llvm-project/llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/SimplifyInstructions.cpp

118 lines
4.7 KiB
C++
Raw Normal View History

//===------ SimplifyInstructions.cpp - Remove redundant instructions ------===//
//
// The LLVM Compiler Infrastructure
//
// This file is distributed under the University of Illinois Open Source
// License. See LICENSE.TXT for details.
//
//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
//
// This is a utility pass used for testing the InstructionSimplify analysis.
// The analysis is applied to every instruction, and if it simplifies then the
// instruction is replaced by the simplification. If you are looking for a pass
// that performs serious instruction folding, use the instcombine pass instead.
//
//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
#include "llvm/Transforms/Scalar.h"
#include "llvm/ADT/DepthFirstIterator.h"
#include "llvm/ADT/SmallPtrSet.h"
#include "llvm/ADT/Statistic.h"
#include "llvm/Analysis/AssumptionCache.h"
#include "llvm/Analysis/InstructionSimplify.h"
#include "llvm/Analysis/TargetLibraryInfo.h"
#include "llvm/IR/DataLayout.h"
#include "llvm/IR/Dominators.h"
#include "llvm/IR/Function.h"
#include "llvm/IR/Type.h"
#include "llvm/Pass.h"
#include "llvm/Transforms/Utils/Local.h"
using namespace llvm;
#define DEBUG_TYPE "instsimplify"
STATISTIC(NumSimplified, "Number of redundant instructions removed");
namespace {
struct InstSimplifier : public FunctionPass {
static char ID; // Pass identification, replacement for typeid
InstSimplifier() : FunctionPass(ID) {
initializeInstSimplifierPass(*PassRegistry::getPassRegistry());
}
void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const override {
AU.setPreservesCFG();
AU.addRequired<AssumptionCacheTracker>();
AU.addRequired<TargetLibraryInfoWrapperPass>();
}
/// runOnFunction - Remove instructions that simplify.
bool runOnFunction(Function &F) override {
const DominatorTreeWrapperPass *DTWP =
getAnalysisIfAvailable<DominatorTreeWrapperPass>();
const DominatorTree *DT = DTWP ? &DTWP->getDomTree() : nullptr;
const DataLayout &DL = F.getParent()->getDataLayout();
const TargetLibraryInfo *TLI =
&getAnalysis<TargetLibraryInfoWrapperPass>().getTLI();
AssumptionCache *AC =
&getAnalysis<AssumptionCacheTracker>().getAssumptionCache(F);
SmallPtrSet<const Instruction*, 8> S1, S2, *ToSimplify = &S1, *Next = &S2;
bool Changed = false;
do {
for (BasicBlock *BB : depth_first(&F.getEntryBlock()))
// Here be subtlety: the iterator must be incremented before the loop
// body (not sure why), so a range-for loop won't work here.
for (BasicBlock::iterator BI = BB->begin(), BE = BB->end(); BI != BE;) {
Instruction *I = &*BI++;
// The first time through the loop ToSimplify is empty and we try to
// simplify all instructions. On later iterations ToSimplify is not
// empty and we only bother simplifying instructions that are in it.
if (!ToSimplify->empty() && !ToSimplify->count(I))
continue;
// Don't waste time simplifying unused instructions.
if (!I->use_empty())
if (Value *V = SimplifyInstruction(I, DL, TLI, DT, AC)) {
// Mark all uses for resimplification next time round the loop.
[C++11] Add range based accessors for the Use-Def chain of a Value. This requires a number of steps. 1) Move value_use_iterator into the Value class as an implementation detail 2) Change it to actually be a *Use* iterator rather than a *User* iterator. 3) Add an adaptor which is a User iterator that always looks through the Use to the User. 4) Wrap these in Value::use_iterator and Value::user_iterator typedefs. 5) Add the range adaptors as Value::uses() and Value::users(). 6) Update *all* of the callers to correctly distinguish between whether they wanted a use_iterator (and to explicitly dig out the User when needed), or a user_iterator which makes the Use itself totally opaque. Because #6 requires churning essentially everything that walked the Use-Def chains, I went ahead and added all of the range adaptors and switched them to range-based loops where appropriate. Also because the renaming requires at least churning every line of code, it didn't make any sense to split these up into multiple commits -- all of which would touch all of the same lies of code. The result is still not quite optimal. The Value::use_iterator is a nice regular iterator, but Value::user_iterator is an iterator over User*s rather than over the User objects themselves. As a consequence, it fits a bit awkwardly into the range-based world and it has the weird extra-dereferencing 'operator->' that so many of our iterators have. I think this could be fixed by providing something which transforms a range of T&s into a range of T*s, but that *can* be separated into another patch, and it isn't yet 100% clear whether this is the right move. However, this change gets us most of the benefit and cleans up a substantial amount of code around Use and User. =] llvm-svn: 203364
2014-03-09 11:16:01 +08:00
for (User *U : I->users())
Next->insert(cast<Instruction>(U));
I->replaceAllUsesWith(V);
++NumSimplified;
Changed = true;
}
bool res = RecursivelyDeleteTriviallyDeadInstructions(I, TLI);
if (res) {
// RecursivelyDeleteTriviallyDeadInstruction can remove
// more than one instruction, so simply incrementing the
// iterator does not work. When instructions get deleted
// re-iterate instead.
BI = BB->begin(); BE = BB->end();
Changed |= res;
}
}
// Place the list of instructions to simplify on the next loop iteration
// into ToSimplify.
std::swap(ToSimplify, Next);
Next->clear();
} while (!ToSimplify->empty());
return Changed;
}
};
}
char InstSimplifier::ID = 0;
INITIALIZE_PASS_BEGIN(InstSimplifier, "instsimplify",
"Remove redundant instructions", false, false)
INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(AssumptionCacheTracker)
INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(TargetLibraryInfoWrapperPass)
INITIALIZE_PASS_END(InstSimplifier, "instsimplify",
"Remove redundant instructions", false, false)
char &llvm::InstructionSimplifierID = InstSimplifier::ID;
// Public interface to the simplify instructions pass.
FunctionPass *llvm::createInstructionSimplifierPass() {
return new InstSimplifier();
}