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
business.
This header includes Function and BasicBlock and directly uses the
interfaces of both classes. It has to do with the IR, it even has that
in the name. =] Put it in the library it belongs to.
This is one step toward making LLVM's Support library survive a C++
modules bootstrap.
llvm-svn: 202814
Summary:
I searched Transforms/ and Analysis/ for 'ByVal' and updated those call
sites to check for inalloca if appropriate.
I added tests for any change that would allow an optimization to fire on
inalloca.
Reviewers: nlewycky
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2449
llvm-svn: 200281
can be used by both the new pass manager and the old.
This removes it from any of the virtual mess of the pass interfaces and
lets it derive cleanly from the DominatorTreeBase<> template. In turn,
tons of boilerplate interface can be nuked and it turns into a very
straightforward extension of the base DominatorTree interface.
The old analysis pass is now a simple wrapper. The names and style of
this split should match the split between CallGraph and
CallGraphWrapperPass. All of the users of DominatorTree have been
updated to match using many of the same tricks as with CallGraph. The
goal is that the common type remains the resulting DominatorTree rather
than the pass. This will make subsequent work toward the new pass
manager significantly easier.
Also in numerous places things became cleaner because I switched from
re-running the pass (!!! mid way through some other passes run!!!) to
directly recomputing the domtree.
llvm-svn: 199104
directory. These passes are already defined in the IR library, and it
doesn't make any sense to have the headers in Analysis.
Long term, I think there is going to be a much better way to divide
these matters. The dominators code should be fully separated into the
abstract graph algorithm and have that put in Support where it becomes
obvious that evn Clang's CFGBlock's can use it. Then the verifier can
manually construct dominance information from the Support-driven
interface while the Analysis library can provide a pass which both
caches, reconstructs, and supports a nice update API.
But those are very long term, and so I don't want to leave the really
confusing structure until that day arrives.
llvm-svn: 199082
Due to the previously added overflow checks, we can have a retain/release
relation that is one directional. This occurs specifically when we run into an
additive overflow causing us to drop state in only one direction. If that
occurs, we should bail and not optimize that retain/release instead of
asserting.
Apologies for the size of the testcase. It is necessary to cause the additive
cfg overflow to trigger.
rdar://15377890
llvm-svn: 194083
The reason that I am turning off this optimization is that there is an
additional case where a block can escape that has come up. Specifically, this
occurs when a block is used in a scope outside of its current scope.
This can cause a captured retainable object pointer whose life is preserved by
the objc_retainBlock to be deallocated before the block is invoked.
An example of the code needed to trigger the bug is:
----
\#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
int main(int argc, const char * argv[]) {
void (^somethingToDoLater)();
{
NSObject *obj = [NSObject new];
somethingToDoLater = ^{
[obj self]; // Crashes here
};
}
NSLog(@"test.");
somethingToDoLater();
return 0;
}
----
In the next commit, I remove all the dead code that results from this.
Once I put in the fixing commit I will bring back the tests that I deleted in
this commit.
rdar://14802782.
rdar://14868830.
llvm-svn: 189869
I fixed the aforementioned problems that came up on some of the linux boxes.
Major thanks to Nick Lewycky for his help debugging!
rdar://14590914
llvm-svn: 188122
This reverts commit r187941.
The commit was passing on my os x box, but it is failing on some non-osx
platforms. I do not have time to look into it now, so I am reverting and will
recommit after I figure this out.
llvm-svn: 187946
This is the first patch in a series of 3 patches which clean up how we create
runtime function declarations in the ARC optimizer when they do not exist
already in the IR.
Currently we have a bunch of duplicated code in ObjCARCOpts, ObjCARCContract
that does this. This patch refactors that code into a separate class called
ARCRuntimeEntryPoints which lazily creates the declarations for said
entrypoints.
The next two patches will consist of the work of refactoring
ObjCARCContract/ObjCARCOpts to use this new code.
llvm-svn: 185740
This is apart of a series of patches to encapsulate PtrState.RRI and
make PtrState.RRI a private field of PtrState.
*NOTE* This is actually the second commit in the patch stream. I should
have put this note on the first such commit r184528.
llvm-svn: 184532
In the presense of a block being initialized, the frontend will emit the
objc_retain on the original pointer and the release on the pointer loaded from
the alloca. The optimizer will through the provenance analysis realize that the
two are related (albiet different), but since we only require KnownSafe in one
direction, will match the inner retain on the original pointer with the guard
release on the original pointer. This is fixed by ensuring that in the presense
of allocas we only unconditionally remove pointers if both our retain and our
release are KnownSafe (i.e. we are KnownSafe in both directions) since we must
deal with the possibility that the frontend will emit what (to the optimizer)
appears to be unbalanced retain/releases.
An example of the miscompile is:
%A = alloca
retain(%x)
retain(%x) <--- Inner Retain
store %x, %A
%y = load %A
... DO STUFF ...
release(%y)
call void @use(%x)
release(%x) <--- Guarding Release
getting optimized to:
%A = alloca
retain(%x)
store %x, %A
%y = load %A
... DO STUFF ...
release(%y)
call void @use(%x)
rdar://13750319
llvm-svn: 181743
This makes the statistics gathering completely independent of the actual
optimization occuring, preventing any sort of bleeding over from occuring.
