VPInterleaveSC:
case VPRecipeBase::VPBranchOnMaskSC:
case VPRecipeBase::VPWidenMemoryInstructionSC:
case VPRecipeBase::VPWidenLoadSC:
case VPRecipeBase::VPWidenStoreSC:
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hmm, the TODO below suggests that Loads should (also) be considered single def. Should VPWidenLoadRecipe inherit from both VPWidenMemoryRecipe and VPSingleDefRecipe? (Deserves a separate patch, but worth thinking when introducing the class hierarchy here.)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, unfortunately it will require some extra work, as at the moment both VPWidenMemoryRecipe and VPSingleDefRecipe inherits from VPRecipeBase, both so they can manage operands.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Another alternative may be to also consider VPWidenStoreRecipe as a Single Def recipe, with a singleton "void" Def that has no uses. Akin to LLVM. I.e., VPSingle[OrNo]DefRecipe.

// TODO: Widened stores don't define a value, but widened loads do. Split
// the recipes to be able to make widened loads VPSingleDefRecipes.
return false;
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -2273,7 +2274,8 @@ class VPPredInstPHIRecipe : public VPSingleDefRecipe {
/// - For store: Address, stored value, optional mask
/// TODO: We currently execute only per-part unless a specific instance is
/// provided.
class VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe : public VPRecipeBase {
class VPWidenMemoryRecipe : public VPRecipeBase {
protected:
Instruction &Ingredient;

// Whether the loaded-from / stored-to addresses are consecutive.
Expand All @@ -2293,42 +2295,23 @@ class VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe : public VPRecipeBase {
}

public:
VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe(LoadInst &Load, VPValue *Addr, VPValue *Mask,
bool Consecutive, bool Reverse, DebugLoc DL)
: VPRecipeBase(VPDef::VPWidenMemoryInstructionSC, {Addr}, DL),
Ingredient(Load), Consecutive(Consecutive), Reverse(Reverse) {
VPWidenMemoryRecipe(const char unsigned SC, Instruction &I,
std::initializer_list<VPValue *> Operands,
bool Consecutive, bool Reverse, DebugLoc DL)
: VPRecipeBase(SC, Operands, DL), Ingredient(I), Consecutive(Consecutive),
Reverse(Reverse) {
assert((Consecutive || !Reverse) && "Reverse implies consecutive");
new VPValue(this, &Load);
setMask(Mask);
}

VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe(StoreInst &Store, VPValue *Addr,
VPValue *StoredValue, VPValue *Mask,
bool Consecutive, bool Reverse, DebugLoc DL)
: VPRecipeBase(VPDef::VPWidenMemoryInstructionSC, {Addr, StoredValue},
DL),
Ingredient(Store), Consecutive(Consecutive), Reverse(Reverse) {
assert((Consecutive || !Reverse) && "Reverse implies consecutive");
setMask(Mask);
}
VPRecipeBase *clone() override = 0;

VPRecipeBase *clone() override {
if (isStore())
return new VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe(
cast<StoreInst>(Ingredient), getAddr(), getStoredValue(), getMask(),
Consecutive, Reverse, getDebugLoc());

return new VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe(cast<LoadInst>(Ingredient),
getAddr(), getMask(), Consecutive,
Reverse, getDebugLoc());
static inline bool classof(const VPRecipeBase *R) {
return R->getVPDefID() == VPRecipeBase::VPWidenStoreSC ||
R->getVPDefID() == VPRecipeBase::VPWidenLoadSC;
}

VP_CLASSOF_IMPL(VPDef::VPWidenMemoryInstructionSC)

/// Return the address accessed by this recipe.
VPValue *getAddr() const {
return getOperand(0); // Address is the 1st, mandatory operand.
}
virtual VPValue *getAddr() const = 0;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do you really need to make it virtual? I think you can just remove it from the base class

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There are callers that need to get the address of any WidenMemoryRecipe (e.g. VPlanTransforms::dropPoisonGeneratingRecipes), kept virtual for now.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Better to use static isa/dyn_cast sequences where possible instead of virtual functions

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fair enough, replaced with an implementation using switch and recipe ID.


/// Return the mask used by this recipe. Note that a full mask is represented
/// by a nullptr.
Expand All @@ -2340,19 +2323,44 @@ class VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe : public VPRecipeBase {
/// Returns true if this recipe is a store.
bool isStore() const { return isa<StoreInst>(Ingredient); }

/// Return the address accessed by this recipe.
VPValue *getStoredValue() const {
assert(isStore() && "Stored value only available for store instructions");
return getOperand(1); // Stored value is the 2nd, mandatory operand.
}

// Return whether the loaded-from / stored-to addresses are consecutive.
bool isConsecutive() const { return Consecutive; }

// Return whether the consecutive loaded/stored addresses are in reverse
// order.
bool isReverse() const { return Reverse; }

/// Generate the wide load/store.
void execute(VPTransformState &State) override = 0;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do you really need to make it pure virtual or just enough to have execute function in each implementation? And here just make it llvm_unreachable?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Replaced with llvm_unreachable, thanks!


Instruction &getIngredient() const { return Ingredient; }
};

struct VPWidenLoadRecipe : public VPWidenMemoryRecipe, public VPValue {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

final?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done, thanks!

VPWidenLoadRecipe(LoadInst &Load, VPValue *Addr, VPValue *Mask,
bool Consecutive, bool Reverse, DebugLoc DL)
: VPWidenMemoryRecipe(VPDef::VPWidenLoadSC, Load, {Addr}, Consecutive,
Reverse, DL),
VPValue(this, &Load) {
assert((Consecutive || !Reverse) && "Reverse implies consecutive");
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nit: suffice to assert that reverse implies consecutive once, in the WidenMemory base class, where they are held.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Removed here, thanks!

setMask(Mask);
}

VPRecipeBase *clone() override {
return new VPWidenLoadRecipe(cast<LoadInst>(Ingredient), getAddr(),
getMask(), Consecutive, Reverse,
getDebugLoc());
}

static inline bool classof(const VPRecipeBase *R) {
return R->getVPDefID() == VPRecipeBase::VPWidenLoadSC;
}

/// Return the address accessed by this recipe.
VPValue *getAddr() const override {
return getOperand(0); // Address is the 1st, mandatory operand.
}

/// Generate the wide load/store.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
/// Generate the wide load/store.
/// Generate a wide load or gather.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done, thanks!

void execute(VPTransformState &State) override;

Expand All @@ -2370,13 +2378,55 @@ class VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe : public VPRecipeBase {
// Widened, consecutive memory operations only demand the first lane of
// their address, unless the same operand is also stored. That latter can
// happen with opaque pointers.
return Op == getAddr() && isConsecutive() &&
(!isStore() || Op != getStoredValue());
return Op == getAddr() && isConsecutive();
}

Instruction &getIngredient() const { return Ingredient; }
};

struct VPWidenStoreRecipe : public VPWidenMemoryRecipe {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

final?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done, thanks!

VPWidenStoreRecipe(StoreInst &Store, VPValue *StoredVal, VPValue *Addr,
VPValue *Mask, bool Consecutive, bool Reverse, DebugLoc DL)
: VPWidenMemoryRecipe(VPDef::VPWidenStoreSC, Store, {StoredVal, Addr},
Consecutive, Reverse, DL) {
assert((Consecutive || !Reverse) && "Reverse implies consecutive");
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nit: suffice to assert that reverse implies consecutive in the WidenMemory base class, where they are held.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Removed here, thanks!

setMask(Mask);
}

VPRecipeBase *clone() override {
return new VPWidenStoreRecipe(cast<StoreInst>(Ingredient), getStoredValue(),
getAddr(), getMask(), Consecutive, Reverse,
getDebugLoc());
}

static inline bool classof(const VPRecipeBase *R) {
return R->getVPDefID() == VPRecipeBase::VPWidenStoreSC;
}

/// Return the address accessed by this recipe.
VPValue *getAddr() const override { return getOperand(1); }

/// Return the address accessed by this recipe.
VPValue *getStoredValue() const { return getOperand(0); }

/// Generate the wide load/store.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
/// Generate the wide load/store.
/// Generate a wide store or scatter.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done, thanks!

void execute(VPTransformState &State) override;

#if !defined(NDEBUG) || defined(LLVM_ENABLE_DUMP)
/// Print the recipe.
void print(raw_ostream &O, const Twine &Indent,
VPSlotTracker &SlotTracker) const override;
#endif

/// Returns true if the recipe only uses the first lane of operand \p Op.
bool onlyFirstLaneUsed(const VPValue *Op) const override {
assert(is_contained(operands(), Op) &&
"Op must be an operand of the recipe");

// Widened, consecutive memory operations only demand the first lane of
// their address, unless the same operand is also stored. That latter can
// happen with opaque pointers.
return Op == getAddr() && isConsecutive() && Op != getStoredValue();
}
};
/// Recipe to expand a SCEV expression.
class VPExpandSCEVRecipe : public VPSingleDefRecipe {
const SCEV *Expr;
Expand Down
9 changes: 4 additions & 5 deletions llvm/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/VPlanAnalysis.cpp
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -108,9 +108,9 @@ Type *VPTypeAnalysis::inferScalarTypeForRecipe(const VPWidenCallRecipe *R) {
return CI.getType();
}

Type *VPTypeAnalysis::inferScalarTypeForRecipe(
const VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe *R) {
assert(!R->isStore() && "Store recipes should not define any values");
Type *VPTypeAnalysis::inferScalarTypeForRecipe(const VPWidenMemoryRecipe *R) {
assert(isa<VPWidenLoadRecipe>(R) &&
"Store recipes should not define any values");
return cast<LoadInst>(&R->getIngredient())->getType();
}

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -231,8 +231,7 @@ Type *VPTypeAnalysis::inferScalarType(const VPValue *V) {
return inferScalarType(R->getOperand(0));
})
.Case<VPBlendRecipe, VPInstruction, VPWidenRecipe, VPReplicateRecipe,
VPWidenCallRecipe, VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe,
VPWidenSelectRecipe>(
VPWidenCallRecipe, VPWidenMemoryRecipe, VPWidenSelectRecipe>(
[this](const auto *R) { return inferScalarTypeForRecipe(R); })
.Case<VPInterleaveRecipe>([V](const VPInterleaveRecipe *R) {
// TODO: Use info from interleave group.
Expand Down
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions llvm/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/VPlanAnalysis.h
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ class VPInstruction;
class VPWidenRecipe;
class VPWidenCallRecipe;
class VPWidenIntOrFpInductionRecipe;
class VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe;
class VPWidenMemoryRecipe;
struct VPWidenSelectRecipe;
class VPReplicateRecipe;
class Type;
Expand All @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ class VPTypeAnalysis {
Type *inferScalarTypeForRecipe(const VPWidenCallRecipe *R);
Type *inferScalarTypeForRecipe(const VPWidenRecipe *R);
Type *inferScalarTypeForRecipe(const VPWidenIntOrFpInductionRecipe *R);
Type *inferScalarTypeForRecipe(const VPWidenMemoryInstructionRecipe *R);
Type *inferScalarTypeForRecipe(const VPWidenMemoryRecipe *R);
Type *inferScalarTypeForRecipe(const VPWidenSelectRecipe *R);
Type *inferScalarTypeForRecipe(const VPReplicateRecipe *R);

Expand Down
Loading