thr3ads.net - llvm dev - [llvm-dev] Failure to match a DAG after a minor pattern change in a custom Target [Feb 2016]

If this information is useful, please help other people find it:
Share via:

Rail Shafigulin via llvm-dev

2016-Feb-19 00:01 UTC

[llvm-dev] Failure to match a DAG after a minor pattern change in a custom Target

In an attempt to add vector registers to my target, I ran into a problem.
LLVM started to complain about not being able to infer types from the
provided DAG patterns for several classes of instructions. After a
discussion on the llvm-dev mailing list and IRC channel the recommendation
was to make DAG patterns for these classes of instructions more specific.
Which is what was done. However after the changes were made, LLVM stopped
recognizing a particular pattern, saying that it can not match it. Given
that my understanding of DAG patterns is quite weak, I'd appreciate any
help on this. For that matter, any opportunity to learn about LLVM is
welcomed. Original code, modified code as well as the error are provided
below. I can provide more if needed. There were two changes made. One in
the definition of SDT_EsenciaSetFlag and another in SF_RI class
(specifically in its DAG pattern).

Any help is appreciated.

========================= Orignal Code ====================================
def SDT_EsenciaSetFlag      : SDTypeProfile<0, 3, [SDTCisSameAs<0,
1>]>;

def Esenciasetflag     : SDNode<"EsenciaISD::SET_FLAG",
SDT_EsenciaSetFlag,
                             [SDNPOutGlue]>;


def Esencia_CC_LT  : PatLeaf<(imm),
                  [{return (N->getZExtValue() == ISD::SETLT);}]>;


class SF_RI<bits<5> op2Val, string asmstr, PatLeaf Cond>
  : InstRI<0xf, (outs), (ins GPR:$rA, s16imm:$imm),
           !strconcat(asmstr, "i\t$rA, $imm"),
           [(Esenciasetflag (i32 GPR:$rA), immSExt16:$imm, Cond)]> {
  bits<5> op2;
  bits<5> rA;
  bits<16> imm;

  let Inst{25-21} = op2;
  let Inst{20-16} = rA;
  let Inst{15-0} = imm;

  let format = AFrm;
  let op2 = op2Val;
}

defm SFLTS : SF<0xc, "l.sflts", Esencia_CC_LT>;

========================= Modified Code
====================================
def SDT_EsenciaSetFlag      : SDTypeProfile<1, 3, [SDTCisSameAs<1,
2>]>;

def Esenciasetflag     : SDNode<"EsenciaISD::SET_FLAG",
SDT_EsenciaSetFlag,
                             [SDNPOutGlue]>;

def Esencia_CC_LT  : PatLeaf<(imm),
                  [{return (N->getZExtValue() == ISD::SETLT);}]>;

class SF_RI<bits<5> op2Val, string asmstr, PatLeaf Cond>
  : InstRI<0xf, (outs), (ins GPR:$rA, s16imm:$imm),
           !strconcat(asmstr, "i\t$rA, $imm"),
           [(set SR:$rD, (Esenciasetflag (i32 GPR:$rA), (i32
immSExt16:$imm), (i32 Cond)))]> {
  bits<5> op2;
  bits<5> rA;
  bits<16> imm;

  let Inst{25-21} = op2;
  let Inst{20-16} = rA;
  let Inst{15-0} = imm;

  let format = AFrm;
  let op2 = op2Val;
}

multiclass SF<bits<5> op2Val, string asmstr, PatLeaf Cond> {
  def _rr : SF_RR<op2Val, asmstr, Cond>;
  def _ri : SF_RI<op2Val, asmstr, Cond>;
}

defm SFLTS : SF<0xc, "l.sflts", Esencia_CC_LT>;

========================= Orignal Match Result
====================================
Selecting: 0x2ebfa78: glue = EsenciaISD::SET_FLAG 0x2ebee18, 0x2ebef20,
0x2ebf658 [ORD=3] [ID=11]

ISEL: Starting pattern match on root node: 0x2ebfa78: glue EsenciaISD::SET_FLAG
0x2ebee18, 0x2ebef20, 0x2ebf658 [ORD=3] [ID=11]

