I checked that all of these out-of-line methods previously compiled to
simple loads and bittests, so they are pretty good candidates for
inlining. In particular, arg_size() and arg_empty() are popular and are
just two loads, so they seem worth inlining.
llvm-svn: 297963
The instance method 'self' does not actually return an over-retained object,
so we shouldn't report an error when it's used with 'performSelector'.
rdar://31071620
llvm-svn: 297961
Citing http://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32288
The DWARF generated by LLVM includes this location:
0x55 0x93 0x04 DW_OP_reg5 DW_OP_piece(4) When GCC's DWARF is simply
0x55 (DW_OP_reg5) without the DW_OP_piece. I believe it's reasonable
to assume the DWARF consumer knows which part of a register
logically holds the value (low bytes, high bytes, how many bytes,
etc) for a primitive value like an integer.
This patch gets rid of the redundant DW_OP_piece when a subregister is
at offset 0. It also adds previously missing subregister masking when
a subregister is followed by another operation.
rdar://problem/31069390
https://reviews.llvm.org/D31010
llvm-svn: 297960
We can mark functions to always inline early in the opt. Since we do not have
call support this early inlining creates opportunities for inter-procedural
optimizations which would not occur otherwise.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31016
llvm-svn: 297958
Summary:
The call to canEvaluateZExtd in InstCombiner::visitZExt may
return with BitsToClear == SrcTy->getScalarSizeInBits(), but
there is an assert that BitsToClear should be smaller than
SrcTy->getScalarSizeInBits().
I have a test case that triggers the assert, but it only happens
for my downstream target. I've not been able to trigger it for
any upstream target.
The assert triggered for a piece of code such as this
%shr1 = lshr i16 undef, 15
...
%shr2 = lshr i16 %shr1, 1
%conv = zext i16 %shr2 to i32
Normally the lshr instructions are constant folded before we
visit the zext (that is why it is so hard to reproduce).
The original pattern, before instcombine, is of course a lot more
complicated in my test case. The shift count in the second lshr
is for example determined by the outcome of a PHI instruction.
It seems like other rewrites by instcombine leads up to
the pattern above. And then the zext is pulled from the
worklist, and visited (hitting the assert), before we detect
that the lshr instrucions can be constant folded.
Anyway, since the canEvaluateZExtd may return with BitsToClear
equal to SrcTy->getScalarSizeInBits(), and since the rewrite
that converts the expression type to avoid a zero extend works
also for the case where SrcBitsKept ends up being zero, then
it should be OK to liberate the assert to
assert(BitsToClear <= SrcTy->getScalarSizeInBits() &&
"Unreasonable BitsToClear");
Reviewers: hfinkel
Reviewed By: hfinkel
Subscribers: hfinkel, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30993
llvm-svn: 297952
This test would have been broken if we convert SharedSymbols
to DefinerRegular without saving the symbol version information when
creating .bss/.bss.rel.ro sections for copy relocations.
Relative to D30541, PR32167
llvm-svn: 297948
That allows to detemplate getGotPltOffset/getGotPltVA
methods of SymbolBody and also will help to detemplate
DynamicReloc itself later.
llvm-svn: 297946
This change adds support for functions to set and get file permissions, in a similar manner to the C++17 permissions() function in <filesystem>. The setter uses chmod on Unix systems and SetFileAttributes on Windows, setting the permissions as passed in. The getter simply uses the existing status() function.
Prior to this change, status() would always return an unknown value for the permissions on a Windows file, making it impossible to test the new function on Windows. I have therefore added support for this as well. On Linux, prior to this change, the permissions included the file type, which should actually be accessed via a different member of the file_status class.
Note that on Windows, only the *_write permission bits have any affect - if any are set, the file is writable, and if not, the file is read-only. This is in common with what MSDN describes for their behaviour of std::filesystem::permissions(), and also what boost::filesystem does.
The motivation behind this change is so that we can easily test behaviour on read-only files in LLVM unit tests, but I am sure that others may find it useful in some situations.
Reviewers: zturner, amccarth, aaron.ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30736
llvm-svn: 297945
clang-format treats MSVC `__super` keyword like all other keywords adding
a single space after. This change disables this behavior for `__super`.
Patch originally by jutocz (thanks!).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30932
llvm-svn: 297936
in r297374.
I've extracted a small version of this from the C++ metaprogram Richard
came up with to exercise these kinds of issues and written comments to
describe both how to reproduce a fresh version of the test case and what
likely failure modes are.
The test case is still a bit brittle as it depends on the particular
inline cost modeling and SCC visitation order, but it definitely would
have caught the bug right away when developing things so it seems
a really valuable test case to have.
llvm-svn: 297935
Don't scalarize VSELECT->SETCC when operands/results needs to be widened,
or when the type of the SETCC operands are different from those of the VSELECT.
(VSELECT SETCC) and (VSELECT (AND/OR/XOR (SETCC,SETCC))) are handled.
The previous splitting of VSELECT->SETCC in DAGCombiner::visitVSELECT() is
no longer needed and has been removed.
Updated tests:
test/CodeGen/ARM/vuzp.ll
test/CodeGen/NVPTX/f16x2-instructions.ll
test/CodeGen/X86/2011-10-19-widen_vselect.ll
test/CodeGen/X86/2011-10-21-widen-cmp.ll
test/CodeGen/X86/psubus.ll
test/CodeGen/X86/vselect-pcmp.ll
Review: Eli Friedman, Simon Pilgrim
https://reviews.llvm.org/D29489
llvm-svn: 297930
Summary:
In commit r289548 ([ADCE] Add code to remove dead branches) a redundant loop
nest was accidentally introduced, which implements exactly the same
functionality as has already been available right after. This redundancy has
been found when inspecting the ADCE code in the context of our recent
discussions on post-dominator modeling. This redundant code was also eliminated
by r296535 (which sparked the discussion), but only as part of a larger semantic
change of the post-dominance modeling. As this redundency in [ADCE] is really
just an oversight completely independent of the post-dominance changes under
discussion, we remove this redundancy independently.
Reviewers: dberlin, david2050
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31023
llvm-svn: 297929
The idea is that the policy string fully specifies the policy and is portable
between clients.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31020
llvm-svn: 297927
This produces a 1% speedup on an important internal Google benchmark
(protocol buffers), with no other regressions in google or in the llvm
test-suite. Only 5 targets in the entire llvm test-suite are affected,
and on those 5 targets the size increase is 0.027%
llvm-svn: 297925
a) avoid actually compiling anything
b) avoid depositing files in the test directory
c) use a check line to make sure that we're looking for the correct behavior
llvm-svn: 297917
Reid Kleckner