Re: [PATCH] vect: Unify bbs in loop_vec_info and bb_vec_info
On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 10:39 AM Feng Xue OS wrote: > > Ok. Then I will add a TODO comment on "bbs" field to describe it. Fine with me. Thanks, Richard. > Thanks, > Feng > > > > From: Richard Biener > Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2024 3:14 PM > To: Feng Xue OS > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH] vect: Unify bbs in loop_vec_info and bb_vec_info > > On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 6:11 PM Feng Xue OS > wrote: > > > > Because bbs of loop_vec_info need to be allocated via old-fashion > > XCNEWVEC, in order to receive result from dfs_enumerate_from(), > > so have to make bb_vec_info align with loop_vec_info, use > > basic_block * instead of vec. Another reason is that > > some loop vect related codes assume that bbs is a pointer, such > > as using LOOP_VINFO_BBS() to directly free the bbs area. > > I think dfs_enumerate_from is fine with receiving bbs.address () > (if you first grow the vector, of course). There might be other code > that needs changing, sure. > > > While encapsulating bbs into array_slice might make changed code > > more wordy. So still choose basic_block * as its type. Updated the > > patch by removing bbs_as_vector. > > The updated patch looks good to me. Lifetime management of > the base class bbs done differently by _loop_vec_info and _bb_vec_info > is a bit ugly but it's a well isolated fact. > > Thus, OK. > > I do think we can turn the basic_block * back to a vec<> but this > can be done as followup if anybody has spare cycles. > > Thanks, > Richard. > > > Feng. > > > > gcc/ > > * tree-vect-loop.cc (_loop_vec_info::_loop_vec_info): Move > > initialization of bbs to explicit construction code. Adjust the > > definition of nbbs. > > (update_epilogue_loop_vinfo): Update nbbs for epilog vinfo. > > * tree-vect-pattern.cc (vect_determine_precisions): Make > > loop_vec_info and bb_vec_info share same code. > > (vect_pattern_recog): Remove duplicated vect_pattern_recog_1 loop. > > * tree-vect-slp.cc (vect_get_and_check_slp_defs): Access to bbs[0] > > via base vec_info class. > > (_bb_vec_info::_bb_vec_info): Initialize bbs and nbbs using data > > fields of input auto_vec<> bbs. > > (vect_slp_region): Use access to nbbs to replace original > > bbs.length(). > > (vect_schedule_slp_node): Access to bbs[0] via base vec_info class. > > * tree-vectorizer.cc (vec_info::vec_info): Add initialization of > > bbs and nbbs. > > (vec_info::insert_seq_on_entry): Access to bbs[0] via base vec_info > > class. > > * tree-vectorizer.h (vec_info): Add new fields bbs and nbbs. > > (LOOP_VINFO_NBBS): New macro. > > (BB_VINFO_BBS): Rename BB_VINFO_BB to BB_VINFO_BBS. > > (BB_VINFO_NBBS): New macro. > > (_loop_vec_info): Remove field bbs. > > (_bb_vec_info): Rename field bbs. > > --- > > gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc | 7 +- > > gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc | 142 +++--- > > gcc/tree-vect-slp.cc | 23 +++--- > > gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc| 7 +- > > gcc/tree-vectorizer.h | 19 +++-- > > 5 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 128 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc > > index 3b94bb13a8b..04a9ac64df7 100644 > > --- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc > > +++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc > > @@ -1028,7 +1028,6 @@ bb_in_loop_p (const_basic_block bb, const void *data) > > _loop_vec_info::_loop_vec_info (class loop *loop_in, vec_info_shared > > *shared) > >: vec_info (vec_info::loop, shared), > > loop (loop_in), > > -bbs (XCNEWVEC (basic_block, loop->num_nodes)), > > num_itersm1 (NULL_TREE), > > num_iters (NULL_TREE), > > num_iters_unchanged (NULL_TREE), > > @@ -1079,8 +1078,9 @@ _loop_vec_info::_loop_vec_info (class loop *loop_in, > > vec_info_shared *shared) > > case of the loop forms we allow, a dfs order of the BBs would the same > > as reversed postorder traversal, so we are safe. */ > > > > - unsigned int nbbs = dfs_enumerate_from (loop->header, 0, bb_in_loop_p, > > - bbs, loop->num_nodes, loop); > > + bbs = XCNEWVEC (basic_block, loop->num_nodes); > > + nbbs = dfs_enumerate_from (loop->header, 0, bb_in_loop_p, bbs, > > +loop->num_nodes, loop); > &g