  Initial Opcode index to 258
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 278, continuing at
292
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 293, continuing at
307
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 308, continuing at
322
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 323, continuing at
337
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 338, continuing at
352
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 353, continuing at
367
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 368, continuing at
382
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 383, continuing at
397
  Morphed node: 0x2ebfa78: i32,glue = SFLTS_ri 0x2ebee18, 0x2ebf130 [ORD=3]

ISEL: Match complete!
=> 0x2ebfa78: i32,glue = SFLTS_ri 0x2ebee18, 0x2ebf130 [ORD=3]

========================= Failed Match Result
====================================
Selecting: 0x242d278: glue = EsenciaISD::SET_FLAG 0x242c618, 0x242c720,
0x242ce58 [ORD=3] [ID=11]

ISEL: Starting pattern match on root node: 0x242d278: glue EsenciaISD::SET_FLAG
0x242c618, 0x242c720, 0x242ce58 [ORD=3] [ID=11]

  Initial Opcode index to 258
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 285, continuing at
301
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 302, continuing at
318
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 319, continuing at
335
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 336, continuing at
352
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 353, continuing at
369
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 370, continuing at
386
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 387, continuing at
403
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 404, continuing at
420
  Match failed at index 424
  Continuing at 437
  Match failed at index 438
  Continuing at 454
  Continuing at 455
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 466, continuing at
480
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 481, continuing at
495
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 496, continuing at
510
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 511, continuing at
525
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 526, continuing at
540
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 541, continuing at
555
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 556, continuing at
570
  Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 571, continuing at
585
  Match failed at index 589
  Continuing at 600
  Match failed at index 601
  Continuing at 615
  Continuing at 616
  Continuing at 617
  Match failed at index 619
  Continuing at 811
LLVM ERROR: Cannot select: 0x242d278: glue = EsenciaISD::SET_FLAG
0x242c618, 0x242c720, 0x242ce58 [ORD=3] [ID=11]
  0x242c618: i32,ch = CopyFromReg 0x24009a0, 0x242c510 [ORD=1] [ID=9]
    0x242c510: i32 = Register %vreg5 [ID=1]
  0x242c720: i32 = Constant<3> [ID=2]
  0x242ce58: i32 = Constant<20> [ID=8]
In function: fib



-- 
Rail Shafigulin
Software Engineer
Esencia Technologies
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160218/93eb6709/attachment.html>

Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev

2016-Feb-19 14:10 UTC

head link

[llvm-dev] Failure to match a DAG after a minor pattern change in a custom Target

On 2/18/2016 6:01 PM, Rail Shafigulin via llvm-dev
wrote:>             [(set SR:$rD, (Esenciasetflag (i32 GPR:$rA), (i32
> immSExt16:$imm), (i32 Cond)))]> {
I suspect that the "set SR:$rD" is the problem here.  The
Esenciasetflag
does not have any values that can be assigned to a
register, so it's probably this part that causes the pattern to fail.


Tablegen creates a xxxGenDAGISel.inc file in your target's build 
directory. The "index" numbers that the debugging info shows
correspond
to the numbers in that file.  Here's an example from HexagonGenDAGISel.inc:

/*28*/              OPC_Scope, 88|128,3/*472*/, /*->503*/ // 3 children 
in Scope
/*31*/                OPC_MoveChild, 1,
/*33*/                OPC_CheckOpcode, TARGET_VAL(ISD::ADD),
/*36*/                OPC_RecordChild0, // #2 = $base
/*37*/                OPC_RecordChild1, // #3 = $offset
/*38*/                OPC_MoveChild, 1,
/*40*/                OPC_CheckOpcode, TARGET_VAL(ISD::Constant),
/*43*/                OPC_Scope, 65, /*->110*/ // 7 children in Scope
/*45*/                  OPC_CheckPredicate, 0, // Predicate_u32ImmPred
/*47*/                  OPC_MoveParent,
/*48*/                  OPC_CheckType, MVT::i32,

When the matcher says "false predicate at index 123", you can look at 
the line marked with /*123*/ and see exactly what predicate it was 
checking.  This helps immensely with solving such problems.