Additionally, it simplifies a switch statement in the non-statistic gathering case.
llvm-svn: 181719
the things, and renames it to CBindingWrapping.h. I also moved
CBindingWrapping.h into Support/.
This new file just contains the macros for defining different wrap/unwrap
methods.
The calls to those macros, as well as any custom wrap/unwrap definitions
(like for array of Values for example), are put into corresponding C++
headers.
Doing this required some #include surgery, since some .cpp files relied
on the fact that including Wrap.h implicitly caused the inclusion of a
bunch of other things.
This also now means that the C++ headers will include their corresponding
C API headers; for example Value.h must include llvm-c/Core.h. I think
this is harmless, since the C API headers contain just external function
declarations and some C types, so I don't believe there should be any
nasty dependency issues here.
llvm-svn: 180881
Turning retains into retainRV calls disrupts the data flow analysis in
ObjCARCOpts. Thus we move it as late as we can by moving it into
ObjCARCContract.
We leave in the conversion from retainRV -> retain in ObjCARCOpt since
it enables the dataflow analysis.
rdar://10813093
llvm-svn: 180698
This reverts commit r180222.
I think this might tie in with a different problem which will require a
different approach potentially. I am reverting this in the case I need to go
down that second path.
My apologies for the noise. = /.
llvm-svn: 180590
Due to the semantics of ARC, we must be extremely conservative with autorelease
calls inserted by the frontend since ARC gaurantees that said object will be in
the autorelease pool after that point, an optimization invariant that the
optimizer must respect.
On the other hand, we are allowed significantly more flexibility with
autoreleaseRV instructions.
Often times though this flexibility is disrupted by early transformations which
transform objc_autoreleaseRV => objc_autorelease if said instruction is no
longer being used as part of an RV pair (generally due to inlining). Since we
can not tell the difference in between an autorelease put into place by the
frontend and one created through said ``strength reduction'' we can not perform
these optimizations.
The addition of this set gets around said issues by allowing us to differentiate
in between said two cases.
rdar://problem/13697741.
llvm-svn: 180222
This will make it clearer when we are actually resetting a sequence's progress
vs just changing state. This is an important distinction because the former case
clears any pointers that we are tracking while the later does not.
llvm-svn: 179963
This occurs due to an alloca representing a separate ownership from the
original pointer. Thus consider the following pseudo-IR:
objc_retain(%a)
for (...) {
objc_retain(%a)
%block <- %a
F(%block)
objc_release(%block)
}
objc_release(%a)
From the perspective of the optimizer, the %block is a separate
provenance from the original %a. Thus the optimizer pairs up the inner
retain for %a and the outer release from %a, resulting in segfaults.
This is fixed by noting that the signature of a mismatch of
retain/releases inside the for loop is a Use/CanRelease top down with an
None bottom up (since bottom up the Retain-CanRelease-Use-Release
sequence is completed by the inner objc_retain, but top down due to the
differing provenance from the objc_release said sequence is not
completed). In said case in CheckForCFGHazards, we now clear the state
of %a implying that no pairing will occur.
Additionally a test case is included.
rdar://12969722
llvm-svn: 179747
The normal dataflow sequence in the ARC optimizer consists of the following
states:
Retain -> CanRelease -> Use -> Release
The optimizer before this patch stored the uses that determine the lifetime of
the retainable object pointer when it bottom up hits a retain or when top down
it hits a release. This is correct for an imprecise lifetime scenario since what
we are trying to do is remove retains/releases while making sure that no
``CanRelease'' (which is usually a call) deallocates the given pointer before we
get to the ``Use'' (since that would cause a segfault).
If we are considering the precise lifetime scenario though, this is not
correct. In such a situation, we *DO* care about the previous sequence, but
additionally, we wish to track the uses resulting from the following incomplete
sequences:
Retain -> CanRelease -> Release (TopDown)
Retain <- Use <- Release (BottomUp)
*NOTE* This patch looks large but the most of it consists of updating
test cases. Additionally this fix exposed an additional bug. I removed
the test case that expressed said bug and will recommit it with the fix
in a little bit.
llvm-svn: 178921
Cleaned up trailing whitespace and added extra slashes in front of a
function level comment so that it follow the convention of having 3
slashes.
llvm-svn: 178712
The semantics of ARC implies that a pointer passed into an objc_autorelease
must live until some point (potentially down the stack) where an
autorelease pool is popped. On the other hand, an
objc_autoreleaseReturnValue just signifies that the object must live
until the end of the given function at least.
Thus objc_autorelease is stronger than objc_autoreleaseReturnValue in
terms of the semantics of ARC* implying that performing the given
strength reduction without any knowledge of how this relates to
the autorelease pool pop that is further up the stack violates the
semantics of ARC.
