Commit Graph

91 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Chandler Carruth 6bda14b313 Sort the remaining #include lines in include/... and lib/....
I did this a long time ago with a janky python script, but now
clang-format has built-in support for this. I fed clang-format every
line with a #include and let it re-sort things according to the precise
LLVM rules for include ordering baked into clang-format these days.

I've reverted a number of files where the results of sorting includes
isn't healthy. Either places where we have legacy code relying on
particular include ordering (where possible, I'll fix these separately)
or where we have particular formatting around #include lines that
I didn't want to disturb in this patch.

This patch is *entirely* mechanical. If you get merge conflicts or
anything, just ignore the changes in this patch and run clang-format
over your #include lines in the files.

Sorry for any noise here, but it is important to keep these things
stable. I was seeing an increasing number of patches with irrelevant
re-ordering of #include lines because clang-format was used. This patch
at least isolates that churn, makes it easy to skip when resolving
conflicts, and gets us to a clean baseline (again).

llvm-svn: 304787
2017-06-06 11:49:48 +00:00
Francis Visoiu Mistrih 262ad16a3a [LCG] Fix EXPENSIVE_CHECKS typo. NFC
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30434

llvm-svn: 296500
2017-02-28 18:34:55 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 1f8fcfeac5 [PM/LCG] Teach LCG to support spurious reference edges.
Somewhat amazingly, this only requires teaching it to clean them up when
deleting a dead function from the graph. And we already have exactly the
necessary data structures to do that in the parent RefSCCs.

This allows ArgPromote to work in a much simpler way be merely letting
reference edges linger in the graph after the causing IR is deleted. We
will clean up these edges when we run any function pass over the IR, but
don't remove them eagerly.

This avoids all of the quadratic update issues both in the current pass
manager and in my previous attempt with the new pass manager.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29579

llvm-svn: 294663
2017-02-09 23:30:14 +00:00
Chandler Carruth aaad9f84be [PM/LCG] Teach the LazyCallGraph how to replace a function without
disturbing the graph or having to update edges.

This is motivated by porting argument promotion to the new pass manager.
Because of how LLVM IR Function objects work, in order to change their
signature a new object needs to be created. This is efficient and
straight forward in the IR but previously was very hard to implement in
LCG. We could easily replace the function a node in the graph
represents. The challenging part is how to handle updating the edges in
the graph.

LCG previously used an edge to a raw function to represent a node that
had not yet been scanned for calls and references. This was the core
of its laziness. However, that model causes this kind of update to be
very hard:
1) The keys to lookup an edge need to be `Function*`s that would all
   need to be updated when we update the node.
2) There will be some unknown number of edges that haven't transitioned
   from `Function*` edges to `Node*` edges.

All of this complexity isn't necessary. Instead, we can always build
a node around any function, always pointing edges at it and always using
it as the key to lookup an edge. To maintain the laziness, we need to
sink the *edges* of a node into a secondary object and explicitly model
transitioning a node from empty to populated by scanning the function.
This design seems much cleaner in a number of ways, but importantly
there is now exactly *one* place where the `Function*` has to be
updated!

Some other cleanups that fall out of this include having something to
model the *entry* edges more accurately. Rather than hand rolling parts
of the node in the graph itself, we have an explicit `EdgeSequence`
object that gives us exactly the functionality needed. We also have
a consistent place to define the edge iterators and can use them for
both the entry edges and the internal edges of the graph.

The API used to model the separation between a node and its edges is
intentionally very thin as most clients are expected to deal with nodes
that have populated edges. We model this exactly as an optional does
with an additional method to populate the edges when that is
a reasonable thing for a client to do. This is based on API design
suggestions from Richard Smith and David Blaikie, credit goes to them
for helping pick how to model this without it being either too explicit
or too implicit.

The patch is somewhat noisy due to shifting around iterator types and
new syntax for walking the edges of a node, but most of the
functionality change is in the `Edge`, `EdgeSequence`, and `Node` types.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29577

llvm-svn: 294653
2017-02-09 23:24:13 +00:00
Chandler Carruth a80cfb3063 [PM/LCG] Fix the no-asserts build after r294227. Sorry for the noise.
llvm-svn: 294235
2017-02-06 20:59:07 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 2e0fe3e65b [PM/LCG] Remove the lazy RefSCC formation from the LazyCallGraph during
iteration.

The lazy formation of RefSCCs isn't really the most important part of
the laziness here -- that has to do with walking the functions
themselves -- and isn't essential to maintain. Originally, there were
incremental update algorithms that relied on updates happening
predominantly near the most recent RefSCC formed, but those have been
replaced with ones that have much tighter general case bounds at this
point. We do still perform asserts that only scale well due to this
incrementality, but those are easy to place behind EXPENSIVE_CHECKS.

Removing this simplifies the entire analysis by having a single up-front
step that builds all of the RefSCCs in a direct Tarjan walk. We can even
easily replace this with other or better algorithms at will and with
much less confusion now that there is no iterator-based incremental
logic involved. This removes a lot of complexity from LCG.

Another advantage of moving in this direction is that it simplifies
testing the system substantially as we no longer have to worry about
observing and mutating the graph half-way through the RefSCC formation.

We still need a somewhat special iterator for RefSCCs because we want
the iterator to remain stable in the face of graph updates. However,
this now merely involves relative indexing to the current RefSCC's
position in the sequence which isn't too hard.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29381

llvm-svn: 294227
2017-02-06 19:38:06 +00:00
Matthias Braun 8c209aa877 Cleanup dump() functions.
We had various variants of defining dump() functions in LLVM. Normalize
them (this should just consistently implement the things discussed in
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2014-January/034323.html

For reference:
- Public headers should just declare the dump() method but not use
  LLVM_DUMP_METHOD or #if !defined(NDEBUG) || defined(LLVM_ENABLE_DUMP)
- The definition of a dump method should look like this:
  #if !defined(NDEBUG) || defined(LLVM_ENABLE_DUMP)
  LLVM_DUMP_METHOD void MyClass::dump() {
    // print stuff to dbgs()...
  }
  #endif

llvm-svn: 293359
2017-01-28 02:02:38 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 443e57e01d [PM] Teach the CGSCC's CG update utility to more carefully invalidate
analyses when we're about to break apart an SCC.

We can't wait until after breaking apart the SCC to invalidate things:
1) Which SCC do we then invalidate? All of them?
2) Even if we invalidate all of them, a newly created SCC may not have
   a proxy that will convey the invalidation to functions!

Previously we only invalidated one of the SCCs and too late. This led to
stale analyses remaining in the cache. And because the caching strategy
actually works, they would get used and chaos would ensue.

Doing invalidation early is somewhat pessimizing though if we *know*
that the SCC structure won't change. So it turns out that the design to
make the mutation API force the caller to know the *kind* of mutation in
advance was indeed 100% correct and we didn't do enough of it. So this
change also splits two cases of switching a call edge to a ref edge into
two separate APIs so that callers can clearly test for this and take the
easy path without invalidating when appropriate. This is particularly
important in this case as we expect most inlines to be between functions
in separate SCCs and so the common case is that we don't have to so
aggressively invalidate analyses.

The LCG API change in turn needed some basic cleanups and better testing
in its unittest. No interesting functionality changed there other than
more coverage of the returned sequence of SCCs.

While this seems like an obvious improvement over the current state, I'd
like to revisit the core concept of invalidating within the CG-update
layer at all. I'm wondering if we would be better served forcing the
callers to handle the invalidation beforehand in the cases that they
can handle it. An interesting example is when we want to teach the
inliner to *update and preserve* analyses. But we can cross that bridge
when we get there.

With this patch, the new pass manager an build all of the LLVM test
suite at -O3 and everything passes. =D I haven't bootstrapped yet and
I'm sure there are still plenty of bugs, but this gives a nice baseline
so I'm going to increasingly focus on fleshing out the missing
functionality, especially the bits that are just turned off right now in
order to let us establish this baseline.

llvm-svn: 290664
2016-12-28 10:34:50 +00:00
Chandler Carruth c6334579e9 [LCG] Teach the ref edge removal to handle a ref edge that is trivial
due to a call cycle.

This actually crashed the ref removal before.

I've added a unittest that covers this kind of interesting graph
structure and mutation.

llvm-svn: 290645
2016-12-28 02:24:58 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 86f0bdf832 [LCG] Minor cleanup to the LCG walk over a function, NFC.
This just hoists the check for declarations up a layer which allows
various sets used in the walk to be smaller. Also moves the relevant
comments to match, and catches a few other cleanups in this code.

llvm-svn: 289163
2016-12-09 00:46:44 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 5205c35075 [LCG] Add basic verification of the parent set and fix bugs it uncovers.
The existing unittests actually cover this now that we verify things.

llvm-svn: 288875
2016-12-07 01:42:40 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 23a6c3f746 [LCG] Add some much needed asserts and verify runs to uncover
a hilarious bug and fix it.

We somehow were never verifying the RefSCCs newly formed when
splitting an existing one apart, and when verifying them we weren't
really checking the SCC indices mapping effectively.

If we had been, it would have been blindingly obvious that right after
putting something int `RC.SCCs` we should update `RC.SCCIndices` instead
of `SCCIndices` which we were about to clear and rebuild anyways. =[

Anyways, this is thoroughly covered by existing tests now that we
actually verify things properly.

llvm-svn: 288795
2016-12-06 10:29:23 +00:00
Chandler Carruth dab4eae274 [PM] Change the static object whose address is used to uniquely identify
analyses to have a common type which is enforced rather than using
a char object and a `void *` type when used as an identifier.

This has a number of advantages. First, it at least helps some of the
confusion raised in Justin Lebar's code review of why `void *` was being
used everywhere by having a stronger type that connects to documentation
about this.

However, perhaps more importantly, it addresses a serious issue where
the alignment of these pointer-like identifiers was unknown. This made
it hard to use them in pointer-like data structures. We were already
dodging this in dangerous ways to create the "all analyses" entry. In
a subsequent patch I attempted to use these with TinyPtrVector and
things fell apart in a very bad way.

And it isn't just a compile time or type system issue. Worse than that,
the actual alignment of these pointer-like opaque identifiers wasn't
guaranteed to be a useful alignment as they were just characters.

This change introduces a type to use as the "key" object whose address
forms the opaque identifier. This both forces the objects to have proper
alignment, and provides type checking that we get it right everywhere.
It also makes the types somewhat less mysterious than `void *`.

We could go one step further and introduce a truly opaque pointer-like
type to return from the `ID()` static function rather than returning
`AnalysisKey *`, but that didn't seem to be a clear win so this is just
the initial change to get to a reliably typed and aligned object serving
is a key for all the analyses.

Thanks to Richard Smith and Justin Lebar for helping pick plausible
names and avoid making this refactoring many times. =] And thanks to
Sean for the super fast review!

While here, I've tried to move away from the "PassID" nomenclature
entirely as it wasn't really helping and is overloaded with old pass
manager constructs. Now we have IDs for analyses, and key objects whose
address can be used as IDs. Where possible and clear I've shortened this
to just "ID". In a few places I kept "AnalysisID" to make it clear what
was being identified.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27031

llvm-svn: 287783
2016-11-23 17:53:26 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 9eb857cb84 [LCG] Add a previously missing assert about the relationship of RefSCCs.
No intended change, everything seems to be in working order already.

llvm-svn: 287705
2016-11-22 21:40:10 +00:00
Chandler Carruth bae595b742 [LCG] Add utilities to compute parent and ascestor relationships between
SCCs.

These will be fairly expensive routines to call and might be abused in
real code, but are quite useful when debugging or in asserts and are
reasonable and well formed properties to query.

I've used one of them in an assert that was requested in a code review
here. In subsequent commits I'll start using these routines more
heavily, for example in unittests etc. But this at least gets the
groundwork in place.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25506

llvm-svn: 287682
2016-11-22 19:23:31 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 5dbc164d15 [LCG] Add the necessary functionality to the LazyCallGraph to support inlining.
The basic inlining operation makes the following changes to the call graph:
1) Add edges that were previously transitive edges. This is always trivial and
   this patch gives the LCG helper methods to make this more convenient.
2) Remove the inlined edge. We had existing support for this, but it contained
   bugs that needed to be fixed. Testing in the same pattern as the inliner
   exposes these bugs very nicely.
3) Delete a function when it becomes dead because it is internal and all calls
   have been inlined. The LCG had no support at all for this operation, so this
   adds that support.

Two unittests have been added that exercise this specific mutation pattern to
the call graph. They were extremely effective in uncovering bugs. Sadly,
a large fraction of the code here is just to implement those unit tests, but
I think they're paying for themselves. =]

This was split out of a patch that actually uses the routines to
implement inlining in the new pass manager in order to isolate (with
unit tests) the logic that was entirely within the LCG.

Many thanks for the careful review from folks! There will be a few minor
follow-up patches based on the comments in the review as well.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24225

llvm-svn: 283982
2016-10-12 07:59:56 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 49d728ad21 [LCG] Redesign the lazy post-order iteration mechanism for the
LazyCallGraph to support repeated, stable iterations, even in the face
of graph updates.

This is particularly important to allow the CGSCC pass manager to walk
the RefSCCs (and thus everything else) in a module more than once. Lots
of unittests and other tests were hard or impossible to write because
repeated CGSCC pass managers which didn't invalidate the LazyCallGraph
would conclude the module was empty after the first one. =[ Really,
really bad.

The interesting thing is that in many ways this simplifies the code. We
can now re-use the same code for handling reference edge insertion
updates of the RefSCC graph as we use for handling call edge insertion
updates of the SCC graph. Outside of adapting to the shared logic for
this (which isn't trivial, but is *much* simpler than the DFS it
replaces!), the new code involves putting newly created RefSCCs when
deleting a reference edge into the cached list in the correct way, and
to re-formulate the iterator to be stable and effective even in the face
of these kinds of updates.

I've updated the unittests for the LazyCallGraph to re-iterate the
postorder sequence and verify that this all works. We even check for
using alternating iterators to trigger the lazy formation of RefSCCs
after mutation has occured.

It's worth noting that there are a reasonable number of likely
simplifications we can make past this. It isn't clear that we need to
keep the "LeafRefSCCs" around any more. But I've not removed that mostly
because I want this to be a more isolated change.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24219

llvm-svn: 281716
2016-09-16 10:20:17 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 11b3f60cd9 [LCG] Clean up and make NDEBUG verify calls more rigorous with
make_scope_exit now that we have that utility.

This makes the code much more clear and readable by isolating the check.
It also makes it easy to go through and make sure all the interesting
update routines have a start and end verify so we don't slowly let the
graph drift into an invalid state.

llvm-svn: 280619
2016-09-04 08:34:31 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 1f621f0a70 [LCG] A NFC refactoring to extract the logic for doing
a postorder-sequence based update after edge insertion into a generic
helper function.

This separates the SCC-specific logic into two fairly simple lambdas and
extracts the rest into a generic helper template function. I think this
is a net win on its own merits because it disentangles different pieces
of the algorithm. Now there is one place that does the two-step
partition to identify a set of newly connected components and at the
same time update the postorder sequence.

However, I'm also hoping to re-use this an upcoming patch to update
a cached post-order sequence of RefSCCs when doing the analogous update
to the RefSCC graph, and I don't want to have two copies.

The diff is quite messy but this really is just moving things around and
making types generic rather than specific.

llvm-svn: 280618
2016-09-04 08:34:24 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 8882346842 [PM] Introduce basic update capabilities to the new PM's CGSCC pass
manager, including both plumbing and logic to handle function pass
updates.

There are three fundamentally tied changes here:
1) Plumbing *some* mechanism for updating the CGSCC pass manager as the
   CG changes while passes are running.
2) Changing the CGSCC pass manager infrastructure to have support for
   the underlying graph to mutate mid-pass run.
3) Actually updating the CG after function passes run.

I can separate them if necessary, but I think its really useful to have
them together as the needs of #3 drove #2, and that in turn drove #1.

The plumbing technique is to extend the "run" method signature with
extra arguments. We provide the call graph that intrinsically is
available as it is the basis of the pass manager's IR units, and an
output parameter that records the results of updating the call graph
during an SCC passes's run. Note that "...UpdateResult" isn't a *great*
name here... suggestions very welcome.

I tried a pretty frustrating number of different data structures and such
for the innards of the update result. Every other one failed for one
reason or another. Sometimes I just couldn't keep the layers of
complexity right in my head. The thing that really worked was to just
directly provide access to the underlying structures used to walk the
call graph so that their updates could be informed by the *particular*
nature of the change to the graph.

The technique for how to make the pass management infrastructure cope
with mutating graphs was also something that took a really, really large
number of iterations to get to a place where I was happy. Here are some
of the considerations that drove the design:

- We operate at three levels within the infrastructure: RefSCC, SCC, and
  Node. In each case, we are working bottom up and so we want to
  continue to iterate on the "lowest" node as the graph changes. Look at
  how we iterate over nodes in an SCC running function passes as those
  function passes mutate the CG. We continue to iterate on the "lowest"
  SCC, which is the one that continues to contain the function just
  processed.

- The call graph structure re-uses SCCs (and RefSCCs) during mutation
  events for the *highest* entry in the resulting new subgraph, not the
  lowest. This means that it is necessary to continually update the
  current SCC or RefSCC as it shifts. This is really surprising and
  subtle, and took a long time for me to work out. I actually tried
  changing the call graph to provide the opposite behavior, and it
  breaks *EVERYTHING*. The graph update algorithms are really deeply
  tied to this particualr pattern.

- When SCCs or RefSCCs are split apart and refined and we continually
  re-pin our processing to the bottom one in the subgraph, we need to
  enqueue the newly formed SCCs and RefSCCs for subsequent processing.
  Queuing them presents a few challenges:
  1) SCCs and RefSCCs use wildly different iteration strategies at
     a high level. We end up needing to converge them on worklist
     approaches that can be extended in order to be able to handle the
     mutations.
  2) The order of the enqueuing need to remain bottom-up post-order so
     that we don't get surprising order of visitation for things like
     the inliner.
  3) We need the worklists to have set semantics so we don't duplicate
     things endlessly. We don't need a *persistent* set though because
     we always keep processing the bottom node!!!! This is super, super
     surprising to me and took a long time to convince myself this is
     correct, but I'm pretty sure it is... Once we sink down to the
     bottom node, we can't re-split out the same node in any way, and
     the postorder of the current queue is fixed and unchanging.
  4) We need to make sure that the "current" SCC or RefSCC actually gets
     enqueued here such that we re-visit it because we continue
     processing a *new*, *bottom* SCC/RefSCC.

- We also need the ability to *skip* SCCs and RefSCCs that get merged
  into a larger component. We even need the ability to skip *nodes* from
  an SCC that are no longer part of that SCC.

This led to the design you see in the patch which uses SetVector-based
worklists. The RefSCC worklist is always empty until an update occurs
and is just used to handle those RefSCCs created by updates as the
others don't even exist yet and are formed on-demand during the
bottom-up walk. The SCC worklist is pre-populated from the RefSCC, and
we push new SCCs onto it and blacklist existing SCCs on it to get the
desired processing.

We then *directly* update these when updating the call graph as I was
never able to find a satisfactory abstraction around the update
strategy.

Finally, we need to compute the updates for function passes. This is
mostly used as an initial customer of all the update mechanisms to drive
their design to at least cover some real set of use cases. There are
a bunch of interesting things that came out of doing this:

- It is really nice to do this a function at a time because that
  function is likely hot in the cache. This means we want even the
  function pass adaptor to support online updates to the call graph!

