llvm-project/llvm/lib/Analysis/OptimizationDiagnosticInfo.cpp

226 lines
7.2 KiB
C++
Raw Normal View History

[OptRemark,LDist] RFC: Add hotness attribute Summary: This is the first set of changes implementing the RFC from http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/98334 This is a cross-sectional patch; rather than implementing the hotness attribute for all optimization remarks and all passes in a patch set, it implements it for the 'missed-optimization' remark for Loop Distribution. My goal is to shake out the design issues before scaling it up to other types and passes. Hotness is computed as an integer as the multiplication of the block frequency with the function entry count. It's only printed in opt currently since clang prints the diagnostic fields directly. E.g.: remark: /tmp/t.c:3:3: loop not distributed: use -Rpass-analysis=loop-distribute for more info (hotness: 300) A new API added is similar to emitOptimizationRemarkMissed. The difference is that it additionally takes a code region that the diagnostic corresponds to. From this, hotness is computed using BFI. The new API is exposed via an analysis pass so that it can be made dependent on LazyBFI. (Thanks to Hal for the analysis pass idea.) This feature can all be enabled by setDiagnosticHotnessRequested in the LLVM context. If this is off, LazyBFI is not calculated (D22141) so there should be no overhead. A new command-line option is added to turn this on in opt. My plan is to switch all user of emitOptimizationRemark* to use this module instead. Reviewers: hfinkel Subscribers: rcox2, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21771 llvm-svn: 275583
2016-07-16 01:23:20 +08:00
//===- OptimizationDiagnosticInfo.cpp - Optimization Diagnostic -*- C++ -*-===//
//
// The LLVM Compiler Infrastructure
//
// This file is distributed under the University of Illinois Open Source
// License. See LICENSE.TXT for details.
//
//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
//
// Optimization diagnostic interfaces. It's packaged as an analysis pass so
// that by using this service passes become dependent on BFI as well. BFI is
// used to compute the "hotness" of the diagnostic message.
//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
#include "llvm/Analysis/OptimizationDiagnosticInfo.h"
#include "llvm/Analysis/BranchProbabilityInfo.h"
[OptRemark,LDist] RFC: Add hotness attribute Summary: This is the first set of changes implementing the RFC from http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/98334 This is a cross-sectional patch; rather than implementing the hotness attribute for all optimization remarks and all passes in a patch set, it implements it for the 'missed-optimization' remark for Loop Distribution. My goal is to shake out the design issues before scaling it up to other types and passes. Hotness is computed as an integer as the multiplication of the block frequency with the function entry count. It's only printed in opt currently since clang prints the diagnostic fields directly. E.g.: remark: /tmp/t.c:3:3: loop not distributed: use -Rpass-analysis=loop-distribute for more info (hotness: 300) A new API added is similar to emitOptimizationRemarkMissed. The difference is that it additionally takes a code region that the diagnostic corresponds to. From this, hotness is computed using BFI. The new API is exposed via an analysis pass so that it can be made dependent on LazyBFI. (Thanks to Hal for the analysis pass idea.) This feature can all be enabled by setDiagnosticHotnessRequested in the LLVM context. If this is off, LazyBFI is not calculated (D22141) so there should be no overhead. A new command-line option is added to turn this on in opt. My plan is to switch all user of emitOptimizationRemark* to use this module instead. Reviewers: hfinkel Subscribers: rcox2, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21771 llvm-svn: 275583
2016-07-16 01:23:20 +08:00
#include "llvm/Analysis/LazyBlockFrequencyInfo.h"
#include "llvm/Analysis/LoopInfo.h"
Output optimization remarks in YAML (Re-committed after moving the template specialization under the yaml namespace. GCC was complaining about this.) This allows various presentation of this data using an external tool. This was first recommended here[1]. As an example, consider this module: 1 int foo(); 2 int bar(); 3 4 int baz() { 5 return foo() + bar(); 6 } The inliner generates these missed-optimization remarks today (the hotness information is pulled from PGO): remark: /tmp/s.c:5:10: foo will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) remark: /tmp/s.c:5:18: bar will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) Now with -pass-remarks-output=<yaml-file>, we generate this YAML file: --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 10 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: foo - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 18 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: bar - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... This is a summary of the high-level decisions: * There is a new streaming interface to emit optimization remarks. E.g. for the inliner remark above: ORE.emit(DiagnosticInfoOptimizationRemarkMissed( DEBUG_TYPE, "NotInlined", &I) << NV("Callee", Callee) << " will not be inlined into " << NV("Caller", CS.getCaller()) << setIsVerbose()); NV stands for named value and allows the YAML client to process a remark using its name (NotInlined) and the named arguments (Callee and Caller) without parsing the text of the message. Subsequent patches will update ORE users to use the new streaming API. * I am using YAML I/O for writing the YAML file. YAML I/O requires you to specify reading and writing at once but reading is highly non-trivial for some of the more complex LLVM types. Since it's not clear that we (ever) want to use LLVM to parse this YAML file, the code supports and asserts that we're writing only. On the other hand, I did experiment that the class hierarchy starting at DiagnosticInfoOptimizationBase can be mapped back from YAML generated here (see D24479). * The YAML stream is stored in the LLVM context. * In the example, we can probably further specify the IR value used, i.e. print "Function" rather than "Value". * As before hotness is computed in the analysis pass instead of DiganosticInfo. This avoids the layering problem since BFI is in Analysis while DiagnosticInfo is in IR. [1] https://reviews.llvm.org/D19678#419445 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24587 llvm-svn: 282539
2016-09-28 04:55:07 +08:00
#include "llvm/IR/DebugInfo.h"
[OptRemark,LDist] RFC: Add hotness attribute Summary: This is the first set of changes implementing the RFC from http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/98334 This is a cross-sectional patch; rather than implementing the hotness attribute for all optimization remarks and all passes in a patch set, it implements it for the 'missed-optimization' remark for Loop Distribution. My goal is to shake out the design issues before scaling it up to other types and passes. Hotness is computed as an integer as the multiplication of the block frequency with the function entry count. It's only printed in opt currently since clang prints the diagnostic fields directly. E.g.: remark: /tmp/t.c:3:3: loop not distributed: use -Rpass-analysis=loop-distribute for more info (hotness: 300) A new API added is similar to emitOptimizationRemarkMissed. The difference is that it additionally takes a code region that the diagnostic corresponds to. From this, hotness is computed using BFI. The new API is exposed via an analysis pass so that it can be made dependent on LazyBFI. (Thanks to Hal for the analysis pass idea.) This feature can all be enabled by setDiagnosticHotnessRequested in the LLVM context. If this is off, LazyBFI is not calculated (D22141) so there should be no overhead. A new command-line option is added to turn this on in opt. My plan is to switch all user of emitOptimizationRemark* to use this module instead. Reviewers: hfinkel Subscribers: rcox2, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21771 llvm-svn: 275583
2016-07-16 01:23:20 +08:00
#include "llvm/IR/DiagnosticInfo.h"
#include "llvm/IR/Dominators.h"
[OptRemark,LDist] RFC: Add hotness attribute Summary: This is the first set of changes implementing the RFC from http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/98334 This is a cross-sectional patch; rather than implementing the hotness attribute for all optimization remarks and all passes in a patch set, it implements it for the 'missed-optimization' remark for Loop Distribution. My goal is to shake out the design issues before scaling it up to other types and passes. Hotness is computed as an integer as the multiplication of the block frequency with the function entry count. It's only printed in opt currently since clang prints the diagnostic fields directly. E.g.: remark: /tmp/t.c:3:3: loop not distributed: use -Rpass-analysis=loop-distribute for more info (hotness: 300) A new API added is similar to emitOptimizationRemarkMissed. The difference is that it additionally takes a code region that the diagnostic corresponds to. From this, hotness is computed using BFI. The new API is exposed via an analysis pass so that it can be made dependent on LazyBFI. (Thanks to Hal for the analysis pass idea.) This feature can all be enabled by setDiagnosticHotnessRequested in the LLVM context. If this is off, LazyBFI is not calculated (D22141) so there should be no overhead. A new command-line option is added to turn this on in opt. My plan is to switch all user of emitOptimizationRemark* to use this module instead. Reviewers: hfinkel Subscribers: rcox2, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21771 llvm-svn: 275583
2016-07-16 01:23:20 +08:00
#include "llvm/IR/LLVMContext.h"
using namespace llvm;
OptimizationRemarkEmitter::OptimizationRemarkEmitter(const Function *F)
: F(F), BFI(nullptr) {
if (!F->getContext().getDiagnosticsHotnessRequested())
return;
// First create a dominator tree.
DominatorTree DT;
DT.recalculate(*const_cast<Function *>(F));
// Generate LoopInfo from it.
LoopInfo LI;
LI.analyze(DT);
// Then compute BranchProbabilityInfo.
BranchProbabilityInfo BPI;
BPI.calculate(*F, LI);
// Finally compute BFI.
OwnedBFI = llvm::make_unique<BlockFrequencyInfo>(*F, BPI, LI);
BFI = OwnedBFI.get();
}
bool OptimizationRemarkEmitter::invalidate(
Function &F, const PreservedAnalyses &PA,
FunctionAnalysisManager::Invalidator &Inv) {
// This analysis has no state and so can be trivially preserved but it needs
// a fresh view of BFI if it was constructed with one.
if (BFI && Inv.invalidate<BlockFrequencyAnalysis>(F, PA))
return true;
// Otherwise this analysis result remains valid.
return false;
}
Optional<uint64_t> OptimizationRemarkEmitter::computeHotness(const Value *V) {
[OptRemark,LDist] RFC: Add hotness attribute Summary: This is the first set of changes implementing the RFC from http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/98334 This is a cross-sectional patch; rather than implementing the hotness attribute for all optimization remarks and all passes in a patch set, it implements it for the 'missed-optimization' remark for Loop Distribution. My goal is to shake out the design issues before scaling it up to other types and passes. Hotness is computed as an integer as the multiplication of the block frequency with the function entry count. It's only printed in opt currently since clang prints the diagnostic fields directly. E.g.: remark: /tmp/t.c:3:3: loop not distributed: use -Rpass-analysis=loop-distribute for more info (hotness: 300) A new API added is similar to emitOptimizationRemarkMissed. The difference is that it additionally takes a code region that the diagnostic corresponds to. From this, hotness is computed using BFI. The new API is exposed via an analysis pass so that it can be made dependent on LazyBFI. (Thanks to Hal for the analysis pass idea.) This feature can all be enabled by setDiagnosticHotnessRequested in the LLVM context. If this is off, LazyBFI is not calculated (D22141) so there should be no overhead. A new command-line option is added to turn this on in opt. My plan is to switch all user of emitOptimizationRemark* to use this module instead. Reviewers: hfinkel Subscribers: rcox2, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21771 llvm-svn: 275583
2016-07-16 01:23:20 +08:00
if (!BFI)
return None;
return BFI->getBlockProfileCount(cast<BasicBlock>(V));
}
Output optimization remarks in YAML (Re-committed after moving the template specialization under the yaml namespace. GCC was complaining about this.) This allows various presentation of this data using an external tool. This was first recommended here[1]. As an example, consider this module: 1 int foo(); 2 int bar(); 3 4 int baz() { 5 return foo() + bar(); 6 } The inliner generates these missed-optimization remarks today (the hotness information is pulled from PGO): remark: /tmp/s.c:5:10: foo will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) remark: /tmp/s.c:5:18: bar will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) Now with -pass-remarks-output=<yaml-file>, we generate this YAML file: --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 10 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: foo - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 18 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: bar - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... This is a summary of the high-level decisions: * There is a new streaming interface to emit optimization remarks. E.g. for the inliner remark above: ORE.emit(DiagnosticInfoOptimizationRemarkMissed( DEBUG_TYPE, "NotInlined", &I) << NV("Callee", Callee) << " will not be inlined into " << NV("Caller", CS.getCaller()) << setIsVerbose()); NV stands for named value and allows the YAML client to process a remark using its name (NotInlined) and the named arguments (Callee and Caller) without parsing the text of the message. Subsequent patches will update ORE users to use the new streaming API. * I am using YAML I/O for writing the YAML file. YAML I/O requires you to specify reading and writing at once but reading is highly non-trivial for some of the more complex LLVM types. Since it's not clear that we (ever) want to use LLVM to parse this YAML file, the code supports and asserts that we're writing only. On the other hand, I did experiment that the class hierarchy starting at DiagnosticInfoOptimizationBase can be mapped back from YAML generated here (see D24479). * The YAML stream is stored in the LLVM context. * In the example, we can probably further specify the IR value used, i.e. print "Function" rather than "Value". * As before hotness is computed in the analysis pass instead of DiganosticInfo. This avoids the layering problem since BFI is in Analysis while DiagnosticInfo is in IR. [1] https://reviews.llvm.org/D19678#419445 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24587 llvm-svn: 282539
2016-09-28 04:55:07 +08:00
namespace llvm {
namespace yaml {
void MappingTraits<DiagnosticInfoOptimizationBase *>::mapping(
IO &io, DiagnosticInfoOptimizationBase *&OptDiag) {
assert(io.outputting() && "input not yet implemented");
if (io.mapTag("!Passed",
(OptDiag->getKind() == DK_OptimizationRemark ||
OptDiag->getKind() == DK_MachineOptimizationRemark)))
;
else if (io.mapTag(
"!Missed",
(OptDiag->getKind() == DK_OptimizationRemarkMissed ||
OptDiag->getKind() == DK_MachineOptimizationRemarkMissed)))
;
else if (io.mapTag(
"!Analysis",
(OptDiag->getKind() == DK_OptimizationRemarkAnalysis ||
OptDiag->getKind() == DK_MachineOptimizationRemarkAnalysis)))
;
else if (io.mapTag("!AnalysisFPCommute",
OptDiag->getKind() ==
DK_OptimizationRemarkAnalysisFPCommute))
;
else if (io.mapTag("!AnalysisAliasing",
OptDiag->getKind() ==
DK_OptimizationRemarkAnalysisAliasing))
;
else if (io.mapTag("!Failure", OptDiag->getKind() == DK_OptimizationFailure))
;
else
llvm_unreachable("Unknown remark type");
// These are read-only for now.
DiagnosticLocation DL = OptDiag->getLocation();
StringRef FN =
GlobalValue::dropLLVMManglingEscape(OptDiag->getFunction().getName());
StringRef PassName(OptDiag->PassName);
io.mapRequired("Pass", PassName);
io.mapRequired("Name", OptDiag->RemarkName);
if (!io.outputting() || DL.isValid())
io.mapOptional("DebugLoc", DL);
io.mapRequired("Function", FN);
io.mapOptional("Hotness", OptDiag->Hotness);
io.mapOptional("Args", OptDiag->Args);
}
Output optimization remarks in YAML (Re-committed after moving the template specialization under the yaml namespace. GCC was complaining about this.) This allows various presentation of this data using an external tool. This was first recommended here[1]. As an example, consider this module: 1 int foo(); 2 int bar(); 3 4 int baz() { 5 return foo() + bar(); 6 } The inliner generates these missed-optimization remarks today (the hotness information is pulled from PGO): remark: /tmp/s.c:5:10: foo will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) remark: /tmp/s.c:5:18: bar will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) Now with -pass-remarks-output=<yaml-file>, we generate this YAML file: --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 10 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: foo - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 18 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: bar - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... This is a summary of the high-level decisions: * There is a new streaming interface to emit optimization remarks. E.g. for the inliner remark above: ORE.emit(DiagnosticInfoOptimizationRemarkMissed( DEBUG_TYPE, "NotInlined", &I) << NV("Callee", Callee) << " will not be inlined into " << NV("Caller", CS.getCaller()) << setIsVerbose()); NV stands for named value and allows the YAML client to process a remark using its name (NotInlined) and the named arguments (Callee and Caller) without parsing the text of the message. Subsequent patches will update ORE users to use the new streaming API. * I am using YAML I/O for writing the YAML file. YAML I/O requires you to specify reading and writing at once but reading is highly non-trivial for some of the more complex LLVM types. Since it's not clear that we (ever) want to use LLVM to parse this YAML file, the code supports and asserts that we're writing only. On the other hand, I did experiment that the class hierarchy starting at DiagnosticInfoOptimizationBase can be mapped back from YAML generated here (see D24479). * The YAML stream is stored in the LLVM context. * In the example, we can probably further specify the IR value used, i.e. print "Function" rather than "Value". * As before hotness is computed in the analysis pass instead of DiganosticInfo. This avoids the layering problem since BFI is in Analysis while DiagnosticInfo is in IR. [1] https://reviews.llvm.org/D19678#419445 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24587 llvm-svn: 282539
2016-09-28 04:55:07 +08:00
template <> struct MappingTraits<DiagnosticLocation> {
static void mapping(IO &io, DiagnosticLocation &DL) {
Output optimization remarks in YAML (Re-committed after moving the template specialization under the yaml namespace. GCC was complaining about this.) This allows various presentation of this data using an external tool. This was first recommended here[1]. As an example, consider this module: 1 int foo(); 2 int bar(); 3 4 int baz() { 5 return foo() + bar(); 6 } The inliner generates these missed-optimization remarks today (the hotness information is pulled from PGO): remark: /tmp/s.c:5:10: foo will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) remark: /tmp/s.c:5:18: bar will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) Now with -pass-remarks-output=<yaml-file>, we generate this YAML file: --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 10 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: foo - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 18 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: bar - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... This is a summary of the high-level decisions: * There is a new streaming interface to emit optimization remarks. E.g. for the inliner remark above: ORE.emit(DiagnosticInfoOptimizationRemarkMissed( DEBUG_TYPE, "NotInlined", &I) << NV("Callee", Callee) << " will not be inlined into " << NV("Caller", CS.getCaller()) << setIsVerbose()); NV stands for named value and allows the YAML client to process a remark using its name (NotInlined) and the named arguments (Callee and Caller) without parsing the text of the message. Subsequent patches will update ORE users to use the new streaming API. * I am using YAML I/O for writing the YAML file. YAML I/O requires you to specify reading and writing at once but reading is highly non-trivial for some of the more complex LLVM types. Since it's not clear that we (ever) want to use LLVM to parse this YAML file, the code supports and asserts that we're writing only. On the other hand, I did experiment that the class hierarchy starting at DiagnosticInfoOptimizationBase can be mapped back from YAML generated here (see D24479). * The YAML stream is stored in the LLVM context. * In the example, we can probably further specify the IR value used, i.e. print "Function" rather than "Value". * As before hotness is computed in the analysis pass instead of DiganosticInfo. This avoids the layering problem since BFI is in Analysis while DiagnosticInfo is in IR. [1] https://reviews.llvm.org/D19678#419445 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24587 llvm-svn: 282539
2016-09-28 04:55:07 +08:00
assert(io.outputting() && "input not yet implemented");
StringRef File = DL.getFilename();
Output optimization remarks in YAML (Re-committed after moving the template specialization under the yaml namespace. GCC was complaining about this.) This allows various presentation of this data using an external tool. This was first recommended here[1]. As an example, consider this module: 1 int foo(); 2 int bar(); 3 4 int baz() { 5 return foo() + bar(); 6 } The inliner generates these missed-optimization remarks today (the hotness information is pulled from PGO): remark: /tmp/s.c:5:10: foo will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) remark: /tmp/s.c:5:18: bar will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) Now with -pass-remarks-output=<yaml-file>, we generate this YAML file: --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 10 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: foo - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 18 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: bar - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... This is a summary of the high-level decisions: * There is a new streaming interface to emit optimization remarks. E.g. for the inliner remark above: ORE.emit(DiagnosticInfoOptimizationRemarkMissed( DEBUG_TYPE, "NotInlined", &I) << NV("Callee", Callee) << " will not be inlined into " << NV("Caller", CS.getCaller()) << setIsVerbose()); NV stands for named value and allows the YAML client to process a remark using its name (NotInlined) and the named arguments (Callee and Caller) without parsing the text of the message. Subsequent patches will update ORE users to use the new streaming API. * I am using YAML I/O for writing the YAML file. YAML I/O requires you to specify reading and writing at once but reading is highly non-trivial for some of the more complex LLVM types. Since it's not clear that we (ever) want to use LLVM to parse this YAML file, the code supports and asserts that we're writing only. On the other hand, I did experiment that the class hierarchy starting at DiagnosticInfoOptimizationBase can be mapped back from YAML generated here (see D24479). * The YAML stream is stored in the LLVM context. * In the example, we can probably further specify the IR value used, i.e. print "Function" rather than "Value". * As before hotness is computed in the analysis pass instead of DiganosticInfo. This avoids the layering problem since BFI is in Analysis while DiagnosticInfo is in IR. [1] https://reviews.llvm.org/D19678#419445 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24587 llvm-svn: 282539
2016-09-28 04:55:07 +08:00
unsigned Line = DL.getLine();
unsigned Col = DL.getColumn();
Output optimization remarks in YAML (Re-committed after moving the template specialization under the yaml namespace. GCC was complaining about this.) This allows various presentation of this data using an external tool. This was first recommended here[1]. As an example, consider this module: 1 int foo(); 2 int bar(); 3 4 int baz() { 5 return foo() + bar(); 6 } The inliner generates these missed-optimization remarks today (the hotness information is pulled from PGO): remark: /tmp/s.c:5:10: foo will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) remark: /tmp/s.c:5:18: bar will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) Now with -pass-remarks-output=<yaml-file>, we generate this YAML file: --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 10 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: foo - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 18 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: bar - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... This is a summary of the high-level decisions: * There is a new streaming interface to emit optimization remarks. E.g. for the inliner remark above: ORE.emit(DiagnosticInfoOptimizationRemarkMissed( DEBUG_TYPE, "NotInlined", &I) << NV("Callee", Callee) << " will not be inlined into " << NV("Caller", CS.getCaller()) << setIsVerbose()); NV stands for named value and allows the YAML client to process a remark using its name (NotInlined) and the named arguments (Callee and Caller) without parsing the text of the message. Subsequent patches will update ORE users to use the new streaming API. * I am using YAML I/O for writing the YAML file. YAML I/O requires you to specify reading and writing at once but reading is highly non-trivial for some of the more complex LLVM types. Since it's not clear that we (ever) want to use LLVM to parse this YAML file, the code supports and asserts that we're writing only. On the other hand, I did experiment that the class hierarchy starting at DiagnosticInfoOptimizationBase can be mapped back from YAML generated here (see D24479). * The YAML stream is stored in the LLVM context. * In the example, we can probably further specify the IR value used, i.e. print "Function" rather than "Value". * As before hotness is computed in the analysis pass instead of DiganosticInfo. This avoids the layering problem since BFI is in Analysis while DiagnosticInfo is in IR. [1] https://reviews.llvm.org/D19678#419445 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24587 llvm-svn: 282539
2016-09-28 04:55:07 +08:00
io.mapRequired("File", File);
io.mapRequired("Line", Line);
io.mapRequired("Column", Col);
}
static const bool flow = true;
};
// Implement this as a mapping for now to get proper quotation for the value.
template <> struct MappingTraits<DiagnosticInfoOptimizationBase::Argument> {
static void mapping(IO &io, DiagnosticInfoOptimizationBase::Argument &A) {
assert(io.outputting() && "input not yet implemented");
io.mapRequired(A.Key.data(), A.Val);
if (A.Loc.isValid())
io.mapOptional("DebugLoc", A.Loc);
Output optimization remarks in YAML (Re-committed after moving the template specialization under the yaml namespace. GCC was complaining about this.) This allows various presentation of this data using an external tool. This was first recommended here[1]. As an example, consider this module: 1 int foo(); 2 int bar(); 3 4 int baz() { 5 return foo() + bar(); 6 } The inliner generates these missed-optimization remarks today (the hotness information is pulled from PGO): remark: /tmp/s.c:5:10: foo will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) remark: /tmp/s.c:5:18: bar will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) Now with -pass-remarks-output=<yaml-file>, we generate this YAML file: --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 10 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: foo - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 18 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: bar - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... This is a summary of the high-level decisions: * There is a new streaming interface to emit optimization remarks. E.g. for the inliner remark above: ORE.emit(DiagnosticInfoOptimizationRemarkMissed( DEBUG_TYPE, "NotInlined", &I) << NV("Callee", Callee) << " will not be inlined into " << NV("Caller", CS.getCaller()) << setIsVerbose()); NV stands for named value and allows the YAML client to process a remark using its name (NotInlined) and the named arguments (Callee and Caller) without parsing the text of the message. Subsequent patches will update ORE users to use the new streaming API. * I am using YAML I/O for writing the YAML file. YAML I/O requires you to specify reading and writing at once but reading is highly non-trivial for some of the more complex LLVM types. Since it's not clear that we (ever) want to use LLVM to parse this YAML file, the code supports and asserts that we're writing only. On the other hand, I did experiment that the class hierarchy starting at DiagnosticInfoOptimizationBase can be mapped back from YAML generated here (see D24479). * The YAML stream is stored in the LLVM context. * In the example, we can probably further specify the IR value used, i.e. print "Function" rather than "Value". * As before hotness is computed in the analysis pass instead of DiganosticInfo. This avoids the layering problem since BFI is in Analysis while DiagnosticInfo is in IR. [1] https://reviews.llvm.org/D19678#419445 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24587 llvm-svn: 282539
2016-09-28 04:55:07 +08:00
}
};
} // end namespace yaml
} // end namespace llvm
LLVM_YAML_IS_SEQUENCE_VECTOR(DiagnosticInfoOptimizationBase::Argument)
void OptimizationRemarkEmitter::computeHotness(
DiagnosticInfoIROptimization &OptDiag) {
const Value *V = OptDiag.getCodeRegion();
Output optimization remarks in YAML (Re-committed after moving the template specialization under the yaml namespace. GCC was complaining about this.) This allows various presentation of this data using an external tool. This was first recommended here[1]. As an example, consider this module: 1 int foo(); 2 int bar(); 3 4 int baz() { 5 return foo() + bar(); 6 } The inliner generates these missed-optimization remarks today (the hotness information is pulled from PGO): remark: /tmp/s.c:5:10: foo will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) remark: /tmp/s.c:5:18: bar will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) Now with -pass-remarks-output=<yaml-file>, we generate this YAML file: --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 10 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: foo - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 18 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: bar - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... This is a summary of the high-level decisions: * There is a new streaming interface to emit optimization remarks. E.g. for the inliner remark above: ORE.emit(DiagnosticInfoOptimizationRemarkMissed( DEBUG_TYPE, "NotInlined", &I) << NV("Callee", Callee) << " will not be inlined into " << NV("Caller", CS.getCaller()) << setIsVerbose()); NV stands for named value and allows the YAML client to process a remark using its name (NotInlined) and the named arguments (Callee and Caller) without parsing the text of the message. Subsequent patches will update ORE users to use the new streaming API. * I am using YAML I/O for writing the YAML file. YAML I/O requires you to specify reading and writing at once but reading is highly non-trivial for some of the more complex LLVM types. Since it's not clear that we (ever) want to use LLVM to parse this YAML file, the code supports and asserts that we're writing only. On the other hand, I did experiment that the class hierarchy starting at DiagnosticInfoOptimizationBase can be mapped back from YAML generated here (see D24479). * The YAML stream is stored in the LLVM context. * In the example, we can probably further specify the IR value used, i.e. print "Function" rather than "Value". * As before hotness is computed in the analysis pass instead of DiganosticInfo. This avoids the layering problem since BFI is in Analysis while DiagnosticInfo is in IR. [1] https://reviews.llvm.org/D19678#419445 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24587 llvm-svn: 282539
2016-09-28 04:55:07 +08:00
if (V)
OptDiag.setHotness(computeHotness(V));
}
void OptimizationRemarkEmitter::emit(
DiagnosticInfoOptimizationBase &OptDiagBase) {
auto &OptDiag = cast<DiagnosticInfoIROptimization>(OptDiagBase);
Output optimization remarks in YAML (Re-committed after moving the template specialization under the yaml namespace. GCC was complaining about this.) This allows various presentation of this data using an external tool. This was first recommended here[1]. As an example, consider this module: 1 int foo(); 2 int bar(); 3 4 int baz() { 5 return foo() + bar(); 6 } The inliner generates these missed-optimization remarks today (the hotness information is pulled from PGO): remark: /tmp/s.c:5:10: foo will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) remark: /tmp/s.c:5:18: bar will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) Now with -pass-remarks-output=<yaml-file>, we generate this YAML file: --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 10 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: foo - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 18 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: bar - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... This is a summary of the high-level decisions: * There is a new streaming interface to emit optimization remarks. E.g. for the inliner remark above: ORE.emit(DiagnosticInfoOptimizationRemarkMissed( DEBUG_TYPE, "NotInlined", &I) << NV("Callee", Callee) << " will not be inlined into " << NV("Caller", CS.getCaller()) << setIsVerbose()); NV stands for named value and allows the YAML client to process a remark using its name (NotInlined) and the named arguments (Callee and Caller) without parsing the text of the message. Subsequent patches will update ORE users to use the new streaming API. * I am using YAML I/O for writing the YAML file. YAML I/O requires you to specify reading and writing at once but reading is highly non-trivial for some of the more complex LLVM types. Since it's not clear that we (ever) want to use LLVM to parse this YAML file, the code supports and asserts that we're writing only. On the other hand, I did experiment that the class hierarchy starting at DiagnosticInfoOptimizationBase can be mapped back from YAML generated here (see D24479). * The YAML stream is stored in the LLVM context. * In the example, we can probably further specify the IR value used, i.e. print "Function" rather than "Value". * As before hotness is computed in the analysis pass instead of DiganosticInfo. This avoids the layering problem since BFI is in Analysis while DiagnosticInfo is in IR. [1] https://reviews.llvm.org/D19678#419445 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24587 llvm-svn: 282539
2016-09-28 04:55:07 +08:00
computeHotness(OptDiag);
// If a diagnostic has a hotness value, then only emit it if its hotness
// meets the threshold.
