Summary:
This was motivated by absence of PrunEH functionality in new PM.
It was decided that a proper way to do PruneEH is to add NoUnwind inference
into PostOrderFunctionAttrs and then perform normal SimplifyCFG on top.
This change generalizes attribute handling implemented for (a removal of)
Convergent attribute, by introducing a generic builder-like class
AttributeInferer
It registers all the attribute inference requests, storing per-attribute
predicates into a vector, and then goes through an SCC Node, scanning all
the instructions for not breaking attribute assumptions.
The main idea is that as soon all the instructions from all the functions
of SCC Node conform to attribute assumptions then we are free to infer
the attribute as set for all the functions of SCC Node.
It handles two distinct cases of attributes:
- those that might break due to derefinement of the function code
for these attributes we are allowed to apply inference only if all the
functions are "exact definitions". Example - NoUnwind.
- those that do not care about derefinement
for these attributes we are allowed to apply inference as soon as we see
any function definition. Example - removal of Convergent attribute.
Also in this commit:
* Converted all the FunctionAttrs tests to use FileCheck and added new-PM
invocations to them
* FunctionAttrs/convergent.ll test demonstrates a difference in behavior between
new and old PM implementations. Marked with FIXME.
* PruneEH tests were converted to new-PM as well, using function-attrs+simplify-cfg
combo as intended
* some of "other" tests were updated since function-attrs now infers 'nounwind'
even for old PM pipeline
* -disable-nounwind-inference hidden option added as a possible workaround for a supposedly
rare case when nounwind being inferred by default presents a problem
Reviewers: chandlerc, jlebar
Reviewed By: jlebar
Subscribers: eraman, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44415
llvm-svn: 328377
default pipeline.
A clang with this patch built with ASan and asserts can build all of the
test-suite as well, so it seems to not uncover any latent problems.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29853
llvm-svn: 294888
This is an orthogonal and separated layer instead of being embedded
inside the pass manager. While it adds a small amount of complexity, it
is fairly minimal and the composability and control seems worth the
cost.
The logic for this ends up being nicely isolated and targeted. It should
be easy to experiment with different iteration strategies wrapped around
the CGSCC bottom-up walk using this kind of facility.
The mechanism used to track devirtualization is the simplest one I came
up with. I think it handles most of the cases the existing iteration
machinery handles, but I haven't done a *very* in depth analysis. It
does however match the basic intended semantics, and we can tweak or
tune its exact behavior incrementally as necessary. One thing that we
may want to revisit is freshly building the value handle set on each
iteration. While I don't think this will be a significant cost (it is
strictly fewer value handles but more churn of value handes than the old
call graph), it is conceivable that we'll want a somewhat more clever
tracking mechanism. My hope is to layer that on as a follow up patch
with data supporting any implementation complexity it adds.
This code also provides for a basic count heuristic: if the number of
indirect calls decreases and the number of direct calls increases for
a given function in the SCC, we assume devirtualization is responsible.
This matches the heuristics currently used in the legacy pass manager.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23114
llvm-svn: 290665
Fedor Sergeev