Re: [PATCH] vect: Unify bbs in loop_vec_info and bb_vec_info
Ok. Then I will add a TODO comment on "bbs" field to describe it. Thanks, Feng From: Richard Biener Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2024 3:14 PM To: Feng Xue OS Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] vect: Unify bbs in loop_vec_info and bb_vec_info On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 6:11 PM Feng Xue OS wrote: > > Because bbs of loop_vec_info need to be allocated via old-fashion > XCNEWVEC, in order to receive result from dfs_enumerate_from(), > so have to make bb_vec_info align with loop_vec_info, use > basic_block * instead of vec. Another reason is that > some loop vect related codes assume that bbs is a pointer, such > as using LOOP_VINFO_BBS() to directly free the bbs area. I think dfs_enumerate_from is fine with receiving bbs.address () (if you first grow the vector, of course). There might be other code that needs changing, sure. > While encapsulating bbs into array_slice might make changed code > more wordy. So still choose basic_block * as its type. Updated the > patch by removing bbs_as_vector. The updated patch looks good to me. Lifetime management of the base class bbs done differently by _loop_vec_info and _bb_vec_info is a bit ugly but it's a well isolated fact. Thus, OK. I do think we can turn the basic_block * back to a vec<> but this can be done as followup if anybody has spare cycles. Thanks, Richard. > Feng. > > gcc/ > * tree-vect-loop.cc (_loop_vec_info::_loop_vec_info): Move > initialization of bbs to explicit construction code. Adjust the > definition of nbbs. > (update_epilogue_loop_vinfo): Update nbbs for epilog vinfo. > * tree-vect-pattern.cc (vect_determine_precisions): Make > loop_vec_info and bb_vec_info share same code. > (vect_pattern_recog): Remove duplicated vect_pattern_recog_1 loop. > * tree-vect-slp.cc (vect_get_and_check_slp_defs): Access to bbs[0] > via base vec_info class. > (_bb_vec_info::_bb_vec_info): Initialize bbs and nbbs using data > fields of input auto_vec<> bbs. > (vect_slp_region): Use access to nbbs to replace original > bbs.length(). > (vect_schedule_slp_node): Access to bbs[0] via base vec_info class. > * tree-vectorizer.cc (vec_info::vec_info): Add initialization of > bbs and nbbs. > (vec_info::insert_seq_on_entry): Access to bbs[0] via base vec_info > class. > * tree-vectorizer.h (vec_info): Add new fields bbs and nbbs. > (LOOP_VINFO_NBBS): New macro. > (BB_VINFO_BBS): Rename BB_VINFO_BB to BB_VINFO_BBS. > (BB_VINFO_NBBS): New macro. > (_loop_vec_info): Remove field bbs. > (_bb_vec_info): Rename field bbs. > --- > gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc | 7 +- > gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc | 142 +++--- > gcc/tree-vect-slp.cc | 23 +++--- > gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc| 7 +- > gcc/tree-vectorizer.h | 19 +++-- > 5 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 128 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc > index 3b94bb13a8b..04a9ac64df7 100644 > --- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc > +++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc > @@ -1028,7 +1028,6 @@ bb_in_loop_p (const_basic_block bb, const void *data) > _loop_vec_info::_loop_vec_info (class loop *loop_in, vec_info_shared *shared) >: vec_info (vec_info::loop, shared), > loop (loop_in), > -bbs (XCNEWVEC (basic_block, loop->num_nodes)), > num_itersm1 (NULL_TREE), > num_iters (NULL_TREE), > num_iters_unchanged (NULL_TREE), > @@ -1079,8 +1078,9 @@ _loop_vec_info::_loop_vec_info (class loop *loop_in, > vec_info_shared *shared) > case of the loop forms we allow, a dfs order of the BBs would the same > as reversed postorder traversal, so we are safe. */ > > - unsigned int nbbs = dfs_enumerate_from (loop->header, 0, bb_in_loop_p, > - bbs, loop->num_nodes, loop); > + bbs = XCNEWVEC (basic_block, loop->num_nodes); > + nbbs = dfs_enumerate_from (loop->header, 0, bb_in_loop_p, bbs, > +loop->num_nodes, loop); >gcc_assert (nbbs == loop->num_nodes); > >for (unsigned int i = 0; i < nbbs; i++) > @@ -11667,6 +11667,7 @@ update_epilogue_loop_vinfo (class loop *epilogue, > tree advance) > >free (LOOP_VINFO_BBS (epilogue_vinfo)); >LOOP_VINFO_BBS (epilogue_vinfo) = epilogue_bbs; > + LOOP_VINFO_NBBS (epilogue_vinfo) = epilogue->num_nodes; > >/* Advance data_reference's with the number of iterations of the previous > loop and its prologue. */ > diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc > index 8929e
Re: [PATCH] vect: Unify bbs in loop_vec_info and bb_vec_info
= 0; i < bbs.length (); ++i)
> + for (unsigned i = 0; i < nbbs; ++i)
> {
>if (i != 0)
> for (gphi_iterator si = gsi_start_phis (bbs[i]); !gsi_end_p (si);
> @@ -7630,7 +7635,7 @@ vect_slp_is_lane_insert (gimple *use_stmt, tree vec,
> unsigned *this_lane)
> static void
> vect_slp_check_for_roots (bb_vec_info bb_vinfo)
> {
> - for (unsigned i = 0; i < bb_vinfo->bbs.length (); ++i)
> + for (unsigned i = 0; i < bb_vinfo->nbbs; ++i)
> for (gimple_stmt_iterator gsi = gsi_start_bb (bb_vinfo->bbs[i]);
> !gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next ())
> {
> @@ -8114,7 +8119,7 @@ vect_slp_region (vec bbs,
> vec datarefs,
> we vectorized all if-converted code. */
> if ((!profitable_subgraphs.is_empty () || force_clear) && orig_loop)
> {
> - gcc_assert (bb_vinfo->bbs.length () == 1);
> + gcc_assert (bb_vinfo->nbbs == 1);
> for (gimple_stmt_iterator gsi = gsi_start_bb (bb_vinfo->bbs[0]);
>!gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next ())
> {
> @@ -9618,14 +9623,14 @@ vect_schedule_slp_node (vec_info *vinfo,
>if (!last_stmt)
> {
> gcc_assert (seen_vector_def);
> - si = gsi_after_labels (as_a (vinfo)->bbs[0]);
> + si = gsi_after_labels (vinfo->bbs[0]);
> }
>else if (is_ctrl_altering_stmt (last_stmt))
> {
> /* We split regions to vectorize at control altering stmts
> with a definition so this must be an external which
> we can insert at the start of the region. */
> - si = gsi_after_labels (as_a (vinfo)->bbs[0]);
> + si = gsi_after_labels (vinfo->bbs[0]);
> }
>else if (is_a (vinfo)
>&& gimple_bb (last_stmt) != gimple_bb (stmt_info->stmt)
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc b/gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc
> index 9001b738bf3..1fb4fb36ed4 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc
> +++ b/gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc
> @@ -463,7 +463,9 @@ shrink_simd_arrays
> vec_info::vec_info (vec_info::vec_kind kind_in, vec_info_shared *shared_)
>: kind (kind_in),
> shared (shared_),
> -stmt_vec_info_ro (false)
> +stmt_vec_info_ro (false),
> +bbs (NULL),
> +nbbs (0)
> {
>stmt_vec_infos.create (50);
> }
> @@ -660,9 +662,8 @@ vec_info::insert_seq_on_entry (stmt_vec_info context,
> gimple_seq seq)
> }
>else
> {
> - bb_vec_info bb_vinfo = as_a (this);
>gimple_stmt_iterator gsi_region_begin
> - = gsi_after_labels (bb_vinfo->bbs[0]);
> + = gsi_after_labels (bbs[0]);
>gsi_insert_seq_before (_region_begin, seq, GSI_SAME_STMT);
> }
> }
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-vectorizer.h b/gcc/tree-vectorizer.h
> index 93bc30ef660..bd4f5952f4b 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-vectorizer.h
> +++ b/gcc/tree-vectorizer.h
> @@ -499,6 +499,12 @@ public:
> made any decisions about which vector modes to use. */
>machine_mode vector_mode;
>
> + /* The basic blocks in the vectorization region. */
> + basic_block *bbs;
> +
> + /* The count of the basic blocks in the vectorization region. */
> + unsigned int nbbs;
> +
> private:
>stmt_vec_info new_stmt_vec_info (gimple *stmt);
>void set_vinfo_for_stmt (gimple *, stmt_vec_info, bool = true);
> @@ -679,9 +685,6 @@ public:
>/* The loop to which this info struct refers to. */
>class loop *loop;
>
> - /* The loop basic blocks. */
> - basic_block *bbs;
> -
> /* Number of latch executions. */
>tree num_itersm1;
>/* Number of iterations. */
> @@ -969,6 +972,7 @@ public:
> #define LOOP_VINFO_EPILOGUE_IV_EXIT(L) (L)->vec_epilogue_loop_iv_exit
> #define LOOP_VINFO_SCALAR_IV_EXIT(L) (L)->scalar_loop_iv_exit
> #define LOOP_VINFO_BBS(L) (L)->bbs
> +#define LOOP_VINFO_NBBS(L) (L)->nbbs
> #define LOOP_VINFO_NITERSM1(L) (L)->num_itersm1
> #define LOOP_VINFO_NITERS(L) (L)->num_iters
> /* Since LOOP_VINFO_NITERS and LOOP_VINFO_NITERSM1 can change after
> @@ -1094,16 +1098,11 @@ public:
>_bb_vec_info (vec bbs, vec_info_shared *);
>~_bb_vec_info ();
>
> - /* The region we are operating on. bbs[0] is the entry, excluding
> - its PHI nodes. In the future we might want to track an explicit
> - entry edge to cover bbs[0] PHI nodes and have a region entry
> - insert location. */
> - vec bbs;
> -
>vec roots;
> } *bb_vec_info;
>
> -#define BB_VINFO_BB(B) (B)->bb
> +#define BB_VINFO_BBS(B) (B)->bbs
>
Re: [PATCH] vect: Unify bbs in loop_vec_info and bb_vec_info
in, vec_info_shared *shared_)
: kind (kind_in),
shared (shared_),
-stmt_vec_info_ro (false)
+stmt_vec_info_ro (false),
+bbs (NULL),
+nbbs (0)
{
stmt_vec_infos.create (50);
}
@@ -660,9 +662,8 @@ vec_info::insert_seq_on_entry (stmt_vec_info context,
gimple_seq seq)
}
else
{
- bb_vec_info bb_vinfo = as_a (this);
gimple_stmt_iterator gsi_region_begin
- = gsi_after_labels (bb_vinfo->bbs[0]);
+ = gsi_after_labels (bbs[0]);
gsi_insert_seq_before (_region_begin, seq, GSI_SAME_STMT);
}
}
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vectorizer.h b/gcc/tree-vectorizer.h
index 93bc30ef660..bd4f5952f4b 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vectorizer.h
+++ b/gcc/tree-vectorizer.h
@@ -499,6 +499,12 @@ public:
made any decisions about which vector modes to use. */
machine_mode vector_mode;
+ /* The basic blocks in the vectorization region. */
+ basic_block *bbs;
+
+ /* The count of the basic blocks in the vectorization region. */
+ unsigned int nbbs;
+
private:
stmt_vec_info new_stmt_vec_info (gimple *stmt);
void set_vinfo_for_stmt (gimple *, stmt_vec_info, bool = true);
@@ -679,9 +685,6 @@ public:
/* The loop to which this info struct refers to. */
class loop *loop;
- /* The loop basic blocks. */
- basic_block *bbs;
-
/* Number of latch executions. */
tree num_itersm1;
/* Number of iterations. */
@@ -969,6 +972,7 @@ public:
#define LOOP_VINFO_EPILOGUE_IV_EXIT(L) (L)->vec_epilogue_loop_iv_exit
#define LOOP_VINFO_SCALAR_IV_EXIT(L) (L)->scalar_loop_iv_exit
#define LOOP_VINFO_BBS(L) (L)->bbs
+#define LOOP_VINFO_NBBS(L) (L)->nbbs
#define LOOP_VINFO_NITERSM1(L) (L)->num_itersm1
#define LOOP_VINFO_NITERS(L) (L)->num_iters
/* Since LOOP_VINFO_NITERS and LOOP_VINFO_NITERSM1 can change after
@@ -1094,16 +1098,11 @@ public:
_bb_vec_info (vec bbs, vec_info_shared *);
~_bb_vec_info ();
- /* The region we are operating on. bbs[0] is the entry, excluding
- its PHI nodes. In the future we might want to track an explicit
- entry edge to cover bbs[0] PHI nodes and have a region entry
- insert location. */
- vec bbs;
-
vec roots;
} *bb_vec_info;
-#define BB_VINFO_BB(B) (B)->bb
+#define BB_VINFO_BBS(B) (B)->bbs
+#define BB_VINFO_NBBS(B) (B)->nbbs
#define BB_VINFO_GROUPED_STORES(B) (B)->grouped_stores
#define BB_VINFO_SLP_INSTANCES(B)(B)->slp_instances
#define BB_VINFO_DATAREFS(B) (B)->shared->datarefs
--
2.17.1
From: Richard Biener
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2024 5:43 PM
To: Feng Xue OS
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vect: Unify bbs in loop_vec_info and bb_vec_info
On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 4:54 PM Feng Xue OS wrote:
>
> Both derived classes ( loop_vec_info/bb_vec_info) have their own "bbs"
> field, which have exactly same purpose of recording all basic blocks
> inside the corresponding vect region, while the fields are composed by
> different data type, one is normal array, the other is auto_vec. This
> difference causes some duplicated code even handling the same stuff,
> almost in tree-vect-patterns. One refinement is lifting this field into the
> base class "vec_info", and reset its value to the continuous memory area
> pointed by two old "bbs" in each constructor of derived classes.
Nice. But. bbs_as_vector - why is that necessary? Why is vinfo->bbs
not a vec? Having bbs and nbbs feels like a step back.
Note the code duplications can probably be removed by "indirecting"
through an array_slice.
I'm a bit torn to approve this as-is given the above. Can you explain what
made you not choose vec<> for bbs? I bet you tried.
Richard.
> Regression test on x86-64 and aarch64.
>
> Feng
> --
> gcc/
> * tree-vect-loop.cc (_loop_vec_info::_loop_vec_info): Move
> initialization of bbs to explicit construction code. Adjust the
> definition of nbbs.
> * tree-vect-pattern.cc (vect_determine_precisions): Make
> loop_vec_info and bb_vec_info share same code.
> (vect_pattern_recog): Remove duplicated vect_pattern_recog_1 loop.
> * tree-vect-slp.cc (vect_get_and_check_slp_defs): Access to bbs[0]
> via base vec_info class.
> (_bb_vec_info::_bb_vec_info): Initialize bbs and nbbs using data
> fields of input auto_vec<> bbs.
> (_bb_vec_info::_bb_vec_info): Add assertions on bbs and nbbs to ensure
> they are not changed externally.
> (vect_slp_region): Use access to nbbs to replace original
> bbs.length().
> (vect_schedule_slp_node): Access to bbs[0] via base vec_info class.
> * tree-vectorizer.cc (vec_info::vec_info): Add initialization of
>
Re: [PATCH] vect: Unify bbs in loop_vec_info and bb_vec_info
On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 4:54 PM Feng Xue OS wrote:
>
> Both derived classes ( loop_vec_info/bb_vec_info) have their own "bbs"
> field, which have exactly same purpose of recording all basic blocks
> inside the corresponding vect region, while the fields are composed by
> different data type, one is normal array, the other is auto_vec. This
> difference causes some duplicated code even handling the same stuff,
> almost in tree-vect-patterns. One refinement is lifting this field into the
> base class "vec_info", and reset its value to the continuous memory area
> pointed by two old "bbs" in each constructor of derived classes.
Nice. But. bbs_as_vector - why is that necessary? Why is vinfo->bbs
not a vec? Having bbs and nbbs feels like a step back.
Note the code duplications can probably be removed by "indirecting"
through an array_slice.
I'm a bit torn to approve this as-is given the above. Can you explain what
made you not choose vec<> for bbs? I bet you tried.
Richard.
> Regression test on x86-64 and aarch64.
>
> Feng
> --
> gcc/
> * tree-vect-loop.cc (_loop_vec_info::_loop_vec_info): Move
> initialization of bbs to explicit construction code. Adjust the
> definition of nbbs.
> * tree-vect-pattern.cc (vect_determine_precisions): Make
> loop_vec_info and bb_vec_info share same code.
> (vect_pattern_recog): Remove duplicated vect_pattern_recog_1 loop.
> * tree-vect-slp.cc (vect_get_and_check_slp_defs): Access to bbs[0]
> via base vec_info class.
> (_bb_vec_info::_bb_vec_info): Initialize bbs and nbbs using data
> fields of input auto_vec<> bbs.
> (_bb_vec_info::_bb_vec_info): Add assertions on bbs and nbbs to ensure
> they are not changed externally.
