Commit Graph

17 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Nikita Popov 4ef272ec9c [InstCombine] DCE instructions earlier
When InstCombine initially populates the worklist, it already
performs constant folding and DCE. However, as the instructions
are initially visited in program order, this DCE can pick up only
the last instruction of a dead chain, the rest would only get
picked up in the main InstCombine run.

To avoid this, we instead perform the DCE in separate pass over the
collected instructions in reverse order, which will allow us to
pick up full dead instruction chains. We already need to do this
reverse iteration anyway to populate the worklist, so this
shouldn't add extra cost.

This by itself only fixes a small part of the problem though:
The same basic issue also applies during the main InstCombine loop.
We generally always want DCE to occur as early as possible,
because it will allow one-use folds to happen. Address this by also
performing DCE while adding deferred instructions to the main worklist.

This drops the number of tests that perform more than 2 InstCombine
iterations from ~80 to ~40. There's some spurious test changes due
to operand order / icmp toggling.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75008
2020-02-27 18:45:59 +01:00
Nikita Popov ef052a7527 [InstCombine] Update SimplifyCFG test
This test also runs -instcombine. Here the operands in an or chain
have been reassociated.
2020-01-30 10:11:42 +01:00
Roman Lebedev 395f254bf0 [SimplifyCFG][NFC] Make merge-cond-stores-cost.ll X86-specific, and rewrite it
We clearly perform store-merging, even though div is really costly.

llvm-svn: 371300
2019-09-07 10:55:04 +00:00
Roman Lebedev 0ff6d7f305 [SimplifyCFG][NFC] Show that we don't consider the cost when merging cond stores
We count instruction count in each BB's separately, not their cost.

llvm-svn: 371297
2019-09-07 09:25:26 +00:00
Roman Lebedev 8d3e4d3a4d [SimplifyCFG][NFC] Regenerate merge-cond-stores* tests
llvm-svn: 371296
2019-09-07 09:25:18 +00:00
Eric Christopher cee313d288 Revert "Temporarily Revert "Add basic loop fusion pass.""
The reversion apparently deleted the test/Transforms directory.

Will be re-reverting again.

llvm-svn: 358552
2019-04-17 04:52:47 +00:00
Eric Christopher a863435128 Temporarily Revert "Add basic loop fusion pass."
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).

This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.

llvm-svn: 358546
2019-04-17 02:12:23 +00:00
David Bolvansky cd57242587 [NFC] Fixed build, updated tests
llvm-svn: 339524
2018-08-12 18:32:53 +00:00
David Bolvansky 6737b3a6a1 [InstCombine] Fold Select with binary op
Summary:
Fold
  %A = icmp eq i8 %x, 0
  %B = xor i8 %x, %z
  %C = select i1 %A, i8 %B, i8 %y
To
  %C = select i1 %A, i8 %z, i8 %y

Fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38345
Proof: https://rise4fun.com/Alive/43J

Reviewers: lebedev.ri, spatel

Reviewed By: spatel

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D49954

llvm-svn: 338300
2018-07-30 20:38:53 +00:00
Craig Topper 7d3aba6687 [SimplifyCFG] Teach merge conditional stores to handle cases where the PostBB has more than 2 predecessors by inserting a new block for the store.
Summary:
Currently merge conditional stores can't handle cases where PostBB (the block we need to move the store to) has more than 2 predecessors.

This patch removes that restriction by creating a new block with only the 2 predecessors we care about and an unconditional branch to the original block. This provides a place to put the store.

Reviewers: efriedma, jmolloy, ABataev

Reviewed By: efriedma

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39760

llvm-svn: 329142
2018-04-04 03:47:17 +00:00
Craig Topper 7af078847c [SimplifyCFG] Fix the determination of PostBB in conditional store merging to handle the targets on the second branch being commuted
Currently we choose PostBB as the single successor of QFB, but its possible that QTB's single successor is QFB which would make QFB the correct choice.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32323

llvm-svn: 300992
2017-04-21 15:53:42 +00:00
Craig Topper 1cb0e5afb0 [Simplify] Add testcase to show that merging conditional stores for triangles is sensitive to the order of the branch targets on the conditional branches. NFC
llvm-svn: 300915
2017-04-20 22:57:36 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 33439f982b [InstCombine] morph an existing instruction instead of creating a new one
One potential way to make InstCombine (very slightly?) faster is to recycle instructions 
when possible instead of creating new ones. It's not explicitly stated AFAIK, but we don't
consider this an "InstSimplify". We could, however, make a new layer to house transforms 
like this if that makes InstCombine more manageable (just throwing out an idea; not sure 
how much opportunity is actually here).

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31863

llvm-svn: 300067
2017-04-12 15:11:33 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 2824927e8a [SimplifyCFG] auto-generate better checks; NFC
llvm-svn: 299825
2017-04-09 16:16:32 +00:00
Reid Kleckner db9a91e324 Revert "Don't create unnecessary PHIs"
This reverts commit r255489.

It causes test failures in Chromium and does not appear to respect the
AlternativeV parameter.

llvm-svn: 255562
2015-12-14 22:36:57 +00:00
James Molloy 2b1e101e99 Don't create unnecessary PHIs
In conditional store merging, we were creating PHIs when we didn't
need to. If the value to be predicated isn't defined in the block
we're predicating, then it doesn't need a PHI at all (because we only
deal with triangles and diamonds, any value not in the predicated BB
must dominate the predicated BB).

This fixes a large code size increase in some benchmarks in a popular embedded benchmark suite.

llvm-svn: 255489
2015-12-14 10:57:01 +00:00
James Molloy 4de84ddec9 [SimplifyCFG] Merge conditional stores
We can often end up with conditional stores that cannot be speculated. They can come from fairly simple, idiomatic code:

  if (c & flag1)
    *a = x;
  if (c & flag2)
    *a = y;
  ...

There is no dominating or post-dominating store to a, so it is not legal to move the store unconditionally to the end of the sequence and cache the intermediate result in a register, as we would like to.

It is, however, legal to merge the stores together and do the store once:

  tmp = undef;
  if (c & flag1)
    tmp = x;
  if (c & flag2)
    tmp = y;
  if (c & flag1 || c & flag2)
    *a = tmp;

The real power in this optimization is that it allows arbitrary length ladders such as these to be completely and trivially if-converted. The typical code I'd expect this to trigger on often uses binary-AND with constants as the condition (as in the above example), which means the ending condition can simply be truncated into a single binary-AND too: 'if (c & (flag1|flag2))'. As in the general case there are bitwise operators here, the ladder can often be optimized further too.

This optimization involves potentially increasing register pressure. Even in the simplest case, the lifetime of the first predicate is extended. This can be elided in some cases such as using binary-AND on constants, but not in the general case. Threading 'tmp' through all branches can also increase register pressure.

The optimization as in this patch is enabled by default but kept in a very conservative mode. It will only optimize if it thinks the resultant code should be if-convertable, and additionally if it can thread 'tmp' through at least one existing PHI, so it will only ever in the worst case create one more PHI and extend the lifetime of a predicate.

This doesn't trigger much in LNT, unfortunately, but it does trigger in a big way in a third party test suite.

llvm-svn: 252051
2015-11-04 15:28:04 +00:00