Commit Graph

71 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Alina Sbirlea dfd14adeb0 Generalize MergeBlockIntoPredecessor. Replace uses of MergeBasicBlockIntoOnlyPred.
Summary:
Two utils methods have essentially the same functionality. This is an attempt to merge them into one.
1. lib/Transforms/Utils/Local.cpp : MergeBasicBlockIntoOnlyPred
2. lib/Transforms/Utils/BasicBlockUtils.cpp : MergeBlockIntoPredecessor

Prior to the patch:
1. MergeBasicBlockIntoOnlyPred
Updates either DomTree or DeferredDominance
Moves all instructions from Pred to BB, deletes Pred
Asserts BB has single predecessor
If address was taken, replace the block address with constant 1 (?)

2. MergeBlockIntoPredecessor
Updates DomTree, LoopInfo and MemoryDependenceResults
Moves all instruction from BB to Pred, deletes BB
Returns if doesn't have a single predecessor
Returns if BB's address was taken

After the patch:
Method 2. MergeBlockIntoPredecessor is attempting to become the new default:
Updates DomTree or DeferredDominance, and LoopInfo and MemoryDependenceResults
Moves all instruction from BB to Pred, deletes BB
Returns if doesn't have a single predecessor
Returns if BB's address was taken

Uses of MergeBasicBlockIntoOnlyPred that need to be replaced:

1. lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopSimplifyCFG.cpp
Updated in this patch. No challenges.

2. lib/CodeGen/CodeGenPrepare.cpp
Updated in this patch.
  i. eliminateFallThrough is straightforward, but I added using a temporary array to avoid the iterator invalidation.
  ii. eliminateMostlyEmptyBlock(s) methods also now use a temporary array for blocks
Some interesting aspects:
  - Since Pred is not deleted (BB is), the entry block does not need updating.
  - The entry block was being updated with the deleted block in eliminateMostlyEmptyBlock. Added assert to make obvious that BB=SinglePred.
  - isMergingEmptyBlockProfitable assumes BB is the one to be deleted.
  - eliminateMostlyEmptyBlock(BB) does not delete BB on one path, it deletes its unique predecessor instead.
  - adding some test owner as subscribers for the interesting tests modified:
    test/CodeGen/X86/avx-cmp.ll
    test/CodeGen/AMDGPU/nested-loop-conditions.ll
    test/CodeGen/AMDGPU/si-annotate-cf.ll
    test/CodeGen/X86/hoist-spill.ll
    test/CodeGen/X86/2006-11-17-IllegalMove.ll

3. lib/Transforms/Scalar/JumpThreading.cpp
Not covered in this patch. It is the only use case using the DeferredDominance.
I would defer to Brian Rzycki to make this replacement.

Reviewers: chandlerc, spatel, davide, brzycki, bkramer, javed.absar

Subscribers: qcolombet, sanjoy, nemanjai, nhaehnle, jlebar, tpr, kbarton, RKSimon, wmi, arsenm, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48202

llvm-svn: 335183
2018-06-20 22:01:04 +00:00
Sanjay Patel d7c702b451 [LoopStrengthReduce, x86] don't add cost for a cmp that will be macro-fused (PR35681)
In the motivating case from PR35681 and represented by the macro-fuse-cmp test:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35681
...there's a 37 -> 31 byte size win for the loop because we eliminate the big base 
address offsets.

SPEC2017 on Ryzen shows no significant perf difference.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42607

llvm-svn: 324289
2018-02-05 23:43:05 +00:00
Mikael Holmen 6d06976e74 [LSR] Don't force bases of foldable formulae to the final type.
Summary:
Before emitting code for scaled registers, we prevent
SCEVExpander from hoisting any scaled addressing mode
by emitting all the bases first. However, these bases
are being forced to the final type, resulting in some
odd code.

For example, if the type of the base is an integer and
the final type is a pointer, we will emit an inttoptr
for the base, a ptrtoint for the scale, and then a
'reverse' GEP where the GEP pointer is actually the base
integer and the index is the pointer. It's more intuitive
to use the pointer as a pointer and the integer as index.

Patch by: Bevin Hansson

Reviewers: atrick, qcolombet, sanjoy

Reviewed By: qcolombet

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42103

llvm-svn: 323946
2018-02-01 06:38:34 +00:00
Puyan Lotfi 43e94b15ea Followup on Proposal to move MIR physical register namespace to '$' sigil.
Discussed here:

http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-January/120320.html

In preparation for adding support for named vregs we are changing the sigil for
physical registers in MIR to '$' from '%'. This will prevent name clashes of
named physical register with named vregs.

llvm-svn: 323922
2018-01-31 22:04:26 +00:00
Sanjay Patel ffb37a29d1 [LoopStrengthReduce] add test to show potential macro-fusion-based diff (PR35681); NFC
This is the baseline output for the test proposed with D42607.

llvm-svn: 323806
2018-01-30 19:17:38 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 5bce08ddff [x86] auto-generate complete checks; NFC
llvm-svn: 323571
2018-01-26 22:06:07 +00:00
Matt Morehouse 9e658c974b Revert "[X86] Improvement in CodeGen instruction selection for LEAs."
This reverts r319543, due to ASan bot breakage.

llvm-svn: 319591
2017-12-01 22:20:26 +00:00
Jatin Bhateja 328199ec26 [X86] Improvement in CodeGen instruction selection for LEAs.
Summary:
1/  Operand folding during complex pattern matching for LEAs has been extended, such that it promotes Scale to
     accommodate similar operand appearing in the DAG  e.g.
                 T1 = A + B
                 T2 = T1 + 10
                 T3 = T2 + A
    For above DAG rooted at T3, X86AddressMode will now look like
                Base = B , Index = A , Scale = 2 , Disp = 10

2/  During OptimizeLEAPass down the pipeline factorization is now performed over LEAs so that if there is an opportunity
     then complex LEAs (having 3 operands) could be factored out  e.g.
                 leal 1(%rax,%rcx,1), %rdx
                 leal 1(%rax,%rcx,2), %rcx
     will be factored as following
                 leal 1(%rax,%rcx,1), %rdx
                 leal (%rdx,%rcx)   , %edx

3/ Aggressive operand folding for AM based selection for LEAs is sensitive to loops, thus avoiding creation of any complex LEAs within a loop.

4/ Simplify LEA converts (lea (BASE,1,INDEX,0)  --> add (BASE, INDEX) which offers better through put.

PR32755 will be taken care of by this pathc.

Previous patch revisions : r313343 , r314886

Reviewers: lsaba, RKSimon, craig.topper, qcolombet, jmolloy, jbhateja

Reviewed By: lsaba, RKSimon, jbhateja

Subscribers: jmolloy, spatel, igorb, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35014

llvm-svn: 319543
2017-12-01 14:07:38 +00:00
Hans Wennborg 2a6c9adb2f Revert r314886 "[X86] Improvement in CodeGen instruction selection for LEAs (re-applying post required revision changes.)"
It broke the Chromium / SQLite build; see PR34830.

> Summary:
>    1/  Operand folding during complex pattern matching for LEAs has been
>        extended, such that it promotes Scale to accommodate similar operand
>        appearing in the DAG.
>        e.g.
>          T1 = A + B
>          T2 = T1 + 10
>          T3 = T2 + A
>        For above DAG rooted at T3, X86AddressMode will no look like
>          Base = B , Index = A , Scale = 2 , Disp = 10
>
>    2/  During OptimizeLEAPass down the pipeline factorization is now performed over LEAs
>        so that if there is an opportunity then complex LEAs (having 3 operands)
>        could be factored out.
>        e.g.
>          leal 1(%rax,%rcx,1), %rdx
>          leal 1(%rax,%rcx,2), %rcx
>        will be factored as following
>          leal 1(%rax,%rcx,1), %rdx
>          leal (%rdx,%rcx)   , %edx
>
>    3/ Aggressive operand folding for AM based selection for LEAs is sensitive to loops,
>       thus avoiding creation of any complex LEAs within a loop.
>
> Reviewers: lsaba, RKSimon, craig.topper, qcolombet, jmolloy
>
> Reviewed By: lsaba
>
> Subscribers: jmolloy, spatel, igorb, llvm-commits
>
>     Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35014

llvm-svn: 314919
2017-10-04 17:54:06 +00:00
Jatin Bhateja 3c29bacd43 [X86] Improvement in CodeGen instruction selection for LEAs (re-applying post required revision changes.)
Summary:
   1/  Operand folding during complex pattern matching for LEAs has been
       extended, such that it promotes Scale to accommodate similar operand
       appearing in the DAG.
       e.g.
         T1 = A + B
         T2 = T1 + 10
         T3 = T2 + A
       For above DAG rooted at T3, X86AddressMode will no look like
         Base = B , Index = A , Scale = 2 , Disp = 10

   2/  During OptimizeLEAPass down the pipeline factorization is now performed over LEAs
       so that if there is an opportunity then complex LEAs (having 3 operands)
       could be factored out.
       e.g.
         leal 1(%rax,%rcx,1), %rdx
         leal 1(%rax,%rcx,2), %rcx
       will be factored as following
         leal 1(%rax,%rcx,1), %rdx
         leal (%rdx,%rcx)   , %edx

   3/ Aggressive operand folding for AM based selection for LEAs is sensitive to loops,
      thus avoiding creation of any complex LEAs within a loop.

Reviewers: lsaba, RKSimon, craig.topper, qcolombet, jmolloy

Reviewed By: lsaba

Subscribers: jmolloy, spatel, igorb, llvm-commits

    Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35014

llvm-svn: 314886
2017-10-04 09:02:10 +00:00
Hans Wennborg 534bfbd3ba Revert r313343 "[X86] PR32755 : Improvement in CodeGen instruction selection for LEAs."
This caused PR34629: asserts firing when building Chromium. It also broke some
buildbots building test-suite as reported on the commit thread.

> Summary:
>    1/  Operand folding during complex pattern matching for LEAs has been
>        extended, such that it promotes Scale to accommodate similar operand
>        appearing in the DAG.
>        e.g.
>           T1 = A + B
>           T2 = T1 + 10
>           T3 = T2 + A
>        For above DAG rooted at T3, X86AddressMode will no look like
>           Base = B , Index = A , Scale = 2 , Disp = 10
>
>    2/  During OptimizeLEAPass down the pipeline factorization is now performed over LEAs
>        so that if there is an opportunity then complex LEAs (having 3 operands)
>        could be factored out.
>        e.g.
>           leal 1(%rax,%rcx,1), %rdx
>           leal 1(%rax,%rcx,2), %rcx
>        will be factored as following
>           leal 1(%rax,%rcx,1), %rdx
>           leal (%rdx,%rcx)   , %edx
>
>    3/ Aggressive operand folding for AM based selection for LEAs is sensitive to loops,
>       thus avoiding creation of any complex LEAs within a loop.
>
> Reviewers: lsaba, RKSimon, craig.topper, qcolombet
>
> Reviewed By: lsaba
>
> Subscribers: spatel, igorb, llvm-commits
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35014

llvm-svn: 313376
2017-09-15 18:40:26 +00:00
Jatin Bhateja 908c8b37c2 [X86] PR32755 : Improvement in CodeGen instruction selection for LEAs.
Summary:
   1/  Operand folding during complex pattern matching for LEAs has been
       extended, such that it promotes Scale to accommodate similar operand
       appearing in the DAG.
       e.g.
          T1 = A + B
          T2 = T1 + 10
          T3 = T2 + A
       For above DAG rooted at T3, X86AddressMode will no look like
          Base = B , Index = A , Scale = 2 , Disp = 10

   2/  During OptimizeLEAPass down the pipeline factorization is now performed over LEAs
       so that if there is an opportunity then complex LEAs (having 3 operands)
       could be factored out.
       e.g.
          leal 1(%rax,%rcx,1), %rdx
          leal 1(%rax,%rcx,2), %rcx
       will be factored as following
          leal 1(%rax,%rcx,1), %rdx
          leal (%rdx,%rcx)   , %edx

   3/ Aggressive operand folding for AM based selection for LEAs is sensitive to loops,
      thus avoiding creation of any complex LEAs within a loop.

Reviewers: lsaba, RKSimon, craig.topper, qcolombet

Reviewed By: lsaba

Subscribers: spatel, igorb, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35014

llvm-svn: 313343
2017-09-15 05:29:51 +00:00
Max Kazantsev bb1d010872 [LSR] Fix Shadow IV in case of integer overflow
When LSR processes code like

  int accumulator = 0;
  for (int i = 0; i < N; i++) {
    accummulator += i;
    use((double) accummulator);
  }

It may decide to replace integer `accumulator` with a double Shadow IV to get rid
of casts.  The problem with that is that the `accumulator`'s value may overflow.
Starting from this moment, the behavior of integer and double accumulators
will differ.

This patch strenghtens up the conditions of Shadow IV mechanism applicability.
We only allow it for IVs that are proved to be `AddRec`s with `nsw`/`nuw` flag.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37209

llvm-svn: 311986
2017-08-29 07:32:20 +00:00
Max Kazantsev f2e017b083 [NFC] Fix indents in test
llvm-svn: 311982
2017-08-29 05:30:58 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 03407da281 [NFC] Refactor ShadowIV test to use FileCheck
Also get rid of unnamed values that make the test hard to read.

llvm-svn: 311980
2017-08-29 05:20:56 +00:00
Evgeny Stupachenko c675290680 Reapply fix PR23384 (part 3 of 3) r304824 (was reverted in r305720).
The root cause of reverting was fixed - PR33514.

Summary:
The patch makes instruction count the highest priority for
 LSR solution for X86 (previously registers had highest priority).

Reviewers: qcolombet

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D30562

From: Evgeny Stupachenko <evstupac@gmail.com>
                         <evgeny.v.stupachenko@intel.com>
llvm-svn: 310289
2017-08-07 19:56:34 +00:00
Wei Mi 90707394e3 [LSR] Narrow search space by filtering non-optimal formulae with the same ScaledReg and Scale.
When the formulae search space is huge, LSR uses a series of heuristic to keep
pruning the search space until the number of possible solutions are within
certain limit.

The big hammer of the series of heuristics is NarrowSearchSpaceByPickingWinnerRegs,
which picks the register which is used by the most LSRUses and deletes the other
formulae which don't use the register. This is a effective way to prune the search
space, but quite often not a good way to keep the best solution. We saw cases before
that the heuristic pruned the best formula candidate out of search space.

To relieve the problem, we introduce a new heuristic called
NarrowSearchSpaceByFilterFormulaWithSameScaledReg. The basic idea is in order to
reduce the search space while keeping the best formula, we want to keep as many
formulae with different Scale and ScaledReg as possible. That is because the central
idea of LSR is to choose a group of loop induction variables and use those induction
variables to represent LSRUses. An induction variable candidate is often represented
by the Scale and ScaledReg in a formula. If we have more formulae with different
ScaledReg and Scale to choose, we have better opportunity to find the best solution.
That is why we believe pruning search space by only keeping the best formula with the
same Scale and ScaledReg should be more effective than PickingWinnerReg. And we use
two criteria to choose the best formula with the same Scale and ScaledReg. The first
criteria is to select the formula using less non shared registers, and the second
criteria is to select the formula with less cost got from RateFormula. The patch
implements the heuristic before NarrowSearchSpaceByPickingWinnerRegs, which is the
last resort.

Testing shows we get 1.8% and 2% on two internal benchmarks on x86. llvm nightly
testsuite performance is neutral. We also tried lsr-exp-narrow and it didn't help
on the two improved internal cases we saw.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34583

llvm-svn: 307269
2017-07-06 15:52:14 +00:00
Hans Wennborg ca69fc1cb7 Revert r304824 "Fix PR23384 (part 3 of 3)"
This seems to be interacting badly with ASan somehow, causing false reports of
heap-buffer overflows: PR33514.

> Summary:
> The patch makes instruction count the highest priority for
> LSR solution for X86 (previously registers had highest priority).
>
> Reviewers: qcolombet
>
> Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D30562
>
> From: Evgeny Stupachenko <evstupac@gmail.com>

llvm-svn: 305720
2017-06-19 17:57:15 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 35b2a18eb9 [SCEV] Teach SCEVExpander to expand BinPow
Current implementation of SCEVExpander demonstrates a very naive behavior when
it deals with power calculation. For example, a SCEV for x^8 looks like

  (x * x * x * x * x * x * x * x)

If we try to expand it, it generates a very straightforward sequence of muls, like:

  x2 = mul x, x
  x3 = mul x2, x
  x4 = mul x3, x
      ...
  x8 = mul x7, x

This is a non-efficient way of doing that. A better way is to generate a sequence of
binary power calculation. In this case the expanded calculation will look like:

  x2 = mul x, x
  x4 = mul x2, x2
  x8 = mul x4, x4

In some cases the code size reduction for such SCEVs is dramatic. If we had a loop:

  x = a;
  for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++)
    x = x * x;

And this loop have been fully unrolled, we have something like:

  x = a;
  x2 = x * x;
  x4 = x2 * x2;
  x8 = x4 * x4;

The SCEV for x8 is the same as in example above, and if we for some reason
want to expand it, we will generate naively 7 multiplications instead of 3.
The BinPow expansion algorithm here allows to keep code size reasonable.

This patch teaches SCEV Expander to generate a sequence of BinPow multiplications
if we have repeating arguments in SCEVMulExpressions.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34025

llvm-svn: 305663
2017-06-19 06:24:53 +00:00
Evgeny Stupachenko 3b88291581 Fix PR23384 (part 3 of 3)
Summary:
The patch makes instruction count the highest priority for
 LSR solution for X86 (previously registers had highest priority).

Reviewers: qcolombet

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D30562

From: Evgeny Stupachenko <evstupac@gmail.com>
llvm-svn: 304824
2017-06-06 20:04:16 +00:00
Craig Topper 2b54baeb96 [X86] Replace 'REQUIRES: x86' in tests with 'REQUIRES: x86-registered-target' which seems to be the correct way to make them run on an x86 build.
llvm-svn: 304682
2017-06-04 08:21:58 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 41450329f7 Re-enable "[SCEV] Do not fold dominated SCEVUnknown into AddRecExpr start"
The patch rL303730 was reverted because test lsr-expand-quadratic.ll failed on
many non-X86 configs with this patch. The reason of this is that the patch
makes a correctless fix that changes optimizer's behavior for this test.
Without the change, LSR was making an overconfident simplification basing on a
wrong SCEV. Apparently it did not need the IV analysis to do this. With the
change, it chose a different way to simplify (that wasn't so confident), and
this way required the IV analysis. Now, following the right execution path,
LSR tries to make a transformation relying on IV Users analysis. This analysis
is target-dependent due to this code:

  // LSR is not APInt clean, do not touch integers bigger than 64-bits.
  // Also avoid creating IVs of non-native types. For example, we don't want a
  // 64-bit IV in 32-bit code just because the loop has one 64-bit cast.
  uint64_t Width = SE->getTypeSizeInBits(I->getType());
  if (Width > 64 || !DL.isLegalInteger(Width))
    return false;

To make a proper transformation in this test case, the type i32 needs to be
legal for the specified data layout. When the test runs on some non-X86
configuration (e.g. pure ARM 64), opt gets confused by the specified target
and does not use it, rejecting the specified data layout as well. Instead,
it uses some default layout that does not treat i32 as a legal type
(currently the layout that is used when it is not specified does not have
legal types at all). As result, the transformation we expect to happen does
not happen for this test.

This re-enabling patch does not have any source code changes compared to the
original patch rL303730. The only difference is that the failing test is
moved to X86 directory and now has requirement of running on x86 only to comply
with the specified target triple and data layout.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33543

llvm-svn: 303971
2017-05-26 06:47:04 +00:00
Diana Picus 183863fc3b Revert "[SCEV] Do not fold dominated SCEVUnknown into AddRecExpr start"
This reverts commit r303730 because it broke all the buildbots.

llvm-svn: 303747
2017-05-24 14:16:04 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 13e016bf48 [SCEV] Do not fold dominated SCEVUnknown into AddRecExpr start
When folding arguments of AddExpr or MulExpr with recurrences, we rely on the fact that
the loop of our base recurrency is the bottom-lost in terms of domination. This assumption
may be broken by an expression which is treated as invariant, and which depends on a complex
Phi for which SCEVUnknown was created. If such Phi is a loop Phi, and this loop is lower than
the chosen AddRecExpr's loop, it is invalid to fold our expression with the recurrence.

Another reason why it might be invalid to fold SCEVUnknown into Phi start value is that unlike
other SCEVs, SCEVUnknown are sometimes position-bound. For example, here:

for (...) { // loop
  phi = {A,+,B}
}
X = load ...
Folding phi + X into {A+X,+,B}<loop> actually makes no sense, because X does not exist and cannot
exist while we are iterating in loop (this memory can be even not allocated and not filled by this moment).
It is only valid to make such folding if X is defined before the loop. In this case the recurrence {A+X,+,B}<loop>
may be existant.

This patch prohibits folding of SCEVUnknown (and those who use them) into the start value of an AddRecExpr,
if this instruction is dominated by the loop. Merging the dominating unknown values is still valid. Some tests that
relied on the fact that some SCEVUnknown should be folded into AddRec's are changed so that they no longer
expect such behavior.

llvm-svn: 303730
2017-05-24 08:52:18 +00:00
Wei Mi 8848c1e3c7 [LSR] Call canonicalize after we generate a new Formula in GenerateTruncates. Fix PR33077.
The testcase in PR33077 generates a LSR Use Formula with two SCEVAddRecExprs for the same
loop. Such uncommon formula will become non-canonical after GenerateTruncates adds sign
extension to the ScaledReg of the Formula, and it will break the assertion that every
Formula to be inserted is canonical.

The fix is to call canonicalize for the raw Formula generated by GenerateTruncates
before inserting it.

llvm-svn: 303361
2017-05-18 17:21:22 +00:00
Eli Friedman 5fba1e53f2 Turn on -addr-sink-using-gep by default.
The new codepath has been in the tree for years, and there isn't any
reason to use two codepaths here.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30596

llvm-svn: 299723
2017-04-06 22:42:18 +00:00
Wei Mi 74d5a90fa6 [LSR] Canonicalize formula and put recursive Reg related with current loop in ScaledReg.
After rL294814, LSR formula can have multiple SCEVAddRecExprs inside of its BaseRegs.
Previous canonicalization will swap the first SCEVAddRecExpr in BaseRegs with ScaledReg.
But now we want to swap the SCEVAddRecExpr Reg related with current loop with ScaledReg.
Otherwise, we may generate code like this: RegA + lsr.iv + RegB, where loop invariant
parts RegA and RegB are not grouped together and cannot be promoted outside of loop.
With this patch, it will ensure lsr.iv to be generated later in the expr:
RegA + RegB + lsr.iv, so that RegA + RegB can be promoted outside of loop.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26781

llvm-svn: 295884
2017-02-22 21:47:08 +00:00
Wei Mi 493fb266ed [LSR] Prevent formula with SCEVAddRecExpr type of Reg from Sibling loops
In rL294814, we allow formula with SCEVAddRecExpr type of Reg from loops
other than current loop. This is good for the case when induction variable
of outerloop being used in expr in innerloop. But it is very bad to allow
such Reg from sibling loop because we may need to add lsr.iv in other sibling
loops when scev expanding those SCEVAddRecExpr type exprs. For the testcase
below, one loop can be inserted with a bunch of lsr.iv because of LSR for
other loops. 

// The induction variable j from a loop in the middle will have initial
// value generated from previous sibling loop and exit value used by its
// next sibling loop.
void goo(long i, long j); 
long cond; 

void foo(long N) { 
long i = 0; 
long j = 0; 
i = 0; do { goo(i, j); i++; j++; } while (cond); 
i = 0; do { goo(i, j); i++; j++; } while (cond); 
i = 0; do { goo(i, j); i++; j++; } while (cond); 
i = 0; do { goo(i, j); i++; j++; } while (cond); 
i = 0; do { goo(i, j); i++; j++; } while (cond); 
i = 0; do { goo(i, j); i++; j++; } while (cond); 
} 

The fix is to only allow formula with SCEVAddRecExpr type of Reg from current
loop or its parents.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30021

llvm-svn: 295378
2017-02-16 21:27:31 +00:00
Evgeny Stupachenko 5f3d9b6c09 The patch fixes r294821
Summary:
Update register match for windows testing

From: Evgeny Stupachenko <evstupac@gmail.com>
llvm-svn: 294825
2017-02-11 05:39:00 +00:00
Evgeny Stupachenko fe6f548d2d Fix PR23384 (under "-lsr-insns-cost" option)
Summary:
The patch adds instructions number generated by a solution
 to LSR cost under "-lsr-insns-cost" option.

Reviewers: qcolombet, hfinkel

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D28307

From: Evgeny Stupachenko <evstupac@gmail.com>
llvm-svn: 294821
2017-02-11 02:57:43 +00:00
Wei Mi 8f20e63a20 [LSR] Recommit: Allow formula containing Reg for SCEVAddRecExpr related with outerloop.
The recommit includes some changes of testcases. No functional change to the patch.

In RateRegister of existing LSR, if a formula contains a Reg which is a SCEVAddRecExpr,
and this SCEVAddRecExpr's loop is an outerloop, the formula will be marked as Loser
and dropped.

Suppose we have an IR that %for.body is outerloop and %for.body2 is innerloop. LSR only
handle inner loop now so only %for.body2 will be handled.

Using the logic above, formula like
reg(%array) + reg({1,+, %size}<%for.body>) + 1*reg({0,+,1}<%for.body2>) will be dropped
no matter what because reg({1,+, %size}<%for.body>) is a SCEVAddRecExpr type reg related
with outerloop. Only formula like
reg(%array) + 1*reg({{1,+, %size}<%for.body>,+,1}<nuw><nsw><%for.body2>) will be kept
because the SCEVAddRecExpr related with outerloop is folded into the initial value of the
SCEVAddRecExpr related with current loop.

But in some cases, we do need to share the basic induction variable
reg{0 ,+, 1}<%for.body2> among LSR Uses to reduce the final total number of induction
variables used by LSR, so we don't want to drop the formula like
reg(%array) + reg({1,+, %size}<%for.body>) + 1*reg({0,+,1}<%for.body2>) unconditionally.

From the existing comment, it tries to avoid considering multiple level loops at the same time.
However, existing LSR only handles innermost loop, so for any SCEVAddRecExpr with a loop other
than current loop, it is an invariant and will be simple to handle, and the formula doesn't have
to be dropped.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26429

llvm-svn: 294814
2017-02-11 00:50:23 +00:00
Chandler Carruth d501b18990 This test apparently requires an x86 target and is failing on numerous
bots ever since d0k fixed the CHECK lines so that it did something at
all.

It isn't actually testing SCEV directly but LSR, so move it into LSR and
the x86-specific tree of tests that already exists there. Target
dependence is common and unavoidable with the current design of LSR.

llvm-svn: 292774
2017-01-23 08:33:29 +00:00
Krzysztof Parzyszek 3cb5ffeb35 Fix testcases failing after r284036
The codegen has changed slightly between my tests and the commit.

llvm-svn: 284049
2016-10-12 20:39:33 +00:00
Krzysztof Parzyszek 8271be9a1d Do not remove implicit defs in BranchFolder
Branch folder removes implicit defs if they are the only non-branching
instructions in a block, and the branches do not use the defined registers.
The problem is that in some cases these implicit defs are required for
the liveness information to be correct.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25478

llvm-svn: 284036
2016-10-12 19:50:57 +00:00
Geoff Berry d01828096f [SCEV] Update interface to handle SCEVExpander insert point motion.
Summary:
This is an extension of the fix in r271424.  That fix dealt with builder
insert points being moved by SCEV expansion, but only for the lifetime
of the expand call.  This change modifies the interface so that LSR can
safely call expand multiple times at the same insert point and do the
right thing if one of the expansions decides to move the original insert
point.

This is a fix for PR28719.

Reviewers: sanjoy

Subscribers: llvm-commits, mcrosier, mzolotukhin

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23342

llvm-svn: 278413
2016-08-11 21:05:17 +00:00
Chuang-Yu Cheng d3fb38cae5 Don't delete empty preheaders in CodeGenPrepare if it would create a critical edge
Presently, CodeGenPrepare deletes all nearly empty (only phi and branch)
basic blocks. This pass can delete loop preheaders which frequently creates
critical edges. A preheader can be a convenient place to spill registers to
the stack. If the entrance to a loop body is a critical edge, then spills
may occur in the loop body rather than immediately before it. This patch
protects loop preheaders from deletion in CodeGenPrepare even if they are
nearly empty.

Since the patch alters the CFG, it affects a large number of test cases.
In most cases, the changes are merely cosmetic (basic blocks have different
names or instruction orders change slightly). I am somewhat concerned about
the test/CodeGen/Mips/brdelayslot.ll test case. If the loop preheader is not
deleted, then the MIPS backend does not take advantage of a branch delay
slot. Consequently, I would like some close review by a MIPS expert.

The patch also partially subsumes D16893 from George Burgess IV. George
correctly notes that CodeGenPrepare does not actually preserve the dominator
tree. I think the dominator tree was usually not valid when CodeGenPrepare
ran, but I am using LoopInfo to mark preheaders, so the dominator tree is
now always valid before CodeGenPrepare.

Author: Tom Jablin (tjablin)
Reviewers: hfinkel george.burgess.iv vkalintiris dsanders kbarton cycheng

http://reviews.llvm.org/D16984

llvm-svn: 265397
2016-04-05 14:06:20 +00:00
Dan Gohman 75452734e4 Followup to 258750; update more tests to use .p2align .
llvm-svn: 258755
2016-01-26 00:35:07 +00:00
Craig Topper 2c4068f409 [TwoAddressInstructionPass] When looking for a 3 addr conversion after commuting, make sure regB has been updated to take into account the commute.
llvm-svn: 249378
2015-10-06 05:39:59 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 215df9ed98 Revert "[LSR] Generate and use zero extends"
This reverts commit r243348 and r243357.  They caused PR24347.

llvm-svn: 243939
2015-08-04 01:52:05 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 3895a57b32 [LSR] Move X86 specific test case to X86/
rL243348 added the test case in the wrong directory.

llvm-svn: 243357
2015-07-28 00:13:42 +00:00
Quentin Colombet 9729fb3315 [TwoAddressInstructionPass] Try 3 Addr Conversion After Commuting.
TwoAddressInstructionPass stops after a successful commuting but 3 Addr
conversion might be good for some cases.
 
Consider:

int foo(int a, int b) {
  return a + b;
}

Before this commit, we emit:

addl	%esi, %edi
movl	%edi, %eax
ret

After this commit, we try 3 Addr conversion:

leal	(%rsi,%rdi), %eax
ret

Patch by Volkan Keles <vkeles@apple.com>!

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D10851

llvm-svn: 241206
2015-07-01 23:12:13 +00:00
David Blaikie 23af64846f [opaque pointer type] Add textual IR support for explicit type parameter to the call instruction
See r230786 and r230794 for similar changes to gep and load
respectively.

Call is a bit different because it often doesn't have a single explicit
type - usually the type is deduced from the arguments, and just the
return type is explicit. In those cases there's no need to change the
IR.

When that's not the case, the IR usually contains the pointer type of
the first operand - but since typed pointers are going away, that
representation is insufficient so I'm just stripping the "pointerness"
of the explicit type away.

This does make the IR a bit weird - it /sort of/ reads like the type of
the first operand: "call void () %x(" but %x is actually of type "void
()*" and will eventually be just of type "ptr". But this seems not too
bad and I don't think it would benefit from repeating the type
("void (), void () * %x(" and then eventually "void (), ptr %x(") as has
been done with gep and load.

