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
I am really sorry for the noise, but the current state where some parts of the
code use TD (from the old name: TargetData) and other parts use DL makes it
hard to write a patch that changes where those variables come from and how
they are passed along.
llvm-svn: 201827
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
other in memory.
The motivation was to get rid of truncate and shift right instructions that get
in the way of paired load or floating point load.
E.g.,
Consider the following example:
struct Complex {
float real;
float imm;
};
When accessing a complex, llvm was generating a 64-bits load and the imm field
was obtained by a trunc(lshr) sequence, resulting in poor code generation, at
least for x86.
The idea is to declare that two load instructions is the canonical form for
loading two arithmetic type, which are next to each other in memory.
Two scalar loads at a constant offset from each other are pretty
easy to detect for the sorts of passes that like to mess with loads.
<rdar://problem/14477220>
llvm-svn: 190870
Use the pointer size if datalayout is available.
Use i64 if it's not, which is consistent with what other
places do when the pointer size is unknown.
The test doesn't really test this in a useful way
since it will be transformed to that later anyway,
but this now tests it for non-zero arrays and when
datalayout isn't available. The cases in
visitGetElementPtrInst should save an extra re-visit to
the newly created GEP since it won't need to cleanup after
itself.
llvm-svn: 188339
into their new header subdirectory: include/llvm/IR. This matches the
directory structure of lib, and begins to correct a long standing point
of file layout clutter in LLVM.
There are still more header files to move here, but I wanted to handle
them in separate commits to make tracking what files make sense at each
layer easier.
The only really questionable files here are the target intrinsic
tablegen files. But that's a battle I'd rather not fight today.
I've updated both CMake and Makefile build systems (I think, and my
tests think, but I may have missed something).
I've also re-sorted the includes throughout the project. I'll be
committing updates to Clang, DragonEgg, and Polly momentarily.
llvm-svn: 171366
Sooooo many of these had incorrect or strange main module includes.
I have manually inspected all of these, and fixed the main module
include to be the nearest plausible thing I could find. If you own or
care about any of these source files, I encourage you to take some time
and check that these edits were sensible. I can't have broken anything
(I strictly added headers, and reordered them, never removed), but they
may not be the headers you'd really like to identify as containing the
API being implemented.
Many forward declarations and missing includes were added to a header
files to allow them to parse cleanly when included first. The main
module rule does in fact have its merits. =]
llvm-svn: 169131
InstCombineLoadStoreAlloca.cpp, which had many issues.
(At least two bugs were noted on llvm-commits, and it was overly conservative.)
Instead, use getOrEnforceKnownAlignment.
llvm-svn: 168629
getIntPtrType support for multiple address spaces via a pointer type,
and also introduced a crasher bug in the constant folder reported in
PR14233.
These commits also contained several problems that should really be
addressed before they are re-committed. I have avoided reverting various
cleanups to the DataLayout APIs that are reasonable to have moving
forward in order to reduce the amount of churn, and minimize the number
of commits that were reverted. I've also manually updated merge
conflicts and manually arranged for the getIntPtrType function to stay
in DataLayout and to be defined in a plausible way after this revert.
Thanks to Duncan for working through this exact strategy with me, and
Nick Lewycky for tracking down the really annoying crasher this
triggered. (Test case to follow in its own commit.)
After discussing with Duncan extensively, and based on a note from
Micah, I'm going to continue to back out some more of the more
problematic patches in this series in order to ensure we go into the
LLVM 3.2 branch with a reasonable story here. I'll send a note to
llvmdev explaining what's going on and why.
Summary of reverted revisions:
r166634: Fix a compiler warning with an unused variable.
r166607: Add some cleanup to the DataLayout changes requested by
Chandler.
r166596: Revert "Back out r166591, not sure why this made it through
since I cancelled the command. Bleh, sorry about this!
r166591: Delete a directory that wasn't supposed to be checked in yet.
r166578: Add in support for getIntPtrType to get the pointer type based
on the address space.
llvm-svn: 167221
This optimization is really just replacing allocas wholesale with
globals, there is no scalarization.
The underlying motivation for this patch is to simplify the SROA pass
and focus it on splitting and promoting allocas.
llvm-svn: 162271
This patch removes ~70 lines in InstCombineLoadStoreAlloca.cpp and makes both functions a bit more aggressive than before :)
In theory, we can be more aggressive when removing an alloca than a malloc, because an alloca pointer should never escape, but we are not taking advantage of this anyway
llvm-svn: 159952
merge all zero-sized alloca's into one, fixing c43204g from the Ada ACATS
conformance testsuite. What happened there was that a variable sized object
was being allocated on the stack, "alloca i8, i32 %size". It was then being
passed to another function, which tested that the address was not null (raising
an exception if it was) then manipulated %size bytes in it (load and/or store).
The optimizers cleverly managed to deduce that %size was zero (congratulations
to them, as it isn't at all obvious), which made the alloca zero size, causing
the optimizers to replace it with null, which then caused the check mentioned
above to fail, and the exception to be raised, wrongly. Note that no loads
and stores were actually being done to the alloca (the loop that does them is
executed %size times, i.e. is not executed), only the not-null address check.
llvm-svn: 159202
GEPs, bit casts, and stores reaching it but no other instructions. These
often show up during the iterative processing of the inliner, SROA, and
DCE. Once we hit this point, we can completely remove the alloca. These
were actually showing up in the final, fully optimized code in a bunch
of inliner tests I've been working on, and notably they show up after
LLVM finishes optimizing away all function calls involved in
hash_combine(a, b).
llvm-svn: 154285
alignment. If that's the case, then we want to make sure that we don't increase
the alignment of the store instruction. Because if we increase it to be "more
aligned" than the pointer, code-gen may use instructions which require a greater
alignment than the pointer guarantees.
<rdar://problem/11043589>
llvm-svn: 152907
load and store reference same memory location, the memory location
is represented by getelementptr with two uses (load and store) and
the getelementptr's base is alloca with single use. At this point,
instructions from alloca to store can be removed.
(this pattern is generated when bitfield is accessed.)
For example,
%u = alloca %struct.test, align 4 ; [#uses=1]
%0 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.test* %u, i32 0, i32 0;[#uses=2]
%1 = load i8* %0, align 4 ; [#uses=1]
%2 = and i8 %1, -16 ; [#uses=1]
%3 = or i8 %2, 5 ; [#uses=1]
store i8 %3, i8* %0, align 4
llvm-svn: 127565
create a testcase where this matters. The select+load transformation only
occurs when isSafeToLoadUnconditionally is true, and in those situations,
instcombine also changes the underlying objects to be aligned. This seems
like a good idea regardless, and I've verified that it doesn't pessimize
the subsequent realignment.
llvm-svn: 94850
Richard Osborne