*Even though objc_autoreleaseReturnValue if you know that no RV
optimization will occur is more computationally expensive.
llvm-svn: 178612
clang.arc.used is an interesting call for ARC since ObjCARCContract
needs to run to remove said intrinsic to avoid a linker error (since the
call does not exist).
llvm-svn: 178369
Since we handle optimizable objc_retainBlocks through strength reduction
in OptimizableIndividualCalls, we know that all code after that point
will only see non-optimizable objc_retainBlock calls. IsForwarding is
only called by functions after that point, so it is ok to just classify
objc_retainBlock as non-forwarding.
<rdar://problem/13249661>.
llvm-svn: 178285
If an objc_retainBlock has the copy_on_escape metadata attached to it
AND if the block pointer argument only escapes down the stack, we are
allowed to strength reduce the objc_retainBlock to to an objc_retain and
thus optimize it.
Current there is logic in the ARC data flow analysis to handle
this case which is complicated and involved making distinctions in
between objc_retainBlock and objc_retain in certain places and
considering them the same in others.
This patch simplifies said code by:
1. Performing the strength reduction in the initial ARC peephole
analysis (ObjCARCOpts::OptimizeIndividualCalls).
2. Changes the ARC dataflow analysis (which runs after the peephole
analysis) to consider all objc_retainBlock calls to not be optimizable
(since if the call was optimizable, we would have strength reduced it
already).
This patch leaves in the infrastructure in the ARC dataflow analysis to
handle this case, which due to 2 will just be dead code. I am doing this
on purpose to separate the removal of the old code from the testing of
the new code.
<rdar://problem/13249661>.
llvm-svn: 178284
This will allow for verification and analysis of the merge function of
the data flow analyses in the ARC optimizer.
The actual implementation of this feature is by introducing calls to
the functions llvm.arc.annotation.{bottomup,topdown}.{bbstart,bbend}
which are only declared. Each such call takes in a pointer to a global
with the same name as the pointer whose provenance is being tracked and
a pointer whose name is one of our Sequence states and points to a
string that contains the same name.
To ensure that the optimizer does not consider these annotations in any
way, I made it so that the annotations are considered to be of IC_None
type.
A test case is included for this commit and the previous
ObjCARCAnnotation commit.
llvm-svn: 177952
Previously the inner works of the data flow analysis in ObjCARCOpts was hard to
get out of the optimizer for analysis of bugs or testing. All of the current ARC
unit tests are based off of testing the effect of the data flow
analysis (i.e. what statements are removed or moved, etc.). This creates
weakness in the current unit testing regimem since we are not actually testing
what effects various instructions have on the modeled pointer state.
Additionally in order to analyze a bug in the optimizer, one would need to track
by hand what the optimizer was actually doing either through use of DEBUG
statements or through the usage of a debugger, both yielding large loses in
developer productivity.
This patch deals with these two issues by providing ARC annotation
metadata that annotates instructions with the state changes that they cause in
various pointers as well as provides metadata to annotate provenance sources.
Specifically, we introduce the following metadata types:
1. llvm.arc.annotation.bottomup.
2. llvm.arc.annotation.topdown.
3. llvm.arc.annotation.provenancesource.
llvm.arc.annotation.{bottomup,topdown}: These annotations describes a state
change in a pointer when we are visiting instructions bottomup/topdown
respectively. The output format for both is the same:
!1 = metadata !{metadata !"(test,%x)", metadata !"S_Release", metadata !"S_Use"}
The first element is a string tuple with the following format:
(function,variable name)
The second two elements of the metadata show the previous state of the
pointer (in this case S_Release) and the new state of the pointer (S_Use). We
write the metadata in such a manner to ensure that it is easy for outside tools
to parse. This is important since I am currently working on a tool for taking
this information and pretty printing it besides the IR and that can be used for
LIT style testing via the generation of an index.
llvm.arc.annotation.provenancesource: This metadata is used to annotate
instructions which act as provenance sources, i.e. ones that introduce a
new (from the optimizer's perspective) non-argument pointer to track. This
enables cross-referencing in between provenance sources and the state changes
that occur to them.
This is still a work in progress. Additionally I plan on committing
later today additions to the annotations that annotate at the top/bottom
of basic blocks the state of the various pointers being tracked.
*NOTE* The metadata support is conditionally compiled into libObjCARCOpts only
when we are producing a debug build of llvm/clang and even so are
disabled by default. To enable the annotation metadata, pass in
-enable-objc-arc-annotations to opt.
llvm-svn: 177951
1. Moved a comment from ObjCARCOpts.cpp -> ObjCARCContract.cpp.
2. Removed a comment from ObjCARCOpts.cpp that was already moved to
ObjCARCAliasAnalysis.h/.cpp.
llvm-svn: 174581
This was missed since whenever I was including ObjCARCAliasAnalysis.h, I
was including ObjCARC.h before it which included these includes
(resulting in no compilation breakage).
llvm-svn: 173764
This also required adding 2x headers Dependency Analysis.h/Provenance Analysis.h
and a .cpp file DependencyAnalysis.cpp to unentangle the dependencies inbetween
ObjCARCContract and ObjCARCOpts.
llvm-svn: 173760
Chandler Carruth