[LV] Move code from widenSelectInstruction to VPWidenSelectRecipe. (NFC)
The code in widenSelectInstruction has already been transitioned
to only rely on information provided by VPWidenSelectRecipe directly.
Moving the code directly to VPWidenSelectRecipe::execute completes
the transition for the recipe.
It provides the following advantages:
1. Less indirection, easier to see what's going on.
2. Removes accesses to fields of ILV.
2) in particular ensures that no dependencies on
fields in ILV for vector code generation are re-introduced.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D114323
diff --git a/llvm/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/LoopVectorize.cpp b/llvm/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/LoopVectorize.cpp
index 50b68ce..df6aac3 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/LoopVectorize.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/LoopVectorize.cpp
@@ -477,10 +477,6 @@
void widenCallInstruction(CallInst &I, VPValue *Def, VPUser &ArgOperands,
VPTransformState &State);
- /// Widen a single select instruction within the innermost loop.
- void widenSelectInstruction(SelectInst &I, VPValue *VPDef, VPUser &Operands,
- bool InvariantCond, VPTransformState &State);
-
/// Fix the vectorized code, taking care of header phi's, live-outs, and more.
void fixVectorizedLoop(VPTransformState &State);
@@ -4935,31 +4931,6 @@
}
}
-void InnerLoopVectorizer::widenSelectInstruction(SelectInst &I, VPValue *VPDef,
- VPUser &Operands,
- bool InvariantCond,
- VPTransformState &State) {
- setDebugLocFromInst(&I);
-
- // The condition can be loop invariant but still defined inside the
- // loop. This means that we can't just use the original 'cond' value.
- // We have to take the 'vectorized' value and pick the first lane.
- // Instcombine will make this a no-op.
- auto *InvarCond = InvariantCond
- ? State.get(Operands.getOperand(0), VPIteration(0, 0))
- : nullptr;
-
- for (unsigned Part = 0; Part < UF; ++Part) {
- Value *Cond =
- InvarCond ? InvarCond : State.get(Operands.getOperand(0), Part);
- Value *Op0 = State.get(Operands.getOperand(1), Part);
- Value *Op1 = State.get(Operands.getOperand(2), Part);
- Value *Sel = Builder.CreateSelect(Cond, Op0, Op1);
- State.set(VPDef, Sel, Part);
- addMetadata(Sel, &I);
- }
-}
-
void LoopVectorizationCostModel::collectLoopScalars(ElementCount VF) {
// We should not collect Scalars more than once per VF. Right now, this
// function is called from collectUniformsAndScalars(), which already does
@@ -9660,8 +9631,24 @@
}
void VPWidenSelectRecipe::execute(VPTransformState &State) {
- State.ILV->widenSelectInstruction(*cast<SelectInst>(getUnderlyingInstr()),
- this, *this, InvariantCond, State);
+ auto &I = *cast<SelectInst>(getUnderlyingInstr());
+ State.ILV->setDebugLocFromInst(&I);
+
+ // The condition can be loop invariant but still defined inside the
+ // loop. This means that we can't just use the original 'cond' value.
+ // We have to take the 'vectorized' value and pick the first lane.
+ // Instcombine will make this a no-op.
+ auto *InvarCond =
+ InvariantCond ? State.get(getOperand(0), VPIteration(0, 0)) : nullptr;
+
+ for (unsigned Part = 0; Part < State.UF; ++Part) {
+ Value *Cond = InvarCond ? InvarCond : State.get(getOperand(0), Part);
+ Value *Op0 = State.get(getOperand(1), Part);
+ Value *Op1 = State.get(getOperand(2), Part);
+ Value *Sel = State.Builder.CreateSelect(Cond, Op0, Op1);
+ State.set(this, Sel, Part);
+ State.ILV->addMetadata(Sel, &I);
+ }
}
void VPWidenRecipe::execute(VPTransformState &State) {