> (vect_slp_region): Use access to nbbs to replace original
> bbs.length().
> (vect_schedule_slp_node): Access to bbs[0] via base vec_info class.
> * tree-vectorizer.cc (vec_info::vec_info): Add initialization of
> bbs and nbbs.
> (vec_info::insert_seq_on_entry): Access to bbs[0] via base vec_info
> class.
> * tree-vectorizer.h (vec_info): Add new fields bbs and nbbs.
> (_loop_vec_info): Remove field bbs.
> (_bb_vec_info): Rename old bbs field to bbs_as_vector, and make it
> be private.
> ---
> gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc | 6 +-
> gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc | 142 +++---
> gcc/tree-vect-slp.cc | 24 ---
> gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc| 7 +-
> gcc/tree-vectorizer.h | 19 ++---
> 5 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 126 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> index 83c0544b6aa..aef17420a5f 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> +++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> @@ -1028,7 +1028,6 @@ bb_in_loop_p (const_basic_block bb, const void *data)
> _loop_vec_info::_loop_vec_info (class loop *loop_in, vec_info_shared *shared)
>: vec_info (vec_info::loop, shared),
> loop (loop_in),
> -bbs (XCNEWVEC (basic_block, loop->num_nodes)),
> num_itersm1 (NULL_TREE),
> num_iters (NULL_TREE),
> num_iters_unchanged (NULL_TREE),
> @@ -1079,8 +1078,9 @@ _loop_vec_info::_loop_vec_info (class loop *loop_in,
> vec_info_shared *shared)
> case of the loop forms we allow, a dfs order of the BBs would the same
> as reversed postorder traversal, so we are safe. */
>
> - unsigned int nbbs = dfs_enumerate_from (loop->header, 0, bb_in_loop_p,
> - bbs, loop->num_nodes, loop);
> + bbs = XCNEWVEC (basic_block, loop->num_nodes);
> + nbbs = dfs_enumerate_from (loop->header, 0, bb_in_loop_p, bbs,
> +loop->num_nodes, loop);
>gcc_assert (nbbs == loop->num_nodes);
>
>for (unsigned int i = 0; i < nbbs; i++)
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc
> index a313dc64643..848a3195a93 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc
> +++ b/gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc
> @@ -6925,81 +6925,41 @@ vect_determine_stmt_precisions (vec_info *vinfo,
> stmt_vec_info stmt_info)
> void
> vect_determine_precisions (vec_info *vinfo)
> {
> + basic_block *bbs = vinfo->bbs;
> + unsigned int nbbs = vinfo->nbbs;
> +
>DUMP_VECT_SCOPE ("vect_determine_precisions");
>
> - if (loop_vec_info loop_vinfo = dyn_cast (vinfo))
> + for (unsigned int i = 0; i < nbbs; i++)
> {
> - class loop *loop = LOOP_VINFO_LOOP (loop_vinfo);
> - basic_block *bbs = LOOP_VINFO_BBS (loop_vinfo);
> - unsigned int nbbs = loop->num_nodes;
> -
> - for (unsigned int i = 0; i < nbbs; i++)
> + basic_block bb = bbs[i];
> + for (auto gsi = gsi_start_phis (bb); !gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next ())
> {
> - basic_block bb = bbs[i];
> - for (auto gsi = gsi_start_phis (bb);
> - !gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next ())
> - {
> - stmt_vec_info stmt_info = vinfo->lookup_stmt
[PATCH] vect: Unify bbs in loop_vec_info and bb_vec_info
Both derived classes ( loop_vec_info/bb_vec_info) have their own "bbs"
field, which have exactly same purpose of recording all basic blocks
inside the corresponding vect region, while the fields are composed by
different data type, one is normal array, the other is auto_vec. This
difference causes some duplicated code even handling the same stuff,
almost in tree-vect-patterns. One refinement is lifting this field into the
base class "vec_info", and reset its value to the continuous memory area
pointed by two old "bbs" in each constructor of derived classes.
Regression test on x86-64 and aarch64.
Feng
--
gcc/
* tree-vect-loop.cc (_loop_vec_info::_loop_vec_info): Move
initialization of bbs to explicit construction code. Adjust the
definition of nbbs.
* tree-vect-pattern.cc (vect_determine_precisions): Make
loop_vec_info and bb_vec_info share same code.
(vect_pattern_recog): Remove duplicated vect_pattern_recog_1 loop.
