Thanks for sharing the reproducer. I reduced it a bit and filed a bug report https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46854 Cheers, Florian > On Jul 26, 2020, at 18:52, Devadasan, Christudasan via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi Stefanos, > > Attached the testcase. I tried to reduce it further, but the problem goes away when I remove the instructions further. > There is a nested loop and the fault occurs while processing the inner loop (for.body) > To reproduce the crash: > opt -O3 testcase.ll -o out.ll > > > `groupChecks()` will only try to group pointers that are on the same alias set. > > If thatâs true, the RT check should have been prevented for these pointers in question. > > Additional details about the problem: > The crash first appeared after the following llvm commit to preserve the Global AA. > > commit e6cf796bab7e02d2b8ac7fd495f14f5e21494270 > Author: Ryan Santhiraraja <rsanthir at quicinc.com <mailto:rsanthir at quicinc.com>> > Date: Thu Jul 2 13:53:20 2020 +0100 > Preserve GlobalsAA analysis result in LowerConstantIntrinsics > > The Global AA now finds out that these pointers refer different objects and wonât alias each other, and eventually ended up in different alias sets. > Prior to this commit, none of the alias analysis could appropriate the noAlias property for these pointers. (If you revert this patch locally, the testcase will compile successfully). > The address-space validation (given below) prevented the RT check for these pointers earlier which I expected even to get triggered with the upstream compiler today. > But it didnât occur as they have the same DependenceSetId value. (The DependenceSetId starts from 1 for each Alias Set and hence pointers of > different AS can have the same Id. If it is intended, I am not sure that the early continue here, only based on the DependenceSetId, handled all cases) > > // Only need to check pointers between two different dependency sets. > > if (RtCheck.Pointers[i].DependencySetId == > > RtCheck.Pointers[j].DependencySetId) > > continue; > > // Only need to check pointers in the same alias set. > > if (RtCheck.Pointers[i].AliasSetId != RtCheck.Pointers[j].AliasSetId) > > continue; > > > > Value *PtrI = RtCheck.Pointers[i].PointerValue; > > Value *PtrJ = RtCheck.Pointers[j].PointerValue; > > > > unsigned ASi = PtrI->getType()->getPointerAddressSpace(); > > unsigned ASj = PtrJ->getType()->getPointerAddressSpace(); > > if (ASi != ASj) { > > LLVM_DEBUG( > > dbgs() << "LAA: Runtime check would require comparison between" > > " different address spaces\n"); > > return false; > > } > Regards, > CD > > From: Stefanos Baziotis <stefanos.baziotis at gmail.com <mailto:stefanos.baziotis at gmail.com>> > Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2020 6:09 PM > To: Devadasan, Christudasan <Christudasan.Devadasan at amd.com <mailto:Christudasan.Devadasan at amd.com>> > Cc: LLVM Dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [LAA] RtCheck on pointers of different address spaces. > > [CAUTION: External Email] > Hi, > > There are a lot of things going on here, but given this: > > > The crash occurs with the pointers 1 & 4 which are from AS1 and AS2 respectively. > > and the trace, I'm not sure how that can happen. `groupChecks()` will only try to group pointers that > are on the same alias set (because it will only try to group pointers that are in the same Eq class > in DepCands, which if you see its construction in `processMemAccesses()`, won't put two pointers > from different alias sets in the same Eq Class because _theoretically_, two such pointers can't > share an underlying object). > > Do maybe have a simplified but complete IR ? Is that a possibility? > > Kind regards, > Stefanos Baziotis > > ΣÏÎ¹Ï ÎÏ Ï, 26 ÎÎ¿Ï Î» 2020 ÏÏÎ¹Ï 1:06 μ.