-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.3k
[Metadata] Preserve MD_prof when merging instructions when one is missing. #132433
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
[Metadata] Preserve MD_prof when merging instructions when one is missing. #132433
Conversation
This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking. |
@llvm/pr-subscribers-llvm-transforms Author: Snehasish Kumar (snehasish) ChangesPreserve branch weight metadata when merging instructions if one of the Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132433.diff 3 Files Affected:
diff --git a/llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/Local.cpp b/llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/Local.cpp
index d18adac5fa914..069ebae117b48 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/Local.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/Local.cpp
@@ -3355,9 +3355,11 @@ static void combineMetadata(Instruction *K, const Instruction *J,
case LLVMContext::MD_invariant_group:
// Preserve !invariant.group in K.
break;
- // Keep empty cases for mmra, memprof, and callsite to prevent them from
+ // Keep empty cases for prof, mmra, memprof, and callsite to prevent them from
// being removed as unknown metadata. The actual merging is handled
// separately below.
+ case LLVMContext::MD_prof:
+ [[fallthrough]];
case LLVMContext::MD_mmra:
case LLVMContext::MD_memprof:
case LLVMContext::MD_callsite:
@@ -3386,10 +3388,6 @@ static void combineMetadata(Instruction *K, const Instruction *J,
if (!AAOnly)
K->setMetadata(Kind, JMD);
break;
- case LLVMContext::MD_prof:
- if (!AAOnly && DoesKMove)
- K->setMetadata(Kind, MDNode::getMergedProfMetadata(KMD, JMD, K, J));
- break;
case LLVMContext::MD_noalias_addrspace:
if (DoesKMove)
K->setMetadata(Kind,
@@ -3436,6 +3434,16 @@ static void combineMetadata(Instruction *K, const Instruction *J,
K->setMetadata(LLVMContext::MD_callsite,
MDNode::getMergedCallsiteMetadata(KCallSite, JCallSite));
}
+
+ // Merge prof metadata.
+ // Handle separately to support cases where only one instruction has the
+ // metadata.
+ auto JProf = J->getMetadata(LLVMContext::MD_prof);
+ auto KProf = K->getMetadata(LLVMContext::MD_prof);
+ if (!AAOnly && (JProf || KProf)) {
+ K->setMetadata(LLVMContext::MD_prof,
+ MDNode::getMergedProfMetadata(KProf, JProf, K, J));
+ }
}
void llvm::combineMetadataForCSE(Instruction *K, const Instruction *J,
diff --git a/llvm/test/Transforms/SimplifyCFG/merge-direct-call-branch-weights-preserve-hoist.ll b/llvm/test/Transforms/SimplifyCFG/merge-direct-call-branch-weights-preserve-hoist.ll
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000..2a0fc3ffc2d4d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/llvm/test/Transforms/SimplifyCFG/merge-direct-call-branch-weights-preserve-hoist.ll
@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
+; NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_test_checks.py UTC_ARGS: --check-globals --version 2
+; RUN: opt < %s -passes='simplifycfg<no-sink-common-insts;hoist-common-insts>' -simplifycfg-require-and-preserve-domtree=1 -S | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=HOIST
+
+; Test case based on C++ code with manualy annotated !prof metadata.
+; This is to test that when calls to 'func1' from 'if.then' block
+; and 'if.else' block are hoisted, the branch_weights are merged and
+; attached to merged call rather than dropped.
+;
+; int func1(int a, int b) ;
+; int func2(int a, int b) ;
+
+; int func(int a, int b, bool c) {
+; int sum= 0;
+; if(c) {
+; sum += func1(a, b);
+; } else {
+; sum += func1(a, b);
+; sum -= func2(a, b);
+; }
+; return sum;
+; }
+define i32 @_Z4funciib(i32 %a, i32 %b, i1 %c) {
+; HOIST-LABEL: define i32 @_Z4funciib
+; HOIST-SAME: (i32 [[A:%.*]], i32 [[B:%.*]], i1 [[C:%.*]]) {
+; HOIST-NEXT: entry:
+; HOIST-NEXT: [[CALL:%.*]] = tail call i32 @_Z5func1ii(i32 [[A]], i32 [[B]]), !prof [[PROF0:![0-9]+]]
+; HOIST-NEXT: br i1 [[C]], label [[IF_END:%.*]], label [[IF_ELSE:%.*]]
+; HOIST: if.else:
+; HOIST-NEXT: [[CALL3:%.*]] = tail call i32 @_Z5func2ii(i32 [[A]], i32 [[B]])
+; HOIST-NEXT: [[SUB:%.*]] = sub i32 [[CALL]], [[CALL3]]
+; HOIST-NEXT: br label [[IF_END]]
+; HOIST: if.end:
+; HOIST-NEXT: [[SUM_0:%.*]] = phi i32 [ [[SUB]], [[IF_ELSE]] ], [ [[CALL]], [[ENTRY:%.*]] ]
+; HOIST-NEXT: ret i32 [[SUM_0]]
+;
+entry:
+ br i1 %c, label %if.then, label %if.else
+
+if.then: ; preds = %entry
+ %call = tail call i32 @_Z5func1ii(i32 %a, i32 %b), !prof !0
+ br label %if.end
+
+if.else: ; preds = %entry
+ %call1 = tail call i32 @_Z5func1ii(i32 %a, i32 %b)
+ %call3 = tail call i32 @_Z5func2ii(i32 %a, i32 %b)
+ %sub = sub i32 %call1, %call3
+ br label %if.end
+
+if.end: ; preds = %if.else, %if.then
+ %sum.0 = phi i32 [ %call, %if.then ], [ %sub, %if.else ]
+ ret i32 %sum.0
+}
+
+declare i32 @_Z5func1ii(i32, i32)
+
+declare i32 @_Z5func2ii(i32, i32)
+
+!0 = !{!"branch_weights", i32 10}
+!1 = !{!"branch_weights", i32 90}
+;.