* tree-vect-slp.cc (vect_get_and_check_slp_defs): Access to bbs[0]
via base vec_info class.
(_bb_vec_info::_bb_vec_info): Initialize bbs and nbbs using data
fields of input auto_vec<> bbs.
(_bb_vec_info::_bb_vec_info): Add assertions on bbs and nbbs to ensure
they are not changed externally.
(vect_slp_region): Use access to nbbs to replace original
bbs.length().
(vect_schedule_slp_node): Access to bbs[0] via base vec_info class.
* tree-vectorizer.cc (vec_info::vec_info): Add initialization of
bbs and nbbs.
(vec_info::insert_seq_on_entry): Access to bbs[0] via base vec_info
class.
* tree-vectorizer.h (vec_info): Add new fields bbs and nbbs.
(_loop_vec_info): Remove field bbs.
(_bb_vec_info): Rename old bbs field to bbs_as_vector, and make it
be private.
---
gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc | 6 +-
gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc | 142 +++---
gcc/tree-vect-slp.cc | 24 ---
gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc| 7 +-
gcc/tree-vectorizer.h | 19 ++---
5 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 126 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
index 83c0544b6aa..aef17420a5f 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
+++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
@@ -1028,7 +1028,6 @@ bb_in_loop_p (const_basic_block bb, const void *data)
_loop_vec_info::_loop_vec_info (class loop *loop_in, vec_info_shared *shared)
: vec_info (vec_info::loop, shared),
loop (loop_in),
-bbs (XCNEWVEC (basic_block, loop->num_nodes)),
num_itersm1 (NULL_TREE),
num_iters (NULL_TREE),
num_iters_unchanged (NULL_TREE),
@@ -1079,8 +1078,9 @@ _loop_vec_info::_loop_vec_info (class loop *loop_in,
vec_info_shared *shared)
case of the loop forms we allow, a dfs order of the BBs would the same
as reversed postorder traversal, so we are safe. */
- unsigned int nbbs = dfs_enumerate_from (loop->header, 0, bb_in_loop_p,
- bbs, loop->num_nodes, loop);
+ bbs = XCNEWVEC (basic_block, loop->num_nodes);
+ nbbs = dfs_enumerate_from (loop->header, 0, bb_in_loop_p, bbs,
+loop->num_nodes, loop);
gcc_assert (nbbs == loop->num_nodes);
for (unsigned int i = 0; i < nbbs; i++)
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc
index a313dc64643..848a3195a93 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc
+++ b/gcc/tree-vect-patterns.cc
@@ -6925,81 +6925,41 @@ vect_determine_stmt_precisions (vec_info *vinfo,
stmt_vec_info stmt_info)
void
vect_determine_precisions (vec_info *vinfo)
{
+ basic_block *bbs = vinfo->bbs;
+ unsigned int nbbs = vinfo->nbbs;
+
DUMP_VECT_SCOPE ("vect_determine_precisions");
- if (loop_vec_info loop_vinfo = dyn_cast (vinfo))
+ for (unsigned int i = 0; i < nbbs; i++)
{
- class loop *loop = LOOP_VINFO_LOOP (loop_vinfo);
- basic_block *bbs = LOOP_VINFO_BBS (loop_vinfo);
- unsigned int nbbs = loop->num_nodes;
-
- for (unsigned int i = 0; i < nbbs; i++)
+ basic_block bb = bbs[i];
+ for (auto gsi = gsi_start_phis (bb); !gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next ())
{
- basic_block bb = bbs[i];
- for (auto gsi = gsi_start_phis (bb);
- !gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next ())
- {
- stmt_vec_info stmt_info = vinfo->lookup_stmt (gsi.phi ());
- if (stmt_info)
- vect_determine_mask_precision (vinfo, stmt_info);
- }
- for (auto si = gsi_start_bb (bb); !gsi_end_p (si); gsi_next ())
- if (!is_gimple_debug (gsi_stmt (si)))
- vect_determine_mask_precision
- (vinfo, vinfo->lookup_stmt (gsi_stmt (si)));
+ stmt_vec_info stmt_info = vinfo->lookup_stmt (gsi.phi ());
+ if (stmt_info && STMT_VINFO_VECTORIZABLE (stmt_info))
+ vect_determine_mask_precision (vinfo, stmt_info);
}
- for (unsigned int i = 0; i < nbbs; i++)
+
