FreeChainXenon/gcc
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Fix PR81362: Vector peeling

Browse source 
npeel was erroneously overwritten by vect_peeling_hash_get_lowest_cost
although the corresponding dataref is not used afterwards.  It should
be safe to get rid of the npeel parameter since we use the returned
peeling_info's npeel anyway.  Also removed the body_cost_vec parameter
which is not used elsewhere.

gcc/ChangeLog:

2017-07-18  Robin Dapp  <rdapp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

	* tree-vect-data-refs.c (vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment): Remove
	body_cost_vec from _vect_peel_extended_info.
	(vect_peeling_hash_get_lowest_cost): Do not set body_cost_vec.
	(vect_peeling_hash_choose_best_peeling): Remove body_cost_vec and
	npeel.

From-SVN: r250300
This commit is contained in:
Robin Dapp 2017-07-18 09:23:35 +00:00 • committed by Andreas Krebbel
parent 4169392a24
commit ec15a15207
2 changed files with 16 additions and 22 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

8
gcc/ChangeLog
View file

@ -1,3 +1,11 @@
2017-07-18 Robin Dapp <rdapp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
* tree-vect-data-refs.c (vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment): Remove
body_cost_vec from _vect_peel_extended_info.
(vect_peeling_hash_get_lowest_cost): Do not set body_cost_vec.
(vect_peeling_hash_choose_best_peeling): Remove body_cost_vec and
npeel.
2017-07-18 Bin Cheng <bin.cheng@arm.com>
* config/arm/arm.c (emit_unlikely_jump): Remove unused var.

30
gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c
View file

@ -1078,7 +1078,6 @@ typedef struct _vect_peel_extended_info
struct _vect_peel_info peel_info;
unsigned int inside_cost;
unsigned int outside_cost;
stmt_vector_for_cost body_cost_vec;
} *vect_peel_extended_info;
@ -1226,6 +1225,8 @@ vect_peeling_hash_get_lowest_cost (_vect_peel_info **slot,
vect_get_peeling_costs_all_drs (elem->dr, &inside_cost, &outside_cost,
&body_cost_vec, elem->npeel, false);
body_cost_vec.release ();
outside_cost += vect_get_known_peeling_cost
(loop_vinfo, elem->npeel, &dummy,
&LOOP_VINFO_SCALAR_ITERATION_COST (loop_vinfo),
@ -1244,14 +1245,10 @@ vect_peeling_hash_get_lowest_cost (_vect_peel_info **slot,
{
min->inside_cost = inside_cost;
min->outside_cost = outside_cost;
min->body_cost_vec.release ();
min->body_cost_vec = body_cost_vec;
min->peel_info.dr = elem->dr;
min->peel_info.npeel = elem->npeel;
min->peel_info.count = elem->count;
}
else
body_cost_vec.release ();
return 1;
}
@ -1263,14 +1260,11 @@ vect_peeling_hash_get_lowest_cost (_vect_peel_info **slot,
static struct _vect_peel_extended_info
vect_peeling_hash_choose_best_peeling (hash_table<peel_info_hasher> *peeling_htab,
loop_vec_info loop_vinfo,
unsigned int *npeel,
stmt_vector_for_cost *body_cost_vec)
loop_vec_info loop_vinfo)
{
struct _vect_peel_extended_info res;
res.peel_info.dr = NULL;
res.body_cost_vec = stmt_vector_for_cost ();
if (!unlimited_cost_model (LOOP_VINFO_LOOP (loop_vinfo)))
{
@ -1288,8 +1282,6 @@ vect_peeling_hash_choose_best_peeling (hash_table<peel_info_hasher> *peeling_hta
res.outside_cost = 0;
}
*npeel = res.peel_info.npeel;
*body_cost_vec = res.body_cost_vec;
return res;
}
@ -1454,7 +1446,6 @@ vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment (loop_vec_info loop_vinfo)
unsigned possible_npeel_number = 1;
tree vectype;
unsigned int nelements, mis, same_align_drs_max = 0;
stmt_vector_for_cost body_cost_vec = stmt_vector_for_cost ();
hash_table<peel_info_hasher> peeling_htab (1);
if (dump_enabled_p ())
@ -1729,7 +1720,7 @@ vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment (loop_vec_info loop_vinfo)
unless aligned. So we try to choose the best possible peeling from
the hash table. */
peel_for_known_alignment = vect_peeling_hash_choose_best_peeling
(&peeling_htab, loop_vinfo, &npeel, &body_cost_vec);
(&peeling_htab, loop_vinfo);
}
/* Compare costs of peeling for known and unknown alignment. */
@ -1755,7 +1746,8 @@ vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment (loop_vec_info loop_vinfo)
{
/* Calculate the penalty for no peeling, i.e. leaving everything
unaligned.
TODO: Adapt vect_get_peeling_costs_all_drs and use here. */
TODO: Adapt vect_get_peeling_costs_all_drs and use here.
TODO: Use nopeel_outside_cost or get rid of it? */
unsigned nopeel_inside_cost = 0;
unsigned nopeel_outside_cost = 0;
@ -1837,10 +1829,7 @@ vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment (loop_vec_info loop_vinfo)
if (!stat)
do_peeling = false;
else
{
body_cost_vec.release ();
return stat;
}
return stat;
}
/* Cost model #1 - honor --param vect-max-peeling-for-alignment. */
@ -1916,19 +1905,16 @@ vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment (loop_vec_info loop_vinfo)
dump_printf_loc (MSG_NOTE, vect_location,
"Peeling for alignment will be applied.\n");
}
/* The inside-loop cost will be accounted for in vectorizable_load
and vectorizable_store correctly with adjusted alignments.
Drop the body_cst_vec on the floor here. */
body_cost_vec.release ();
stat = vect_verify_datarefs_alignment (loop_vinfo);
gcc_assert (stat);
return stat;
}
}
body_cost_vec.release ();
/* (2) Versioning to force alignment. */
/* Try versioning if: