This work is to avoid regressions when we seperate FNeg from the FSub IR instruction.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53205
llvm-svn: 345146
We need to update this code before introducing an 'fneg' instruction in IR,
so we might as well kill off the integer neg/not queries too.
This is no-functional-change-intended for scalar code and most vector code.
For vectors, we can see that the 'match' API allows for undef elements in
constants, so we optimize those cases better.
Ideally, there would be a test for each code diff, but I don't see evidence
of that for the existing code, so I didn't try very hard to come up with new
vector tests for each code change.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53533
llvm-svn: 345042
If we have a pair of binops feeding another pair of binops, rearrange the operands so
the matching pair are together because that allows easy factorization folds to happen
in instcombine:
((X << S) & Y) & (Z << S) --> ((X << S) & (Z << S)) & Y (reassociation)
--> ((X & Z) << S) & Y (factorize shift from 'and' ops optimization)
This is part of solving PR37098:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37098
Note that there's an instcombine version of this patch attached there, but we're trying
to make instcombine have less responsibility to improve compile-time efficiency.
For reasons I still don't completely understand, reassociate does this kind of transform
sometimes, but misses everything in my motivating cases.
This patch on its own is gluing an independent cleanup chunk to the end of the existing
RewriteExprTree() loop. We can build on it and do something stronger to better order the
full expression tree like D40049. That might be an alternative to the proposal to add a
separate reassociation pass like D41574.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45842
llvm-svn: 341288
In the past, DbgInfoIntrinsic has a strong assumption that these
intrinsics all have variables and expressions attached to them.
However, it is too strong to derive the class for other debug entities.
Now, it has problems for debug labels.
In order to make DbgInfoIntrinsic as a base class for 'debug info', I
create a class for 'variable debug info', DbgVariableIntrinsic.
DbgDeclareInst, DbgAddrIntrinsic, and DbgValueInst will be derived from it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50220
llvm-svn: 338984
Review feedback from r328165. Split out just the one function from the
file that's used by Analysis. (As chandlerc pointed out, the original
change only moved the header and not the implementation anyway - which
was fine for the one function that was used (since it's a
template/inlined in the header) but not in general)
llvm-svn: 333954
The DEBUG() macro is very generic so it might clash with other projects.
The renaming was done as follows:
- git grep -l 'DEBUG' | xargs sed -i 's/\bDEBUG\s\?(/LLVM_DEBUG(/g'
- git diff -U0 master | ../clang/tools/clang-format/clang-format-diff.py -i -p1 -style LLVM
- Manual change to APInt
- Manually chage DOCS as regex doesn't match it.
In the transition period the DEBUG() macro is still present and aliased
to the LLVM_DEBUG() one.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D43624
llvm-svn: 332240
Phi nodes can reside in live blocks but one of their incoming
arguments can come from a dead block. Dead blocks and reassociate
don't play nice together. In fact, reassociate performs an RPO
as a first step to avoid processing dead blocks.
The reason why Reassociate might not fixpoint when examining
dead blocks is that the following:
%xor0 = xor i16 %xor1, undef
%xor1 = xor i16 %xor0, undef
is perfectly valid LLVM IR (if it appears in a dead block),
so the worklist algorithm keeps pushing the two instructions for
reexamination. Note that this is not Reassociate fault, at least
not entirely. It's llvm that has a weird definition of dominance.
Fixes PR37390.
llvm-svn: 332100
Summary:
Some of our internal testing detected a major compile time regression which I've
tracked down to:
r278938 - Revert "Reassociate: Reprocess RedoInsts after each inst".
It appears that processing long chains of reassociatable instructions causes
non-linear (potentially exponential) growth in the number of times an
instruction is revisited. For example, the included test revisits instructions
220 times in a 20-instruction test.
It appears that r278938 reversed the order instructions were visited and that
this is preventing scheduled revisits from being cancelled as a result of
visiting the instructions naturally during normal processing. However, simply
reversing the order also harmed the generated code. Upon closer inspection, it
was discovered that revisits occurred in the opposite order to the first pass
(Thanks to escha for spotting that).
This patch makes the revisit order consistent with the first pass which allows
more revisits to be cancelled. This does appear to have a small impact on the
generated code in few cases but it significantly reduces compile-time.
After this patch, our internal test that was most affected by the regression
dropped from ~2 million revisits to ~4k resulting in Reassociate having 0.46%
of the runtime it had before (99.54% improvement).
Here's the summaries reported by lnt for the LLVM test-suite with --benchmarking-only:
| metric | geomean before patch | geomean after patch | delta |
| ----- | ----- | ----- | ----- |
| compile time | 0.1956 | 0.1261 | -35.54% |
| execution time | 0.3240 | 0.3237 | - |
| code size | 7365.4459 | 7365.6079 | - |
The results have a few wins and losses on compile-time, mostly in the +/- 2.5% range. There was one outlier though:
| Performance Regressions - compile_time | Δ | Previous | Current |
| MultiSource/Benchmarks/ASC_Sequoia/CrystalMk/CrystalMk | 9.82% | 2.0473 | 2.2483 |
Reviewers: javed.absar, dberlin
Reviewed By: dberlin
Subscribers: kristof.beyls, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45734
llvm-svn: 331381
We've been running doxygen with the autobrief option for a couple of
years now. This makes the \brief markers into our comments
redundant. Since they are a visual distraction and we don't want to
encourage more \brief markers in new code either, this patch removes
them all.
Patch produced by
for i in $(git grep -l '\\brief'); do perl -pi -e 's/\\brief //g' $i & done
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46290
llvm-svn: 331272
Summary:
When Reassociate is rewriting an expression tree it may
reuse old binary expression nodes, for new expressions.
Whenever an expression node is reused, but with a non-trivial
change in the result, we need to invalidate any debug info
that is associated with the node.
If for example rewriting
x = mul a, b
y = mul c, x
into
x = mul c, b
y = mul a, x
we still get the same result for 'y', but 'x' is a new expression.
All debug info referring to 'x' must be invalidated (marked as
optimized out) since we no longer calculate the expected value.
As a side-effect this patch avoid (at least some) problems where
reassociate could end up creating IR with debug-use before def.
Earlier the dbg.value nodes where left untouched in the IR, while
the reused binary nodes where sinked to just before the root node
of the rewritten expression tree. See PR27273 for more info about
such problems.
Reviewers: dblaikie, aprantl, dexonsmith
Reviewed By: aprantl
Subscribers: JDevlieghere, llvm-commits
Tags: #debug-info
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45975
llvm-svn: 330804
Remove #include of Transforms/Scalar.h from Transform/Utils to fix layering.
Transforms depends on Transforms/Utils, not the other way around. So
remove the header and the "createStripGCRelocatesPass" function
declaration (& definition) that is unused and motivated this dependency.
Move Transforms/Utils/Local.h into Analysis because it's used by
Analysis/MemoryBuiltins.cpp.
llvm-svn: 328165
This algorithm (explained more in the source code) takes into account
global redundancies by building a "pair map" to find common subexprs.
The primary motivation of this is to handle situations like
foo = (a * b) * c
bar = (a * d) * c
where we currently don't identify that "a * c" is redundant.
Accordingly, it prioritizes the emission of a * c so that CSE
can remove the redundant calculation later.
Does not change the actual reassociation algorithm -- only the
order in which the reassociated operand chain is reconstructed.
Gives ~1.5% floating point math instruction count reduction on
a large offline suite of graphics shaders.
llvm-svn: 320515
The toxic stew of created values named 'tmp' and tests that already have
values named 'tmp' and CHECK lines looking for values named 'tmp' causes
bad things to happen in our test line auto-generation scripts because it
wants to use 'TMP' as a prefix for unnamed values. Use less 'tmp' to
avoid that.
llvm-svn: 317818
As discussed on llvm-dev:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-November/107104.html
and again more recently:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-October/118118.html
...this is a step in cleaning up our fast-math-flags implementation in IR to better match
the capabilities of both clang's user-visible flags and the backend's flags for SDNode.
As proposed in the above threads, we're replacing the 'UnsafeAlgebra' bit (which had the
'umbrella' meaning that all flags are set) with a new bit that only applies to algebraic
reassociation - 'AllowReassoc'.
We're also adding a bit to allow approximations for library functions called 'ApproxFunc'
(this was initially proposed as 'libm' or similar).
...and we're out of bits. 7 bits ought to be enough for anyone, right? :) FWIW, I did
look at getting this out of SubclassOptionalData via SubclassData (spacious 16-bits),
but that's apparently already used for other purposes. Also, I don't think we can just
add a field to FPMathOperator because Operator is not intended to be instantiated.
We'll defer movement of FMF to another day.
We keep the 'fast' keyword. I thought about removing that, but seeing IR like this:
%f.fast = fadd reassoc nnan ninf nsz arcp contract afn float %op1, %op2
...made me think we want to keep the shortcut synonym.
Finally, this change is binary incompatible with existing IR as seen in the
compatibility tests. This statement:
"Newer releases can ignore features from older releases, but they cannot miscompile
them. For example, if nsw is ever replaced with something else, dropping it would be
a valid way to upgrade the IR."
( http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#ir-backwards-compatibility )
...provides the flexibility we want to make this change without requiring a new IR
version. Ie, we're not loosening the FP strictness of existing IR. At worst, we will
fail to optimize some previously 'fast' code because it's no longer recognized as
'fast'. This should get fixed as we audit/squash all of the uses of 'isFast()'.
Note: an inter-dependent clang commit to use the new API name should closely follow
commit.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39304
llvm-svn: 317488
Summary:
When reassociating an expression, do not drop the instruction's
original debug location in case the replacement location is
missing.
The debug location must at least not be dropped for inlinable
callsites of debug-info-bearing functions in debug-info-bearing
functions. Failing to do so would result in an "inlinable function "
"call in a function with debug info must have a !dbg location"
error in the verifier.
As preserving the original debug location is not expected
to result in overly jumpy debug line information, it is
preserved for all other cases too.
This fixes PR34231:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34231
Original patch by David Stenberg
Reviewers: davide, craig.topper, mcrosier, dblaikie, aprantl
Reviewed By: davide, aprantl
Subscribers: aprantl
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36865
llvm-svn: 311642
..if the resulting subtract will be broken up later. This can cause us to get
into an infinite loop.
x + (-5.0 * y) -> x - (5.0 * y) ; Canonicalize neg const
x - (5.0 * y) -> x + (0 - (5.0 * y)) ; Break up subtract
x + (0 - (5.0 * y)) -> x + (-5.0 * y) ; Replace 0-X with X*-1.
PR34078
llvm-svn: 311554
While here, rename `i` to `Rank` as the latter is more
self-explanatory (and this code also uses `I` two lines below to
identify an Instruction).
llvm-svn: 310238
Going through the Constant methods requires redetermining that the Constant is a ConstantInt and then calling isZero/isOne/isMinusOne.
llvm-svn: 307292
Summary:
EraseInst didn't report that it made IR changes through MadeChange.
It is essential that changes to the IR are reported correctly,
since for example ReassociatePass::run() will indicate that all
analyses are preserved otherwise.
And the CGPassManager determines if the CallGraph is up-to-date
based on status from InstructionCombiningPass::runOnFunction().
Reviewers: craig.topper, rnk, davide
Reviewed By: rnk, davide
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34616
llvm-svn: 306368
Summary:
Currently we don't try to do anything with vector xors.
This patch adds support for removing duplicate pairs from a chain of vector xors as its pretty easy to support. We still dont' try to combine the xors with and/ors, but I might try that in a future patch.
Reviewers: mcrosier, davide, resistor
Reviewed By: mcrosier
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34338
llvm-svn: 305704
Summary:
Implements PR889
Removing the virtual table pointer from Value saves 1% of RSS when doing
LTO of llc on Linux. The impact on time was positive, but too noisy to
conclusively say that performance improved. Here is a link to the
spreadsheet with the original data:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1F4FHir0qYnV0MEp2sYYp_BuvnJgWlWPhWOwZ6LbW7W4/edit?usp=sharing
This change makes it invalid to directly delete a Value, User, or
Instruction pointer. Instead, such code can be rewritten to a null check
and a call Value::deleteValue(). Value objects tend to have their
lifetimes managed through iplist, so for the most part, this isn't a big
deal. However, there are some places where LLVM deletes values, and
those places had to be migrated to deleteValue. I have also created
llvm::unique_value, which has a custom deleter, so it can be used in
place of std::unique_ptr<Value>.
