[SimplifyCFG] Enable sinking of memory operands with separated geps #172342
+162
−2
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Future change will show how we can sink a memory operation, which is already separated from a getelementptr in a differnt BB.
OutOfCache
force-pushed
the
simplifycfg-gep-sinking-diff-parents
branch
from
70ac602 to
d69ed8a
Compare
|
✅ With the latest revision this PR passed the C/C++ code formatter. |
Enable sinking of a memory operation, if it is separated from the getelementptr in a different BB.
OutOfCache
force-pushed
the
simplifycfg-gep-sinking-diff-parents
branch
from
d69ed8a to
d0e0996
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Not sure if this is the right approach. Open to other suggestions.
Sinking memory instructions is blocked in some cases by not wanting to separate a memory operations from the corresponding getelementptr since #96838.
We encountered a case where the getelementptr is in the entry block of a switch statement, while the loads are in the case blocks themselves. All of the case blocks are very similar and in theory sinkable, but since the geps are not part of the "sinkable instructions", we can't sink the majority of instructions into the merge block (see test cases).
This PR relaxes the criteria for the sinking, so it allows sinking of memory operands that are already separated from the geps.
However, I'll gladly hear any other suggestions for this situation!