-Krzysztof

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, 
hosted by The Linux Foundation

Rail Shafigulin via llvm-dev

2016-Feb-19 19:51 UTC

head link

[llvm-dev] Failure to match a DAG after a minor pattern change in a custom Target

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 6:10 AM, Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On 2/18/2016 6:01 PM, Rail Shafigulin via llvm-dev wrote:
>
>>             [(set SR:$rD, (Esenciasetflag (i32 GPR:$rA), (i32
>> immSExt16:$imm), (i32 Cond)))]> {
>>
>
> I suspect that the "set SR:$rD" is the problem here.  The
Esenciasetflag
> does not have any values that can be assigned to a
> register, so it's probably this part that causes the pattern to fail.
>
>
> Tablegen creates a xxxGenDAGISel.inc file in your target's build
> directory. The "index" numbers that the debugging info shows
correspond to
> the numbers in that file.  Here's an example from
HexagonGenDAGISel.inc:
>
> /*28*/              OPC_Scope, 88|128,3/*472*/, /*->503*/ // 3 children
in
> Scope
> /*31*/                OPC_MoveChild, 1,
> /*33*/                OPC_CheckOpcode, TARGET_VAL(ISD::ADD),
> /*36*/                OPC_RecordChild0, // #2 = $base
> /*37*/                OPC_RecordChild1, // #3 = $offset
> /*38*/                OPC_MoveChild, 1,
> /*40*/                OPC_CheckOpcode, TARGET_VAL(ISD::Constant),
> /*43*/                OPC_Scope, 65, /*->110*/ // 7 children in Scope
> /*45*/                  OPC_CheckPredicate, 0, // Predicate_u32ImmPred
> /*47*/                  OPC_MoveParent,
> /*48*/                  OPC_CheckType, MVT::i32,
>
> When the matcher says "false predicate at index 123", you can
look at the
> line marked with /*123*/ and see exactly what predicate it was checking.
> This helps immensely with solving such problems.
>
>
> -Krzysztof
>
> --
> Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted
> by The Linux Foundation
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
I'm having difficulty interpreting the EsenciaGenDAGISel.inc. Specifically
the MatcherTable. I would really appreciate any help on this. Say we are
looking at the following code:

/*254*/     /*SwitchOpcode*/ 42|128,4/*554*/,
TARGET_VAL(EsenciaISD::SET_FLAG),// ->812
/*258*/       OPC_RecordChild0, // #0 = $rA
/*259*/       OPC_Scope, 99|128,2/*355*/, /*->617*/ // 2 children in Scope
/*262*/         OPC_CheckChild0Type, MVT::i32,
/*264*/         OPC_RecordChild1, // #1 = $imm
/*265*/         OPC_Scope, 59|128,1/*187*/, /*->455*/ // 2 children in Scope
/*268*/           OPC_MoveChild, 1,
/*270*/           OPC_CheckOpcode, TARGET_VAL(ISD::Constant),
/*273*/           OPC_CheckPredicate, 16, // Predicate_immSExt16
/*275*/           OPC_MoveParent,
/*276*/           OPC_MoveChild, 2,
/*278*/           OPC_CheckOpcode, TARGET_VAL(ISD::Constant),
/*281*/           OPC_CheckType, MVT::i32,
/*283*/           OPC_Scope, 16, /*->301*/ // 10 children in Scope
/*285*/             OPC_CheckPredicate, 17, // Predicate_Esencia_CC_EQ
/*287*/             OPC_MoveParent,
/*288*/             OPC_CheckType, MVT::i32,
/*290*/             OPC_EmitConvertToTarget, 1,
/*292*/             OPC_MorphNodeTo, TARGET_VAL(Esencia::SFEQ_ri),
0|OPFL_GlueOutput,
                        1/*#VTs*/, MVT::i32, 2/*#Ops*/, 0, 2,
                    // Src: (Esenciasetflag:i32 GPR:i32:$rA,
(imm:i32)<<P:Predicate_immSExt16>>:$imm,
(imm:i32)<<P:Predicate_Esencia_CC_EQ>>) - Complexity = 11
                    // Dst: (SFEQ_ri:i32 GPR:i32:$rA, (imm:i32):$imm)
/*301*/           /*Scope*/ 16, /*->318*/
/*302*/             OPC_CheckPredicate, 18, // Predicate_Esencia_CC_NE
/*304*/             OPC_MoveParent,
/*305*/             OPC_CheckType, MVT::i32,
/*307*/             OPC_EmitConvertToTarget, 1,
/*309*/             OPC_MorphNodeTo, TARGET_VAL(Esencia::SFNE_ri),
0|OPFL_GlueOutput,
                        1/*#VTs*/, MVT::i32, 2/*#Ops*/, 0, 2,
                    // Src: (Esenciasetflag:i32 GPR:i32:$rA,
(imm:i32)<<P:Predicate_immSExt16>>:$imm,
(imm:i32)<<P:Predicate_Esencia_CC_NE>>) - Complexity = 11
                    // Dst: (SFNE_ri:i32 GPR:i32:$rA, (imm:i32):$imm)
/*318*/           /*Scope*/ 16, /*->335*/
/*319*/             OPC_CheckPredicate, 19, // Predicate_Esencia_CC_GTU
/*321*/             OPC_MoveParent,
/*322*/             OPC_CheckType, MVT::i32,
/*324*/             OPC_EmitConvertToTarget, 1,