- To update the call graph after arbitrary function pass mutations is
  quite hard. We have to build a fairly comprehensive set of
  data structures and then process them. Fortunately, some of this code
  is related to the code for building the cal graph in the first place.
  Unfortunately, very little of it makes any sense to share because the
  nature of what we're doing is so very different. I've factored out the
  one part that made sense at least.

- We need to transfer these updates into the various structures for the
  CGSCC pass manager. Once those were more sanely worked out, this
  became relatively easier. But some of those needs necessitated changes
  to the LazyCallGraph interface to make it significantly easier to
  extract the changed SCCs from an update operation.

- We also need to update the CGSCC analysis manager as the shape of the
  graph changes. When an SCC is merged away we need to clear analyses
  associated with it from the analysis manager which we didn't have
  support for in the analysis manager infrsatructure. New SCCs are easy!
  But then we have the case that the original SCC has its shape changed
  but remains in the call graph. There we need to *invalidate* the
  analyses associated with it.

- We also need to invalidate analyses after we *finish* processing an
  SCC. But the analyses we need to invalidate here are *only those for
  the newly updated SCC*!!! Because we only continue processing the
  bottom SCC, if we split SCCs apart the original one gets invalidated
  once when its shape changes and is not processed farther so its
  analyses will be correct. It is the bottom SCC which continues being
  processed and needs to have the "normal" invalidation done based on
  the preserved analyses set.

All of this is mostly background and context for the changes here.

Many thanks to all the reviewers who helped here. Especially Sanjoy who
caught several interesting bugs in the graph algorithms, David, Sean,
and others who all helped with feedback.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21464

llvm-svn: 279618
2016-08-24 09:37:14 +00:00
David Majnemer 42531260b3 Use the range variant of find/find_if instead of unpacking begin/end
If the result of the find is only used to compare against end(), just
use is_contained instead.

No functionality change is intended.

llvm-svn: 278469
2016-08-12 03:55:06 +00:00
David Majnemer 0d955d0bf5 Use the range variant of find instead of unpacking begin/end
If the result of the find is only used to compare against end(), just
use is_contained instead.

No functionality change is intended.

llvm-svn: 278433
2016-08-11 22:21:41 +00:00
David Majnemer 0a16c22846 Use range algorithms instead of unpacking begin/end
No functionality change is intended.

llvm-svn: 278417
2016-08-11 21:15:00 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 168800c97d [LCG] Hoist the definitions of the stream operator friends to be inline
friend definitions.

Based on the experiments Sean Silva and Reid did, this seems the safest
course of action and also will work around a questionable warning
provided by GCC6 on the old form of the code. Thanks for Davide pointing
out the issue and other suggesting ways to fix.

llvm-svn: 274740
2016-07-07 07:52:07 +00:00
Chandler Carruth dca834089a [PM] Improve the debugging and logging facilities of the CGSCC bits of
the new pass manager.

This adds operator<< overloads for the various bits of the
LazyCallGraph, dump methods for use from the debugger, and debug logging
using them to the CGSCC pass manager.

Having this was essential for debugging the call graph update patch, and
I've extracted what I could from that patch here to minimize the delta.

llvm-svn: 273961
2016-06-27 23:26:08 +00:00
Sean Silva 7cb30664fc Add a super basic LazyCallGraph DOT printer.
Access it through -passes=print-lcg-dot

Let me know any suggestions for changing the rendering; I'm not
particularly attached to what is implemented here.

llvm-svn: 273082
2016-06-18 09:17:32 +00:00
Chandler Carruth b47f8010a9 [PM] Make the AnalysisManager parameter to run methods a reference.
This was originally a pointer to support pass managers which didn't use
AnalysisManagers. However, that doesn't realistically come up much and
the complexity of supporting it doesn't really make sense.

In fact, *many* parts of the pass manager were just assuming the pointer
was never null already. This at least makes it much more explicit and
clear.

llvm-svn: 263219
2016-03-11 11:05:24 +00:00
Chandler Carruth b4faf13c15 [PM] Implement the final conclusion as to how the analysis IDs should
work in the face of the limitations of DLLs and templated static
variables.