if (OptDiag.getHotness() &&
*OptDiag.getHotness() <
F->getContext().getDiagnosticsHotnessThreshold()) {
return;
}
Output optimization remarks in YAML (Re-committed after moving the template specialization under the yaml namespace. GCC was complaining about this.) This allows various presentation of this data using an external tool. This was first recommended here[1]. As an example, consider this module: 1 int foo(); 2 int bar(); 3 4 int baz() { 5 return foo() + bar(); 6 } The inliner generates these missed-optimization remarks today (the hotness information is pulled from PGO): remark: /tmp/s.c:5:10: foo will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) remark: /tmp/s.c:5:18: bar will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) Now with -pass-remarks-output=<yaml-file>, we generate this YAML file: --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 10 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: foo - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 18 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: bar - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... This is a summary of the high-level decisions: * There is a new streaming interface to emit optimization remarks. E.g. for the inliner remark above: ORE.emit(DiagnosticInfoOptimizationRemarkMissed( DEBUG_TYPE, "NotInlined", &I) << NV("Callee", Callee) << " will not be inlined into " << NV("Caller", CS.getCaller()) << setIsVerbose()); NV stands for named value and allows the YAML client to process a remark using its name (NotInlined) and the named arguments (Callee and Caller) without parsing the text of the message. Subsequent patches will update ORE users to use the new streaming API. * I am using YAML I/O for writing the YAML file. YAML I/O requires you to specify reading and writing at once but reading is highly non-trivial for some of the more complex LLVM types. Since it's not clear that we (ever) want to use LLVM to parse this YAML file, the code supports and asserts that we're writing only. On the other hand, I did experiment that the class hierarchy starting at DiagnosticInfoOptimizationBase can be mapped back from YAML generated here (see D24479). * The YAML stream is stored in the LLVM context. * In the example, we can probably further specify the IR value used, i.e. print "Function" rather than "Value". * As before hotness is computed in the analysis pass instead of DiganosticInfo. This avoids the layering problem since BFI is in Analysis while DiagnosticInfo is in IR. [1] https://reviews.llvm.org/D19678#419445 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24587 llvm-svn: 282539
2016-09-28 04:55:07 +08:00
yaml::Output *Out = F->getContext().getDiagnosticsOutputFile();
if (Out) {
// For remarks the << operator takes a reference to a pointer.
auto *P = &OptDiagBase;
Output optimization remarks in YAML (Re-committed after moving the template specialization under the yaml namespace. GCC was complaining about this.) This allows various presentation of this data using an external tool. This was first recommended here[1]. As an example, consider this module: 1 int foo(); 2 int bar(); 3 4 int baz() { 5 return foo() + bar(); 6 } The inliner generates these missed-optimization remarks today (the hotness information is pulled from PGO): remark: /tmp/s.c:5:10: foo will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) remark: /tmp/s.c:5:18: bar will not be inlined into baz (hotness: 30) Now with -pass-remarks-output=<yaml-file>, we generate this YAML file: --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 10 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: foo - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... --- !Missed Pass: inline Name: NotInlined DebugLoc: { File: /tmp/s.c, Line: 5, Column: 18 } Function: baz Hotness: 30 Args: - Callee: bar - String: will not be inlined into - Caller: baz ... This is a summary of the high-level decisions: * There is a new streaming interface to emit optimization remarks. E.g. for the inliner remark above: ORE.emit(DiagnosticInfoOptimizationRemarkMissed( DEBUG_TYPE, "NotInlined", &I) << NV("Callee", Callee) << " will not be inlined into " << NV("Caller", CS.getCaller()) << setIsVerbose()); NV stands for named value and allows the YAML client to process a remark using its name (NotInlined) and the named arguments (Callee and Caller) without parsing the text of the message. Subsequent patches will update ORE users to use the new streaming API. * I am using YAML I/O for writing the YAML file. YAML I/O requires you to specify reading and writing at once but reading is highly non-trivial for some of the more complex LLVM types. Since it's not clear that we (ever) want to use LLVM to parse this YAML file, the code supports and asserts that we're writing only. On the other hand, I did experiment that the class hierarchy starting at DiagnosticInfoOptimizationBase can be mapped back from YAML generated here (see D24479). * The YAML stream is stored in the LLVM context. * In the example, we can probably further specify the IR value used, i.e. print "Function" rather than "Value". * As before hotness is computed in the analysis pass instead of DiganosticInfo. This avoids the layering problem since BFI is in Analysis while DiagnosticInfo is in IR. [1] https://reviews.llvm.org/D19678#419445 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24587 llvm-svn: 282539
2016-09-28 04:55:07 +08:00
*Out << P;
}
// FIXME: now that IsVerbose is part of DI, filtering for this will be moved
// from here to clang.
if (!OptDiag.isVerbose() || shouldEmitVerbose())
F->getContext().diagnose(OptDiag);
}
OptimizationRemarkEmitterWrapperPass::OptimizationRemarkEmitterWrapperPass()
: FunctionPass(ID) {
initializeOptimizationRemarkEmitterWrapperPassPass(
*PassRegistry::getPassRegistry());
}
bool OptimizationRemarkEmitterWrapperPass::runOnFunction(Function &Fn) {
BlockFrequencyInfo *BFI;
[OptRemark,LDist] RFC: Add hotness attribute Summary: This is the first set of changes implementing the RFC from http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/98334 This is a cross-sectional patch; rather than implementing the hotness attribute for all optimization remarks and all passes in a patch set, it implements it for the 'missed-optimization' remark for Loop Distribution. My goal is to shake out the design issues before scaling it up to other types and passes. Hotness is computed as an integer as the multiplication of the block frequency with the function entry count. It's only printed in opt currently since clang prints the diagnostic fields directly. E.g.: remark: /tmp/t.c:3:3: loop not distributed: use -Rpass-analysis=loop-distribute for more info (hotness: 300) A new API added is similar to emitOptimizationRemarkMissed. The difference is that it additionally takes a code region that the diagnostic corresponds to. From this, hotness is computed using BFI. The new API is exposed via an analysis pass so that it can be made dependent on LazyBFI. (Thanks to Hal for the analysis pass idea.) This feature can all be enabled by setDiagnosticHotnessRequested in the LLVM context. If this is off, LazyBFI is not calculated (D22141) so there should be no overhead. A new command-line option is added to turn this on in opt. My plan is to switch all user of emitOptimizationRemark* to use this module instead. Reviewers: hfinkel Subscribers: rcox2, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21771 llvm-svn: 275583
2016-07-16 01:23:20 +08:00
if (Fn.getContext().getDiagnosticsHotnessRequested())
[OptRemark,LDist] RFC: Add hotness attribute Summary: This is the first set of changes implementing the RFC from http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/98334 This is a cross-sectional patch; rather than implementing the hotness attribute for all optimization remarks and all passes in a patch set, it implements it for the 'missed-optimization' remark for Loop Distribution. My goal is to shake out the design issues before scaling it up to other types and passes. Hotness is computed as an integer as the multiplication of the block frequency with the function entry count. It's only printed in opt currently since clang prints the diagnostic fields directly. E.g.: remark: /tmp/t.c:3:3: loop not distributed: use -Rpass-analysis=loop-distribute for more info (hotness: 300) A new API added is similar to emitOptimizationRemarkMissed. The difference is that it additionally takes a code region that the diagnostic corresponds to. From this, hotness is computed using BFI. The new API is exposed via an analysis pass so that it can be made dependent on LazyBFI. (Thanks to Hal for the analysis pass idea.) This feature can all be enabled by setDiagnosticHotnessRequested in the LLVM context. If this is off, LazyBFI is not calculated (D22141) so there should be no overhead. A new command-line option is added to turn this on in opt. My plan is to switch all user of emitOptimizationRemark* to use this module instead. Reviewers: hfinkel Subscribers: rcox2, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21771 llvm-svn: 275583
2016-07-16 01:23:20 +08:00
BFI = &getAnalysis<LazyBlockFrequencyInfoPass>().getBFI();
else
BFI = nullptr;
ORE = llvm::make_unique<OptimizationRemarkEmitter>(&Fn, BFI);
[OptRemark,LDist] RFC: Add hotness attribute Summary: This is the first set of changes implementing the RFC from http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/98334 This is a cross-sectional patch; rather than implementing the hotness attribute for all optimization remarks and all passes in a patch set, it implements it for the 'missed-optimization' remark for Loop Distribution. My goal is to shake out the design issues before scaling it up to other types and passes. Hotness is computed as an integer as the multiplication of the block frequency with the function entry count. It's only printed in opt currently since clang prints the diagnostic fields directly. E.g.: remark: /tmp/t.c:3:3: loop not distributed: use -Rpass-analysis=loop-distribute for more info (hotness: 300) A new API added is similar to emitOptimizationRemarkMissed. The difference is that it additionally takes a code region that the diagnostic corresponds to. From this, hotness is computed using BFI. The new API is exposed via an analysis pass so that it can be made dependent on LazyBFI. (Thanks to Hal for the analysis pass idea.) This feature can all be enabled by setDiagnosticHotnessRequested in the LLVM context. If this is off, LazyBFI is not calculated (D22141) so there should be no overhead. A new command-line option is added to turn this on in opt. My plan is to switch all user of emitOptimizationRemark* to use this module instead. Reviewers: hfinkel Subscribers: rcox2, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21771 llvm-svn: 275583
2016-07-16 01:23:20 +08:00
return false;
}
void OptimizationRemarkEmitterWrapperPass::getAnalysisUsage(
AnalysisUsage &AU) const {
[OptRemark,LDist] RFC: Add hotness attribute Summary: This is the first set of changes implementing the RFC from http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/98334 This is a cross-sectional patch; rather than implementing the hotness attribute for all optimization remarks and all passes in a patch set, it implements it for the 'missed-optimization' remark for Loop Distribution. My goal is to shake out the design issues before scaling it up to other types and passes. Hotness is computed as an integer as the multiplication of the block frequency with the function entry count. It's only printed in opt currently since clang prints the diagnostic fields directly. E.g.: remark: /tmp/t.c:3:3: loop not distributed: use -Rpass-analysis=loop-distribute for more info (hotness: 300) A new API added is similar to emitOptimizationRemarkMissed. The difference is that it additionally takes a code region that the diagnostic corresponds to. From this, hotness is computed using BFI. The new API is exposed via an analysis pass so that it can be made dependent on LazyBFI. (Thanks to Hal for the analysis pass idea.) This feature can all be enabled by setDiagnosticHotnessRequested in the LLVM context. If this is off, LazyBFI is not calculated (D22141) so there should be no overhead. A new command-line option is added to turn this on in opt. My plan is to switch all user of emitOptimizationRemark* to use this module instead. Reviewers: hfinkel Subscribers: rcox2, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21771 llvm-svn: 275583