This also has a side benefit: since the explicit type is no longer a
pointer, there's no ambiguity between an explicit type and a function
that returns a function pointer. Previously this case needed an explicit
type (eg: a function returning a void() function was written as
"call void () () * @x(" rather than "call void () * @x(" because of the
ambiguity between a function returning a pointer to a void() function
and a function returning void).

No ambiguity means even function pointer return types can just be
written alone, without writing the whole function's type.

This leaves /only/ the varargs case where the explicit type is required.

Given the special type syntax in call instructions, the regex-fu used
for migration was a bit more involved in its own unique way (as every
one of these is) so here it is. Use it in conjunction with the apply.sh
script and associated find/xargs commands I've provided in rr230786 to
migrate your out of tree tests. Do let me know if any of this doesn't
cover your cases & we can iterate on a more general script/regexes to
help others with out of tree tests.

About 9 test cases couldn't be automatically migrated - half of those
were functions returning function pointers, where I just had to manually
delete the function argument types now that we didn't need an explicit
function type there. The other half were typedefs of function types used
in calls - just had to manually drop the * from those.

import fileinput
import sys
import re

pat = re.compile(r'((?:=|:|^|\s)call\s(?:[^@]*?))(\s*$|\s*(?:(?:\[\[[a-zA-Z0-9_]+\]\]|[@%](?:(")?[\\\?@a-zA-Z0-9_.]*?(?(3)"|)|{{.*}}))(?:\(|$)|undef|inttoptr|bitcast|null|asm).*$)')
addrspace_end = re.compile(r"addrspace\(\d+\)\s*\*$")
func_end = re.compile("(?:void.*|\)\s*)\*$")

def conv(match, line):
  if not match or re.search(addrspace_end, match.group(1)) or not re.search(func_end, match.group(1)):
    return line
  return line[:match.start()] + match.group(1)[:match.group(1).rfind('*')].rstrip() + match.group(2) + line[match.end():]

for line in sys.stdin:
  sys.stdout.write(conv(re.search(pat, line), line))

llvm-svn: 235145
2015-04-16 23:24:18 +00:00
David Blaikie f72d05bc7b [opaque pointer type] Add textual IR support for explicit type parameter to gep operator
Similar to gep (r230786) and load (r230794) changes.

Similar migration script can be used to update test cases, which
successfully migrated all of LLVM and Polly, but about 4 test cases
needed manually changes in Clang.

(this script will read the contents of stdin and massage it into stdout
- wrap it in the 'apply.sh' script shown in previous commits + xargs to
apply it over a large set of test cases)

import fileinput
import sys
import re

rep = re.compile(r"(getelementptr(?:\s+inbounds)?\s*\()((<\d*\s+x\s+)?([^@]*?)(|\s*addrspace\(\d+\))\s*\*(?(3)>)\s*)(?=$|%|@|null|undef|blockaddress|getelementptr|addrspacecast|bitcast|inttoptr|zeroinitializer|<|\[\[[a-zA-Z]|\{\{)", re.MULTILINE | re.DOTALL)

def conv(match):
  line = match.group(1)
  line += match.group(4)
  line += ", "
  line += match.group(2)
  return line

line = sys.stdin.read()
off = 0
for match in re.finditer(rep, line):
  sys.stdout.write(line[off:match.start()])
  sys.stdout.write(conv(match))
  off = match.end()
sys.stdout.write(line[off:])

llvm-svn: 232184
2015-03-13 18:20:45 +00:00
Mehdi Amini 46a43556db Make DataLayout Non-Optional in the Module
Summary:
DataLayout keeps the string used for its creation.

As a side effect it is no longer needed in the Module.
This is "almost" NFC, the string is no longer
canonicalized, you can't rely on two "equals" DataLayout
having the same string returned by getStringRepresentation().

Get rid of DataLayoutPass: the DataLayout is in the Module

The DataLayout is "per-module", let's enforce this by not
duplicating it more than necessary.
One more step toward non-optionality of the DataLayout in the
module.

Make DataLayout Non-Optional in the Module

Module->getDataLayout() will never returns nullptr anymore.

Reviewers: echristo

Subscribers: resistor, llvm-commits, jholewinski

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7992

From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com>
llvm-svn: 231270
2015-03-04 18:43:29 +00:00
David Blaikie a79ac14fa6 [opaque pointer type] Add textual IR support for explicit type parameter to load instruction
Essentially the same as the GEP change in r230786.

A similar migration script can be used to update test cases, though a few more
test case improvements/changes were required this time around: (r229269-r229278)

import fileinput
import sys
import re

pat = re.compile(r"((?:=|:|^)\s*load (?:atomic )?(?:volatile )?(.*?))(| addrspace\(\d+\) *)\*($| *(?:%|@|null|undef|blockaddress|getelementptr|addrspacecast|bitcast|inttoptr|\[\[[a-zA-Z]|\{\{).*$)")

for line in sys.stdin:
  sys.stdout.write(re.sub(pat, r"\1, \2\3*\4", line))

Reviewers: rafael, dexonsmith, grosser

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7649

llvm-svn: 230794
2015-02-27 21:17:42 +00:00
David Blaikie 79e6c74981 [opaque pointer type] Add textual IR support for explicit type parameter to getelementptr instruction
One of several parallel first steps to remove the target type of pointers,
replacing them with a single opaque pointer type.

This adds an explicit type parameter to the gep instruction so that when the
first parameter becomes an opaque pointer type, the type to gep through is
still available to the instructions.

* This doesn't modify gep operators, only instructions (operators will be
  handled separately)

* Textual IR changes only. Bitcode (including upgrade) and changing the
  in-memory representation will be in separate changes.