μ., ο/η Devadasan, Christudasan via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> ÎγÏαÏε: > Hello, > > I Have a question related to the RT check on pointers during Loop Access Analysis pass. > > There is a testcase with loop code that consist of 4 different memory operations referring two global objects of different address spaces. > One from global constant (address space 4, addr_size = 64) and the other from local, LDS (address space 3, addr_size= 32). > (Details of various address spaces available for AMDGPU backend: https://llvm.org/docs/AMDGPUUsage.html#address-spaces <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fllvm.org%2Fdocs%2FAMDGPUUsage.html%23address-spaces&data=02%7C01%7CChristudasan.Devadasan%40amd.com%7C4a42db7316004baa429c08d83160f7e7%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637313639833494292&sdata=r7fk%2FU%2FCZLt8RKZNc0lAco6wBJKKDj%2Br621r%2FaBOI6A%3D&reserved=0>) > > With upstream compiler, the testcase fails with a crash (given at the end of the e-mail) in the opt while trying to generate the RT check for these pointers. Precisely, with two pointers of different address spaces. > The operand type check fails while trying to insert a âAddExprâ SCEV node as their effective type differs for these pointers (One with 32-bit and the other with 64-bit) > > Question: Is this intended to try for the RtCheck on pointers from different address spaces? > The comments given in the code snippet (below) hints they arenât. > > Code snippet from LoopAccessAnalysis.cpp: > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > bool AccessAnalysis::canCheckPtrAtRT(...) { > ---------- > // If the pointers that we would use for the bounds comparison have different > // address spaces, assume the values aren't directly comparable, so we can't > // use them for the runtime check. We also have to assume they could > // overlap. In the future there should be metadata for whether address spaces > // are disjoint. > unsigned NumPointers = RtCheck.Pointers.size(); > for (unsigned i = 0; i < NumPointers; ++i) { > for (unsigned j = i + 1; j < NumPointers; ++j) { > // Only need to check pointers between two different dependency sets. > if (RtCheck.Pointers[i].DependencySetId == > RtCheck.Pointers[j].DependencySetId) > continue; > // Only need to check pointers in the same alias set. > if (RtCheck.Pointers[i].AliasSetId != RtCheck.Pointers[j].AliasSetId) > continue; > > Value *PtrI = RtCheck.Pointers[i].PointerValue; > Value *PtrJ = RtCheck.Pointers[j].PointerValue; > > unsigned ASi = PtrI->getType()->getPointerAddressSpace(); > unsigned ASj = PtrJ->getType()->getPointerAddressSpace(); > if (ASi != ASj) { > LLVM_DEBUG( > dbgs() << "LAA: Runtime check would require comparison between" > " different address spaces\n"); > return false; > } > } > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > More details about the objects, the pointers and the memory operations: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > %struct_var1 = type { <2 x float> } > %struct_var2 = type { %struct_var1 } > %class_var1 = type { i32, i32, i32, %struct_var2*, i32, i32, i32} > %class_var2 = type { %class_var1, i8, i8*, i32 } > > Objects: > @Obj1 = external protected local_unnamed_addr addrspace(4) externally_initialized global %class_var2, align 8 > @Obj2 = internal unnamed_addr addrspace(3) constant [4000 x float] undef, align 16 > > Pointers: > 1. %struct_var1.cast = bitcast %struct_var1* %struct_var2.gep to i64* (write) // AS1 > > 2. %struct_var2.cast = bitcast %struct_var2* %arrayidx74 to i64* (read-only) // AS1 > > 3. %arrayidx1705 = getelementptr inbounds [4000 x float], [4000 x float] addrspace(3)* @Obj2, i32 0, i32 %add125 (read-only) // AS2 > > 4. %arrayidx274 = getelementptr inbounds [4000 x float], [4000 x float] addrspace(3)* @Obj2, i32 0, i32 %arg1 (read-only) // AS2 > > > While the pointers 1 & 2 belong to one Alias Set (AS1), pointers 3 & 4 belong to a different set (AS2). It is because, the Global Alias Analysis found there is no alias between these two sets of pointers. > The crash occurs with the pointers 1 & 4 which are from AS1 and AS2 respectively. > The DependenceSetId will be reset to 1 before processing a new AS and the pointers in question, ended up having the same DependenceSetId (1), though they are from different AS. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > The load/store (memory operations) using these pointers in the loop. (extracted only the relevant instructions): > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > define protected amdgpu_kernel void @test_func(i32 %arg1, i32 %arg2) { > entry: > %arrayidx274 = getelementptr inbounds [4000 x float], [4000 x float] addrspace(3)* @Obj2, i32 0, i32 %arg1 > --------- > br i1 %cmp1, label %header, label %for.end > > header: > % struct_var2.ld = load %struct_var2*, %struct_var2* addrspace(4)* getelementptr inbounds (%class_var2, %class_var2 addrspace(4)* @Obj1, i64 0, i32 0, i32 3), align 8 > %struct_var2.gep = getelementptr inbounds %struct_var2, %struct_var2* %struct_var2.ld, i64 undef, i32 0 > %struct_var1.cast = bitcast %struct_var1* %struct_var2.gep to i64* > br label %for.body > > for.body: > --------- > %arrayidx74 = getelementptr inbounds %struct_var2, %struct_var2* %struct_var2.ld, i64 %idxprom73 > %struct_var2.cast = bitcast %struct_var2* %arrayidx74 to i64* > %for.body.ld = load i64, i64* %struct_var2.cast, align 8 > --------- > br i1 %cmp2, label %if.then, label %if.end > > if.then: > %rem = srem i32 1, %arg2 > %add125 = add nuw nsw i32 %rem, 1 > %arrayidx1705 = getelementptr inbounds [4000 x float], [4000 x float] addrspace(3)* @Obj2, i32 0, i32 %add125 > %arrayidx1705.ld = load float, float addrspace(3)* %arrayidx1705, align 4 > %arrayidx274.ld = load float, float addrspace(3)* %arrayidx274, align 4 > --------- > br label %if.end > > if.end: > store i64 %for.body.ld, i64* %struct_var1.cast, align 8 > --------- > br i1 %cmp3, label %for.body, label %for.end > > for.end: > br exit > > exit: > } > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > The actual crash and the back-trace: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > opt: $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp:2165: const llvm::SCEV *llvm::ScalarEvolution::getAddExpr(SmallVectorImpl<const llvm::SCEV *> &, SCEV::NoWrapFlags, unsigned int): Assertion `getEffectiveSCEVType(Ops[i]->getType()) == ETy && "SCEVAddExpr operand types don't match!"' failed. > PLEASE submit a bug report to https://bugs.llvm.org/ <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugs.llvm.org%2F&data=02%7C01%7CChristudasan.Devadasan%40amd.com%7C4a42db7316004baa429c08d83160f7e7%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637313639833494292&sdata=L20o6evK45pVbZE4E8csnx6Oc2mBvNihZNNTh0qYMN8%3D&reserved=0> and include the crash backtrace. > Stack dump: > 0. Program arguments: $Tools/bin/opt -O3 test.ll -o out.ll > > llvm::ScalarEvolution::getAddExpr(llvm::SmallVectorImpl<llvm::SCEV const*>&, llvm::SCEV::NoWrapFlags, unsigned int) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp:2164:5 > llvm::ScalarEvolution::getAddExpr(llvm::SCEV const*, llvm::SCEV const*, llvm::SCEV::NoWrapFlags, unsigned int) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/include/llvm/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.h:526:3 > llvm::ScalarEvolution::getMinusSCEV(llvm::SCEV const*, llvm::SCEV const*, llvm::SCEV::NoWrapFlags, unsigned int) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp:3833:3 > getMinFromExprs(llvm::SCEV const*, llvm::SCEV const*, llvm::ScalarEvolution*) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Analysis/LoopAccessAnalysis.cpp:275:15 > llvm::RuntimeCheckingPtrGroup::addPointer(unsigned int) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Analysis/LoopAccessAnalysis.cpp:292:15 > llvm::RuntimePointerChecking::groupChecks(llvm::EquivalenceClasses<llvm::PointerIntPair<llvm::Value*, 1u, bool, llvm::PointerLikeTypeTraits<llvm::Value*>, llvm::PointerIntPairInfo<llvm::Value*, 1u, llvm::PointerLikeTypeTraits<llvm::Value*> > > >&, bool) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Analysis/LoopAccessAnalysis.cpp:413:13 > llvm::RuntimePointerChecking::generateChecks(llvm::EquivalenceClasses<llvm::PointerIntPair<llvm::Value*, 1u, bool, llvm::PointerLikeTypeTraits<llvm::Value*>, llvm::PointerIntPairInfo<llvm::Value*, 1u, llvm::PointerLikeTypeTraits<llvm::Value*> > > >&, bool) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Analysis/LoopAccessAnalysis.cpp:259:12 > (anonymous