-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.3k
[SLP][NFC] Add a new test for store chains that mix different sizes of values #101979
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
Conversation
@llvm/pr-subscribers-llvm-transforms Author: tcwzxx (tcwzxx) ChangesAdd a new test case for PR #101810 Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101979.diff 1 Files Affected:
diff --git a/llvm/test/Transforms/SLPVectorizer/X86/stores_mix_sizes.ll b/llvm/test/Transforms/SLPVectorizer/X86/stores_mix_sizes.ll
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000..c571372e40d16
--- /dev/null
+++ b/llvm/test/Transforms/SLPVectorizer/X86/stores_mix_sizes.ll
@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
+; NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_test_checks.py UTC_ARGS: --version 5
+; RUN: opt -S --passes=slp-vectorizer -mtriple=x86_64-unknown-linux < %s | FileCheck %s
+
+define void @test(ptr %p) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: define void @test(
+; CHECK-SAME: ptr [[P:%.*]]) {
+; CHECK-NEXT: [[ENTRY:.*:]]
+; CHECK-NEXT: [[IDX1:%.*]] = getelementptr i8, ptr [[P]], i64 1
+; CHECK-NEXT: [[IDX_64_9:%.*]] = getelementptr i64, ptr [[P]], i64 9
+; CHECK-NEXT: store i64 1, ptr [[IDX_64_9]], align 8
+; CHECK-NEXT: store <8 x i8> zeroinitializer, ptr [[IDX1]], align 4
+; CHECK-NEXT: ret void
+;
+entry:
+ %idx1 = getelementptr i8, ptr %p, i64 1
+ store i8 0, ptr %idx1, align 4
+ %idx.64.9 = getelementptr i64, ptr %p, i64 9
+ store i64 1, ptr %idx.64.9, align 8
+ %idx2 = getelementptr i8, ptr %p, i64 2
+ store i8 0, ptr %idx2, align 4
+ %idx3 = getelementptr i8, ptr %p, i64 3
+ store i8 0, ptr %idx3, align 4
+ %idx4 = getelementptr i8, ptr %p, i64 4
+ store i8 0, ptr %idx4, align 4
+ %idx5 = getelementptr i8, ptr %p, i64 5
+ store i8 0, ptr %idx5, align 4
+ %idx6 = getelementptr i8, ptr %p, i64 6
+ store i8 0, ptr %idx6, align 4
+ %idx7 = getelementptr i8, ptr %p, i64 7
+ store i8 0, ptr %idx7, align 4
+ %idx8 = getelementptr i8, ptr %p, i64 8
+ store i8 0, ptr %idx8, align 4
+ ret void
+}
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[IDX1:%.*]] = getelementptr i8, ptr [[P]], i64 1 | ||
; CHECK-NEXT: [[IDX_64_9:%.*]] = getelementptr i64, ptr [[P]], i64 9 | ||
; CHECK-NEXT: store i64 1, ptr [[IDX_64_9]], align 8 | ||
; CHECK-NEXT: store <8 x i8> zeroinitializer, ptr [[IDX1]], align 4 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The check must be formed with the current version of the compiler. If it is vectorized already, your patch does nothing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This check is generated after the patch, so is the correct process to add a current version of the compiler test case (NFC) and then update this test case in the patch?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks
70e73af
to
38bfcff
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LG
Could you help me merge it? |
No description provided.