+; HOIST: [[PROF0]] = !{!"branch_weights", i32 10}
+;.
diff --git a/llvm/test/Transforms/SimplifyCFG/merge-direct-call-branch-weights-preserve-sink.ll b/llvm/test/Transforms/SimplifyCFG/merge-direct-call-branch-weights-preserve-sink.ll
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000..6ae798abce827
--- /dev/null
+++ b/llvm/test/Transforms/SimplifyCFG/merge-direct-call-branch-weights-preserve-sink.ll
@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
+; NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_test_checks.py UTC_ARGS: --check-globals --version 2
+; RUN: opt < %s -passes='simplifycfg<sink-common-insts;no-hoist-common-insts>' -simplifycfg-require-and-preserve-domtree=1 -S | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=SINK
+
+
+; Test case based on the following C++ code with manualy annotated !prof metadata.
+; This is to test that when calls to 'func1' from 'if.then' and 'if.else' are
+; sinked, the branch weights are merged and attached to sinked call.
+;
+; int func1(int a, int b) ;
+; int func2(int a, int b) ;
+
+; int func(int a, int b, bool c) {
+; int sum = 0;
+; if (c) {
+; sum += func1(a,b);
+; } else {
+; b -= func2(a,b);
+; sum += func1(a,b);
+; }
+; return sum;
+; }
+
+define i32 @_Z4funciib(i32 %a, i32 %b, i1 %c) {
+; SINK-LABEL: define i32 @_Z4funciib
+; SINK-SAME: (i32 [[A:%.*]], i32 [[B:%.*]], i1 [[C:%.*]]) {
+; SINK-NEXT: entry:
+; SINK-NEXT: br i1 [[C]], label [[IF_END:%.*]], label [[IF_ELSE:%.*]]
+; SINK: if.else:
+; SINK-NEXT: [[CALL1:%.*]] = tail call i32 @_Z5func2ii(i32 [[A]], i32 [[B]])
+; SINK-NEXT: [[SUB:%.*]] = sub i32 [[B]], [[CALL1]]
+; SINK-NEXT: br label [[IF_END]]
+; SINK: if.end:
+; SINK-NEXT: [[SUB_SINK:%.*]] = phi i32 [ [[SUB]], [[IF_ELSE]] ], [ [[B]], [[ENTRY:%.*]] ]
+; SINK-NEXT: [[CALL2:%.*]] = tail call i32 @_Z5func1ii(i32 [[A]], i32 [[SUB_SINK]]), !prof [[PROF0:![0-9]+]]
+; SINK-NEXT: ret i32 [[CALL2]]
+;
+entry:
+ br i1 %c, label %if.then, label %if.else
+
+if.then: ; preds = %entry
+ %call = tail call i32 @_Z5func1ii(i32 %a, i32 %b)
+ br label %if.end
+
+if.else: ; preds = %entry
+ %call1 = tail call i32 @_Z5func2ii(i32 %a, i32 %b)
+ %sub = sub i32 %b, %call1
+ %call2 = tail call i32 @_Z5func1ii(i32 %a, i32 %sub), !prof !0
+ br label %if.end
+
+if.end: ; preds = %if.else, %if.then
+ %sum.0 = phi i32 [ %call, %if.then ], [ %call2, %if.else ]
+ ret i32 %sum.0
+}
+
+declare i32 @_Z5func1ii(i32, i32)
+
+declare i32 @_Z5func2ii(i32, i32)
+
+!0 = !{!"branch_weights", i32 10}
+;.
+; SINK: [[PROF0]] = !{!"branch_weights", i32 10}
+;.
|
✅ With the latest revision this PR passed the C/C++ code formatter. |
8677f64
to
5b2f87d
Compare
llvm/test/Transforms/SimplifyCFG/merge-direct-call-branch-weights-preserve-hoist.ll
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
// metadata. | ||
auto JProf = J->getMetadata(LLVMContext::MD_prof); | ||
auto KProf = K->getMetadata(LLVMContext::MD_prof); | ||
if (!AAOnly && (JProf || KProf)) { |
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 old handling was guarded on DoesKMove - what is the implication of removing that?
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.
Removing the condition was intentional. In the case that DoesKMove
is true, the merging of md_prof can be skipped if J
does not have prof metadata (a minor optimization). I felt that it was simpler to just perform the merge regardless. Let me know if you feel otherwise.
24e5573
to
a55c4a2
Compare
5b2f87d
to
42a9972
Compare
42a9972
to
4680029
Compare
a55c4a2
to
b2601e0
Compare
b2601e0
to
7772c93
Compare
4680029
to
980c9fa
Compare
…e is missing." (#134200) Reverts #132433 I suspect this change caused a failure in the bolt build bot. https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/113/builds/6621 ``` !9185 = !{!"branch_weights", i32 3912, i32 802} Wrong number of operands !9185 = !{!"branch_weights", i32 3912, i32 802} fatal error: error in backend: Broken module found, compilation aborted! ```
…ons when one is missing." (#134200) Reverts llvm/llvm-project#132433 I suspect this change caused a failure in the bolt build bot. https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/113/builds/6621 ``` !9185 = !{!"branch_weights", i32 3912, i32 802} Wrong number of operands !9185 = !{!"branch_weights", i32 3912, i32 802} fatal error: error in backend: Broken module found, compilation aborted! ```
Preserve branch weight metadata when merging instructions if one of the
instructions is missing metadata. This is similar in behaviour to what
we do today for other types of metadata such as mmra, memprof and
callsite metadata.