Summary:
Split off of D67120.
Add the profile guided size optimization instrumentation / queries in the code
gen or target passes. This doesn't enable the size optimizations in those passes
yet as they are currently disabled in shouldOptimizeForSize (for non-IR pass
queries).
A second try after reverted D71072.
Reviewers: davidxl
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71149
Summary:
Split off of D67120.
Add the profile guided size optimization instrumentation / queries in the code
gen or target passes. This doesn't enable the size optimizations in those passes
yet as they are currently disabled in shouldOptimizeForSize (for non-IR pass
queries).
Reviewers: davidxl
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71072
Current tail duplication integrated in bb layout is designed to increase the fallthrough from a BB's predecessor to its successor, but we have observed cases that duplication doesn't increase fallthrough, or it brings too much size overhead.
To overcome these two issues in function canTailDuplicateUnplacedPreds I add two checks:
make sure there is at least one duplication in current work set.
the number of duplication should not exceed the number of successors.
The modification in hasBetterLayoutPredecessor fixes a bug that potential predecessor must be at the bottom of a chain.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64376
This file lists every pass in LLVM, and is included by Pass.h, which is
very popular. Every time we add, remove, or rename a pass in LLVM, it
caused lots of recompilation.
I found this fact by looking at this table, which is sorted by the
number of times a file was changed over the last 100,000 git commits
multiplied by the number of object files that depend on it in the
current checkout:
recompiles touches affected_files header
342380 95 3604 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/STLExtras.h
314730 234 1345 llvm/include/llvm/InitializePasses.h
307036 118 2602 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/APInt.h
213049 59 3611 llvm/include/llvm/Support/MathExtras.h
170422 47 3626 llvm/include/llvm/Support/Compiler.h
162225 45 3605 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/Optional.h
158319 63 2513 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/Triple.h
140322 39 3598 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/StringRef.h
137647 59 2333 llvm/include/llvm/Support/Error.h
131619 73 1803 llvm/include/llvm/Support/FileSystem.h
Before this change, touching InitializePasses.h would cause 1345 files
to recompile. After this change, touching it only causes 550 compiles in
an incremental rebuild.
Reviewers: bkramer, asbirlea, bollu, jdoerfert
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70211
This reverts r371177 (git commit f879c68755)
It caused PR43566 by removing empty, address-taken MachineBasicBlocks.
Such blocks may have references from blockaddress or other operands, and
need more consideration to be removed.
See the PR for a test case to use when relanding.
llvm-svn: 373805
Existing clients are converted to use MachineModuleInfoWrapperPass. The
new interface is for defining a new pass manager API in CodeGen.
Reviewers: fedor.sergeev, philip.pfaffe, chandlerc, arsenm
Reviewed By: arsenm, fedor.sergeev
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64183
llvm-svn: 373240
Summary:
Fix a bug of not update the jump table and recommit it again.
In `block-placement` pass, it will create some patterns for unconditional we can do the simple early retrun.
But the `early-ret` pass is before `block-placement`, we don't want to run it again.
This patch is to do the simple early return to optimize the blocks at the last of `block-placement`.
Reviewed By: efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63972
llvm-svn: 371177
Summary:
This patch renames functions that takes or returns alignment as log2, this patch will help with the transition to llvm::Align.
The renaming makes it explicit that we deal with log(alignment) instead of a power of two alignment.
A few renames uncovered dubious assignments:
- `MirParser`/`MirPrinter` was expecting powers of two but `MachineFunction` and `MachineBasicBlock` were using deal with log2(align). This patch fixes it and updates the documentation.
- `MachineBlockPlacement` exposes two flags (`align-all-blocks` and `align-all-nofallthru-blocks`) supposedly interpreted as power of two alignments, internally these values are interpreted as log2(align). This patch updates the documentation,
- `MachineFunctionexposes` exposes `align-all-functions` also interpreted as power of two alignment, internally this value is interpreted as log2(align). This patch updates the documentation,
Reviewers: lattner, thegameg, courbet
Subscribers: dschuff, arsenm, jyknight, dylanmckay, sdardis, nemanjai, jvesely, nhaehnle, javed.absar, hiraditya, kbarton, fedor.sergeev, asb, rbar, johnrusso, simoncook, apazos, sabuasal, niosHD, jrtc27, MaskRay, zzheng, edward-jones, atanasyan, rogfer01, MartinMosbeck, brucehoult, the_o, dexonsmith, PkmX, jocewei, jsji, Jim, s.egerton, llvm-commits, courbet
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65945
llvm-svn: 371045
This reverts commit b3d258fc44.