2016-07-16 01:23:20 +08:00
LazyBlockFrequencyInfoPass::getLazyBFIAnalysisUsage(AU);
AU.setPreservesAll();
}
[PM] Change the static object whose address is used to uniquely identify analyses to have a common type which is enforced rather than using a char object and a `void *` type when used as an identifier. This has a number of advantages. First, it at least helps some of the confusion raised in Justin Lebar's code review of why `void *` was being used everywhere by having a stronger type that connects to documentation about this. However, perhaps more importantly, it addresses a serious issue where the alignment of these pointer-like identifiers was unknown. This made it hard to use them in pointer-like data structures. We were already dodging this in dangerous ways to create the "all analyses" entry. In a subsequent patch I attempted to use these with TinyPtrVector and things fell apart in a very bad way. And it isn't just a compile time or type system issue. Worse than that, the actual alignment of these pointer-like opaque identifiers wasn't guaranteed to be a useful alignment as they were just characters. This change introduces a type to use as the "key" object whose address forms the opaque identifier. This both forces the objects to have proper alignment, and provides type checking that we get it right everywhere. It also makes the types somewhat less mysterious than `void *`. We could go one step further and introduce a truly opaque pointer-like type to return from the `ID()` static function rather than returning `AnalysisKey *`, but that didn't seem to be a clear win so this is just the initial change to get to a reliably typed and aligned object serving is a key for all the analyses. Thanks to Richard Smith and Justin Lebar for helping pick plausible names and avoid making this refactoring many times. =] And thanks to Sean for the super fast review! While here, I've tried to move away from the "PassID" nomenclature entirely as it wasn't really helping and is overloaded with old pass manager constructs. Now we have IDs for analyses, and key objects whose address can be used as IDs. Where possible and clear I've shortened this to just "ID". In a few places I kept "AnalysisID" to make it clear what was being identified. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27031 llvm-svn: 287783
2016-11-24 01:53:26 +08:00
AnalysisKey OptimizationRemarkEmitterAnalysis::Key;
OptimizationRemarkEmitter
OptimizationRemarkEmitterAnalysis::run(Function &F,
FunctionAnalysisManager &AM) {
BlockFrequencyInfo *BFI;
if (F.getContext().getDiagnosticsHotnessRequested())
BFI = &AM.getResult<BlockFrequencyAnalysis>(F);
else
BFI = nullptr;
return OptimizationRemarkEmitter(&F, BFI);
}
char OptimizationRemarkEmitterWrapperPass::ID = 0;
[OptRemark,LDist] RFC: Add hotness attribute Summary: This is the first set of changes implementing the RFC from http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/98334 This is a cross-sectional patch; rather than implementing the hotness attribute for all optimization remarks and all passes in a patch set, it implements it for the 'missed-optimization' remark for Loop Distribution. My goal is to shake out the design issues before scaling it up to other types and passes. Hotness is computed as an integer as the multiplication of the block frequency with the function entry count. It's only printed in opt currently since clang prints the diagnostic fields directly. E.g.: remark: /tmp/t.c:3:3: loop not distributed: use -Rpass-analysis=loop-distribute for more info (hotness: 300) A new API added is similar to emitOptimizationRemarkMissed. The difference is that it additionally takes a code region that the diagnostic corresponds to. From this, hotness is computed using BFI. The new API is exposed via an analysis pass so that it can be made dependent on LazyBFI. (Thanks to Hal for the analysis pass idea.) This feature can all be enabled by setDiagnosticHotnessRequested in the LLVM context. If this is off, LazyBFI is not calculated (D22141) so there should be no overhead. A new command-line option is added to turn this on in opt. My plan is to switch all user of emitOptimizationRemark* to use this module instead. Reviewers: hfinkel Subscribers: rcox2, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21771 llvm-svn: 275583
2016-07-16 01:23:20 +08:00
static const char ore_name[] = "Optimization Remark Emitter";
#define ORE_NAME "opt-remark-emitter"
INITIALIZE_PASS_BEGIN(OptimizationRemarkEmitterWrapperPass, ORE_NAME, ore_name,
false, true)
[OptRemark,LDist] RFC: Add hotness attribute Summary: This is the first set of changes implementing the RFC from http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/98334 This is a cross-sectional patch; rather than implementing the hotness attribute for all optimization remarks and all passes in a patch set, it implements it for the 'missed-optimization' remark for Loop Distribution. My goal is to shake out the design issues before scaling it up to other types and passes. Hotness is computed as an integer as the multiplication of the block frequency with the function entry count. It's only printed in opt currently since clang prints the diagnostic fields directly. E.g.: remark: /tmp/t.c:3:3: loop not distributed: use -Rpass-analysis=loop-distribute for more info (hotness: 300) A new API added is similar to emitOptimizationRemarkMissed. The difference is that it additionally takes a code region that the diagnostic corresponds to. From this, hotness is computed using BFI. The new API is exposed via an analysis pass so that it can be made dependent on LazyBFI. (Thanks to Hal for the analysis pass idea.) This feature can all be enabled by setDiagnosticHotnessRequested in the LLVM context. If this is off, LazyBFI is not calculated (D22141) so there should be no overhead. A new command-line option is added to turn this on in opt. My plan is to switch all user of emitOptimizationRemark* to use this module instead. Reviewers: hfinkel Subscribers: rcox2, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21771 llvm-svn: 275583
2016-07-16 01:23:20 +08:00
INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(LazyBFIPass)
INITIALIZE_PASS_END(OptimizationRemarkEmitterWrapperPass, ORE_NAME, ore_name,
false, true)