A loop that looks like:
loop {
do_work_1();
if (cond) {
break;
} else {
}
do_work_2();
break;
}
We can't pull that break ahead of do_work_1() after hoisting the initial
do_work_1() out of the loop. So bail in this case.
Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/-/issues/11711
Fixes: 6b4b044739 ("nir/opt_loop: add loop peeling optimization")
Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa@rosenzweig.io>
Part-of: <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/-/merge_requests/30702>
We were not restoring an outer loop as the current loop after we had
finished processing a nested loop.
Fixes: 9995f336e6 ("nir: add merge loop terminators optimisation")
Reviewed-by: Rhys Perry <pendingchaos02@gmail.com>
Part-of: <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/-/merge_requests/29686>
This new pass aims to simplify loop control-flow by reducing the number
of break and continue statements. It also supersedes nir_opt_trivial_continues().
For this purpose, it implements 3 optimizations:
- opt_loop_terminator(), as previously
- opt_loop_merge_break_continue(), similar to opt_merge_breaks() incl. continues
- opt_loop_last_block(), a generalization of opt_if_loop_last_continue()
Reviewed-by: Konstantin Seurer <konstantin.seurer@gmail.com>
Part-of: <https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/-/merge_requests/24940>