@skatkov is reporting crash in D63972#1646303
Contacted @ZhangKang, and revert the commit on behalf of him.
llvm-svn: 370069
Patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D43256 introduced more aggressive loop layout optimization which depends on profile information. If profile information is not available, the statically estimated profile information(generated by BranchProbabilityInfo.cpp) is used. If user program doesn't behave as BranchProbabilityInfo.cpp expected, the layout may be worse.
To be conservative this patch restores the original layout algorithm in plain mode. But user can still try the aggressive layout optimization with -force-precise-rotation-cost=true.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65673
llvm-svn: 369664
Summary:
Fix a bug of preducessors.
In `block-placement` pass, it will create some patterns for unconditional we can do the simple early retrun.
But the `early-ret` pass is before `block-placement`, we don't want to run it again.
This patch is to do the simple early return to optimize the blocks at the last of `block-placement`.
Reviewed By: efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63972
llvm-svn: 369191
Now that we've moved to C++14, we no longer need the llvm::make_unique
implementation from STLExtras.h. This patch is a mechanical replacement
of (hopefully) all the llvm::make_unique instances across the monorepo.
llvm-svn: 369013
Summary:
This patch has trigger a bug of r368339, and the r368339 has been reverted, So upstream this patch again.
In `block-placement` pass, it will create some patterns for unconditional we can do the simple early retrun.
But the `early-ret` pass is before `block-placement`, we don't want to run it again.
This patch is to do the simple early return to optimize the blocks at the last of `block-placement`.
Reviewed By: efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63972
llvm-svn: 368997
It caused assertions to fire when building Chromium:
lib/CodeGen/LiveDebugValues.cpp:331: bool
{anonymous}::LiveDebugValues::OpenRangesSet::empty() const: Assertion
`Vars.empty() == VarLocs.empty() && "open ranges are inconsistent"' failed.
See https://crbug.com/992871#c3 for how to reproduce.
> Patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D43256 introduced more aggressive loop layout optimization which depends on profile information. If profile information is not available, the statically estimated profile information(generated by BranchProbabilityInfo.cpp) is used. If user program doesn't behave as BranchProbabilityInfo.cpp expected, the layout may be worse.
>
> To be conservative this patch restores the original layout algorithm in plain mode. But user can still try the aggressive layout optimization with -force-precise-rotation-cost=true.
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65673
llvm-svn: 368579
Summary:
In `block-placement` pass, it will create some patterns for unconditional we can do the simple early retrun.
But the `early-ret` pass is before `block-placement`, we don't want to run it again.
This patch is to do the simple early return to optimize the blocks at the last of `block-placement`.
Reviewed By: efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63972
llvm-svn: 368565
> In `block-placement` pass, it will create some patterns for unconditional we can do the simple early retrun.
> But the `early-ret` pass is before `block-placement`, we don't want to run it again.
> This patch is to do the simple early return to optimize the blocks at the last of `block-placement`.
>
> Reviewed By: efriedma
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63972
This also revertes follow-ups r368514 and r368532.
llvm-svn: 368560
Summary:
In `block-placement` pass, it will create some patterns for unconditional we can do the simple early retrun.
But the `early-ret` pass is before `block-placement`, we don't want to run it again.
This patch is to do the simple early return to optimize the blocks at the last of `block-placement`.
Reviewed By: efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63972
llvm-svn: 368509
Patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D43256 introduced more aggressive loop layout optimization which depends on profile information. If profile information is not available, the statically estimated profile information(generated by BranchProbabilityInfo.cpp) is used. If user program doesn't behave as BranchProbabilityInfo.cpp expected, the layout may be worse.
To be conservative this patch restores the original layout algorithm in plain mode. But user can still try the aggressive layout optimization with -force-precise-rotation-cost=true.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65673
llvm-svn: 368339
Summary:
In `block-placement` pass, it will create some patterns for unconditional we can do the simple early retrun.