* geps of vectors are transformed as:
    getelementptr <4 x float*> %x, ...
  ->getelementptr float, <4 x float*> %x, ...
  Then, once the opaque pointer type is introduced, this will ultimately look
  like:
    getelementptr float, <4 x ptr> %x
  with the unambiguous interpretation that it is a vector of pointers to float.

* address spaces remain on the pointer, not the type:
    getelementptr float addrspace(1)* %x
  ->getelementptr float, float addrspace(1)* %x
  Then, eventually:
    getelementptr float, ptr addrspace(1) %x

Importantly, the massive amount of test case churn has been automated by
same crappy python code. I had to manually update a few test cases that
wouldn't fit the script's model (r228970,r229196,r229197,r229198). The
python script just massages stdin and writes the result to stdout, I
then wrapped that in a shell script to handle replacing files, then
using the usual find+xargs to migrate all the files.

update.py:
import fileinput
import sys
import re

ibrep = re.compile(r"(^.*?[^%\w]getelementptr inbounds )(((?:<\d* x )?)(.*?)(| addrspace\(\d\)) *\*(|>)(?:$| *(?:%|@|null|undef|blockaddress|getelementptr|addrspacecast|bitcast|inttoptr|\[\[[a-zA-Z]|\{\{).*$))")
normrep = re.compile(       r"(^.*?[^%\w]getelementptr )(((?:<\d* x )?)(.*?)(| addrspace\(\d\)) *\*(|>)(?:$| *(?:%|@|null|undef|blockaddress|getelementptr|addrspacecast|bitcast|inttoptr|\[\[[a-zA-Z]|\{\{).*$))")

def conv(match, line):
  if not match:
    return line
  line = match.groups()[0]
  if len(match.groups()[5]) == 0:
    line += match.groups()[2]
  line += match.groups()[3]
  line += ", "
  line += match.groups()[1]
  line += "\n"
  return line

for line in sys.stdin:
  if line.find("getelementptr ") == line.find("getelementptr inbounds"):
    if line.find("getelementptr inbounds") != line.find("getelementptr inbounds ("):
      line = conv(re.match(ibrep, line), line)
  elif line.find("getelementptr ") != line.find("getelementptr ("):
    line = conv(re.match(normrep, line), line)
  sys.stdout.write(line)

apply.sh:
for name in "$@"
do
  python3 `dirname "$0"`/update.py < "$name" > "$name.tmp" && mv "$name.tmp" "$name"
  rm -f "$name.tmp"
done

The actual commands:
From llvm/src:
find test/ -name *.ll | xargs ./apply.sh
From llvm/src/tools/clang:
find test/ -name *.mm -o -name *.m -o -name *.cpp -o -name *.c | xargs -I '{}' ../../apply.sh "{}"
From llvm/src/tools/polly:
find test/ -name *.ll | xargs ./apply.sh

After that, check-all (with llvm, clang, clang-tools-extra, lld,
compiler-rt, and polly all checked out).

The extra 'rm' in the apply.sh script is due to a few files in clang's test
suite using interesting unicode stuff that my python script was throwing
exceptions on. None of those files needed to be migrated, so it seemed
sufficient to ignore those cases.

Reviewers: rafael, dexonsmith, grosser

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7636

llvm-svn: 230786
2015-02-27 19:29:02 +00:00
Michael Kuperstein 951995821a [X86] Reduce some 32-bit imuls into lea + shl
Reduce integer multiplication by a constant of the form k*2^c, where k is in {3,5,9} into a lea + shl. Previously it was only done for imulq on 64-bit platforms, but it makes sense for imull and 32-bit as well.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7196

llvm-svn: 227308
2015-01-28 14:08:22 +00:00
Alp Toker d3d017cf00 Reduce verbiage of lit.local.cfg files
We can just split targets_to_build in one place and make it immutable.

llvm-svn: 210496
2014-06-09 22:42:55 +00:00
Hal Finkel c3998306f4 Add the ability to use GEPs for address sinking in CGP
The current memory-instruction optimization logic in CGP, which sinks parts of
the address computation that can be adsorbed by the addressing mode, does this
by explicitly converting the relevant part of the address computation into
IR-level integer operations (making use of ptrtoint and inttoptr). For most
targets this is currently not a problem, but for targets wishing to make use of
IR-level aliasing analysis during CodeGen, the use of ptrtoint/inttoptr is a
problem for two reasons:
  1. BasicAA becomes less powerful in the face of the ptrtoint/inttoptr
  2. In cases where type-punning was used, and BasicAA was used
     to override TBAA, BasicAA may no longer do so. (this had forced us to disable
     all use of TBAA in CodeGen; something which we can now enable again)

This (use of GEPs instead of ptrtoint/inttoptr) is not currently enabled by
default (except for those targets that use AA during CodeGen), and so aside
from some PowerPC subtargets and SystemZ, there should be no change in
behavior. We may be able to switch completely away from the ptrtoint/inttoptr
sinking on all targets, but further testing is required.

I've doubled-up on a number of existing tests that are sensitive to the
address sinking behavior (including some store-merging tests that are
sensitive to the order of the resulting ADD operations at the SDAG level).

llvm-svn: 206092
2014-04-12 00:59:48 +00:00
Rafael Espindola 1cf777bc12 This test need the X86 backend, move it to the X86 sub directory.
llvm-svn: 203725
2014-03-12 22:03:43 +00:00