what does it tell me? How do I interpret it?

I also have a question about predicates. What exactly are they? I know that
they are pattern leaves and have code associated with them. But how exactly
do they fit into the pattern matching?

Any help on this is appreciated.


-- 
Rail Shafigulin
Software Engineer
Esencia Technologies
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160219/a0a8ebd3/attachment.html>

Rail Shafigulin via llvm-dev

2016-Feb-22 19:50 UTC

head link

[llvm-dev] Failure to match a DAG after a minor pattern change in a custom Target

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 6:10 AM, Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On 2/18/2016 6:01 PM, Rail Shafigulin via llvm-dev wrote:
>
>>             [(set SR:$rD, (Esenciasetflag (i32 GPR:$rA), (i32
>> immSExt16:$imm), (i32 Cond)))]> {
>>
>
> I suspect that the "set SR:$rD" is the problem here.  The
Esenciasetflag
> does not have any values that can be assigned to a
> register, so it's probably this part that causes the pattern to fail.
>
Would you mind showing how to make Esenciasetflag to actually set a flag? I
can't figure out the syntax.

>
>
> Tablegen creates a xxxGenDAGISel.inc file in your target's build
> directory. The "index" numbers that the debugging info shows
correspond to
> the numbers in that file.  Here's an example from
HexagonGenDAGISel.inc:
>
> /*28*/              OPC_Scope, 88|128,3/*472*/, /*->503*/ // 3 children
in
> Scope
> /*31*/                OPC_MoveChild, 1,
> /*33*/                OPC_CheckOpcode, TARGET_VAL(ISD::ADD),
> /*36*/                OPC_RecordChild0, // #2 = $base
> /*37*/                OPC_RecordChild1, // #3 = $offset
> /*38*/                OPC_MoveChild, 1,
> /*40*/                OPC_CheckOpcode, TARGET_VAL(ISD::Constant),
> /*43*/                OPC_Scope, 65, /*->110*/ // 7 children in Scope
> /*45*/                  OPC_CheckPredicate, 0, // Predicate_u32ImmPred
> /*47*/                  OPC_MoveParent,
> /*48*/                  OPC_CheckType, MVT::i32,
>
> When the matcher says "false predicate at index 123", you can
look at the
> line marked with /*123*/ and see exactly what predicate it was checking.
> This helps immensely with solving such problems.
>
>
> -Krzysztof
>
> --
> Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted
> by The Linux Foundation
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>


-- 
Rail Shafigulin
Software Engineer
Esencia Technologies
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160222/84c3d68e/attachment.html>

Apparently Analagous Threads

Search for more apparently analagous threads

llvm dev - Feb 2016 - Failure to match a DAG after a minor pattern change in a custom Target

[llvm-dev] Failure to match a DAG after a minor pattern change in a custom Target

[llvm-dev] Failure to match a DAG after a minor pattern change in a custom Target

[llvm-dev] Failure to match a DAG after a minor pattern change in a custom Target

[llvm-dev] Failure to match a DAG after a minor pattern change in a custom Target

Apparently Analagous Threads