But the `early-ret` pass is before `block-placement`, we don't want to run it again.
This patch is to do the simple early return to optimize the blocks at the last of `block-placement`.
Below is an example
```
BB: | BB:
XOR 3, 3, 4 | XOR 3, 3, 4
B TBB | B ChainBB
... | ...
ChainBB: | ChainBB:
B TBB | ADD 3, 3, 4
... | BLR
TBB: |
ADD 3, 3, 4 |
BLR |
```
Reviewed By: efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63972
llvm-svn: 367080
Current findBestLoopTop can find and move one kind of block to top, a latch block has one successor. Another common case is:
* a latch block
* it has two successors, one is loop header, another is exit
* it has more than one predecessors
If it is below one of its predecessors P, only P can fall through to it, all other predecessors need a jump to it, and another conditional jump to loop header. If it is moved before loop header, all its predecessors jump to it, then fall through to loop header. So all its predecessors except P can reduce one taken branch.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D43256
llvm-svn: 363471
This patch factor out the function hasViableTopFallthrough from rotateLoop. It is also enhanced. Original code checks only if there is a block can be placed before current loop top. This patch also checks if the loop top is the most possible successor of its predecessor. The attached test case shows its effect.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58393
llvm-svn: 354682
If bottom of block BB has only one successor OldTop, in most cases it is profitable to move it before OldTop, except the following case:
-->OldTop<-
| . |
| . |
| . |
---Pred |
| |
BB-----
Move BB before OldTop can't reduce the number of taken branches, this patch detects this case and prevent the moving.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57067
llvm-svn: 352236
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
The Technical Reference Manuals for these two CPUs state that branching
to an unaligned 32-bit instruction incurs an extra pipeline reload
penalty. That's bad.
This also enables the optimization at -Os since it costs on average one
byte per loop in return for 1 cycle per iteration, which is pretty good
going.
llvm-svn: 342127
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
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:
Tail duplication easily breaks the structure of CFG, e.g. duplicating on
a region entry. If the structure is intended to be preserved, then we
may want to configure tail duplication, or disable it for structured
CFG. From our benchmark results disabling it doesn't cause performance
regression.
Notice that this currently affects AMDGPU backend. In the next patch, I
also plan to turn on requiresStructuredCFG for NVPTX.
All unit tests still pass.
Reviewers: jlebar, arsenm
Subscribers: jholewinski, sanjoy, wdng, tpr, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45008
llvm-svn: 328884
Summary:
This replaces calls to getEntryCount().hasValue() with hasProfileData
that does the same thing. This refactoring is useful to do before adding
synthetic function entry counts but also a useful cleanup IMO even
otherwise. I have used hasProfileData instead of hasRealProfileData as
David had earlier suggested since I think profile implies "real" and I
use the phrase "synthetic entry count" and not "synthetic profile count"
but I am fine calling it hasRealProfileData if you prefer.
Reviewers: davidxl, silvas
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41461
llvm-svn: 321331
As part of the unification of the debug format and the MIR format, print
MBB references as '%bb.5'.
The MIR printer prints the IR name of a MBB only for block definitions.
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#" << ([a-zA-Z0-9_]+)->getNumber\(\)/" << printMBBReference(*\1)/g'
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#" << ([a-zA-Z0-9_]+)\.getNumber\(\)/" << printMBBReference(\1)/g'
* find . \( -name "*.txt" -o -name "*.s" -o -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#([0-9]+)/%bb.\1/g'
* grep -nr 'BB#' and fix
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40422
llvm-svn: 319665
All these headers already depend on CodeGen headers so moving them into
CodeGen fixes the layering (since CodeGen depends on Target, not the
other way around).
llvm-svn: 318490
This header includes CodeGen headers, and is not, itself, included by
any Target headers, so move it into CodeGen to match the layering of its
implementation.
llvm-svn: 317647
The patch that this assert comes with is fixing a bug in MBP. The assert is
invalid however.
Thanks to @sergey.k.okunev for finding this
Currently this fails SPECCPU2006 LTO. I will add a test case when I do more
investigation and have one.
llvm-svn: 315032
Hiroshi Yamauchi