I had to add the "DerivedUser" Deleter escape hatch for MemorySSA, which
derives from User outside of lib/IR. Code in IR cannot include MemorySSA
headers or call the MemoryAccess object destructors without introducing
a circular dependency, so we need some level of indirection.
Unfortunately, no class derived from User may have any virtual methods,
because adding a virtual method would break User::getHungOffOperands(),
which assumes that it can find the use list immediately prior to the
User object. I've added a static_assert to the appropriate OperandTraits
templates to help people avoid this trap.
Reviewers: chandlerc, mehdi_amini, pete, dberlin, george.burgess.iv
Reviewed By: chandlerc
Subscribers: krytarowski, eraman, george.burgess.iv, mzolotukhin, Prazek, nlewycky, hans, inglorion, pcc, tejohnson, dberlin, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31261
llvm-svn: 303362
Commits were:
"Use WeakVH instead of WeakTrackingVH in AliasSetTracker's UnkownInsts"
"Add a new WeakVH value handle; NFC"
"Rename WeakVH to WeakTrackingVH; NFC"
The changes assumed pointers are 8 byte aligned on all architectures.
llvm-svn: 301429
Summary:
I plan to use WeakVH to mean "nulls itself out on deletion, but does
not track RAUW" in a subsequent commit.
Reviewers: dblaikie, davide
Reviewed By: davide
Subscribers: arsenm, mehdi_amini, mcrosier, mzolotukhin, jfb, llvm-commits, nhaehnle
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32266
llvm-svn: 301424
In OptimizeAdd, we scan the operand list to see if there are any common factors
between operands that can be factored out to reduce the number of multiplies
(e.g., 'A*A+A*B*C+D' -> 'A*(A+B*C)+D'). For each operand of the operand list, we
only consider unique factors (which is tracked by the Duplicate set). Now if we
find a factor that is a negative constant, we add the negated value as a factor
as well, because we can percolate the negate out. However, we mistakenly don't
add this negated constant to the Duplicates set.
Consider the expression A*2*-2 + B. Obviously, nothing to factor.
For the added value A*2*-2 we over count 2 as a factor without this change,
which causes the assert reported in PR30256. The problem is that this code is
assuming that all the multiply operands of the add are already reassociated.
This change avoids the issue by making OptimizeAdd tolerate multiplies which
haven't been completely optimized; this sort of works, but we're doing wasted
work: we'll end up revisiting the add later anyway.
Another possible approach would be to enforce RPO iteration order more strongly.
If we have RedoInsts, we process them immediately in RPO order, rather than
waiting until we've finished processing the whole function. Intuitively, it
seems like the natural approach: reassociation works on expression trees, so
the optimization only works in one direction. That said, I'm not sure how
practical that is given the current Reassociate; the "optimal" form for an
expression depends on its use list (see all the uses of "user_back()"), so
Reassociate is really an iterative optimization of sorts, so any changes here
would probably get messy.
PR30256
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30228
llvm-svn: 296003
a function's CFG when that CFG is unchanged.
This allows transformation passes to simply claim they preserve the CFG
and analysis passes to check for the CFG being preserved to remove the
fanout of all analyses being listed in all passes.
I've gone through and removed or cleaned up as many of the comments
reminding us to do this as I could.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28627
llvm-svn: 292054
Summary:
It was detected that the reassociate pass could enter an inifite
loop when analysing dead code. Simply skipping to analyse basic
blocks that are dead avoids such problems (and as a side effect
we avoid spending time on optimising dead code).
The solution is using the same Reverse Post Order ordering of the
basic blocks when doing the optimisations, as when building the
precalculated rank map. A nice side-effect of this solution is
that we now know that we only try to do optimisations for blocks
with ranked instructions.
Fixes https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=30818
Reviewers: llvm-commits, davide, eli.friedman, mehdi_amini
Subscribers: dberlin
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26154
llvm-svn: 285793
Fixes PR 30784. Discussed with Justin, who pointed out that
in the new PassManager infrastructure we can have more fine-grained
control on which analyses we want to preserve, but this is the
best we can do with the current infrastructure.
llvm-svn: 285380
Davide Italiano