namespace)::AccessAnalysis::canCheckPtrAtRT(llvm::RuntimePointerChecking&, llvm::ScalarEvolution*, llvm::Loop*, llvm::DenseMap<llvm::Value const*, llvm::Value*, llvm::DenseMapInfo<llvm::Value const*>, llvm::detail::DenseMapPair<llvm::Value const*, llvm::Value*> > const&, bool) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Analysis/LoopAccessAnalysis.cpp:830:3 > llvm::LoopAccessInfo::analyzeLoop(llvm::AAResults*, llvm::LoopInfo*, llvm::TargetLibraryInfo const*, llvm::DominatorTree*) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Analysis/LoopAccessAnalysis.cpp:2038:8 > llvm::LoopAccessInfo::LoopAccessInfo(llvm::Loop*, llvm::ScalarEvolution*, llvm::TargetLibraryInfo const*, llvm::AAResults*, llvm::DominatorTree*, llvm::LoopInfo*) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Analysis/LoopAccessAnalysis.cpp:2222:1 > std::_MakeUniq<llvm::LoopAccessInfo>::__single_object std::make_unique<llvm::LoopAccessInfo, llvm::Loop*&, llvm::ScalarEvolution*&, llvm::TargetLibraryInfo const*&, llvm::AAResults*&, llvm::DominatorTree*&, llvm::LoopInfo*&>(llvm::Loop*&, llvm::ScalarEvolution*&, llvm::TargetLibraryInfo const*&, llvm::AAResults*&, llvm::DominatorTree*&, llvm::LoopInfo*&) /usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/7.5.0/../../../../include/c++/7.5.0/bits/unique_ptr.h:821:34 > llvm::LoopAccessLegacyAnalysis::getInfo(llvm::Loop*) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Analysis/LoopAccessAnalysis.cpp:2275:5 > (anonymous namespace)::LoopLoadElimination::runOnFunction(llvm::Function&)::'lambda'(llvm::Loop&)::operator()(llvm::Loop&) const $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopLoadElimination.cpp:651:53 > llvm::LoopAccessInfo const& llvm::function_ref<llvm::LoopAccessInfo const& (llvm::Loop&)>::callback_fn<(anonymous namespace)::LoopLoadElimination::runOnFunction(llvm::Function&)::'lambda'(llvm::Loop&)>(long, llvm::Loop&) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/STLExtras.h:185:5 > llvm::function_ref<llvm::LoopAccessInfo const& (llvm::Loop&)>::operator()(llvm::Loop&) const $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/STLExtras.h:203:5 > eliminateLoadsAcrossLoops(llvm::Function&, llvm::LoopInfo&, llvm::DominatorTree&, llvm::BlockFrequencyInfo*, llvm::ProfileSummaryInfo*, llvm::function_ref<llvm::LoopAccessInfo const& (llvm::Loop&)>) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopLoadElimination.cpp:618:53 > (anonymous namespace)::LoopLoadElimination::runOnFunction(llvm::Function&) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopLoadElimination.cpp:649:5 > llvm::FPPassManager::runOnFunction(llvm::Function&) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/IR/LegacyPassManager.cpp:1587:23 > llvm::FPPassManager::runOnModule(llvm::Module&) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/IR/LegacyPassManager.cpp:1629:16 > (anonymous namespace)::MPPassManager::runOnModule(llvm::Module&) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/IR/LegacyPassManager.cpp:1698:23 > llvm::legacy::PassManagerImpl::run(llvm::Module&) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/IR/LegacyPassManager.cpp:614:16 > llvm::legacy::PassManager::run(llvm::Module&) $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/lib/IR/LegacyPassManager.cpp:1824:3 > main $SRC/llvm-project/llvm/tools/opt/opt.cpp:955:3 > __libc_start_main /build/glibc-2ORdQG/glibc-2.27/csu/../csu/libc-start.c:344:0 > _start ($Tools/bin/opt+0xc98b6a) > Aborted (core dumped) > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Regards, > CD > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.llvm.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fllvm-dev&data=02%7C01%7CChristudasan.Devadasan%40amd.com%7C4a42db7316004baa429c08d83160f7e7%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637313639833494292&sdata=vexV9bKO2%2Be4t7ix84mMUfJuSWXHf6hAR8PJSNNtg1k%3D&reserved=0><testcase.ll>_______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev <https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200726/d93b3838/attachment.html>
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4