This requires passes that use the AnalysisBase mixin provide a static
variable themselves. So as to keep their APIs clean, I've made these
private and befriended the CRTP base class (which is the common
practice).

I've added documentation to AnalysisBase for why this is necessary and
at what point we can go back to the much simpler system.

This is clearly a better pattern than the extern template as it caught
*numerous* places where the template magic hadn't been applied and
things were "just working" but would eventually have broken
mysteriously.

llvm-svn: 263216
2016-03-11 10:22:49 +00:00
NAKAMURA Takumi df0cd72657 [PM] Appease mingw32's auto-import DLL build with minimal tweaks, with fix for clang.
char AnalysisBase::ID should be declared as extern and defined in one module.

llvm-svn: 262188
2016-02-28 17:17:00 +00:00
NAKAMURA Takumi ca04a1f720 Revert r262185, "[PM] Appease mingw32's auto-import DLL build with minimal tweaks."
I'll rework soon.

llvm-svn: 262186
2016-02-28 16:54:06 +00:00
NAKAMURA Takumi de40e7437e [PM] Appease mingw32's auto-import DLL build with minimal tweaks.
char AnalysisBase::ID should be declared as extern and defined in one module.

llvm-svn: 262185
2016-02-28 16:38:46 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 3a63435551 [PM] Introduce CRTP mixin base classes to help define passes and
analyses in the new pass manager.

These just handle really basic stuff: turning a type name into a string
statically that is nice to print in logs, and getting a static unique ID
for each analysis.

Sadly, the format of passes in anonymous namespaces makes using their
names in tests really annoying so I've customized the names of the no-op
passes to keep tests sane to read.

This is the first of a few simplifying refactorings for the new pass
manager that should reduce boilerplate and confusion.

llvm-svn: 262004
2016-02-26 11:44:45 +00:00
Chandler Carruth e5944d97d8 [LCG] Construct an actual call graph with call-edge SCCs nested inside
reference-edge SCCs.

This essentially builds a more normal call graph as a subgraph of the
"reference graph" that was the old model. This allows both to exist and
the different use cases to use the aspect which addresses their needs.
Specifically, the pass manager and other *ordering* constrained logic
can use the reference graph to achieve conservative order of visit,
while analyses reasoning about attributes and other properties derived
from reachability can reason about the direct call graph.

Note that this isn't necessarily complete: it doesn't model edges to
declarations or indirect calls. Those can be found by scanning the
instructions of the function if desirable, and in fact every user
currently does this in order to handle things like calls to instrinsics.
If useful, we could consider caching this information in the call graph
to save the instruction scans, but currently that doesn't seem to be
important.

An important realization for why the representation chosen here works is
that the call graph is a formal subset of the reference graph and thus
both can live within the same data structure. All SCCs of the call graph
are necessarily contained within an SCC of the reference graph, etc.

The design is to build 'RefSCC's to model SCCs of the reference graph,
and then within them more literal SCCs for the call graph.

The formation of actual call edge SCCs is not done lazily, unlike
reference edge 'RefSCC's. Instead, once a reference SCC is formed, it
directly builds the call SCCs within it and stores them in a post-order
sequence. This is used to provide a consistent platform for mutation and
update of the graph. The post-order also allows for very efficient
updates in common cases by bounding the number of nodes (and thus edges)
considered.

There is considerable common code that I'm still looking for the best
way to factor out between the various DFS implementations here. So far,
my attempts have made the code harder to read and understand despite
reducing the duplication, which seems a poor tradeoff. I've not given up
on figuring out the right way to do this, but I wanted to wait until
I at least had the system working and tested to continue attempting to
factor it differently.

This also requires introducing several new algorithms in order to handle
all of the incremental update scenarios for the more complex structure
involving two edge colorings. I've tried to comment the algorithms
sufficiently to make it clear how this is expected to work, but they may
still need more extensive documentation.

I know that there are some changes which are not strictly necessarily
coupled here. The process of developing this started out with a very
focused set of changes for the new structure of the graph and
algorithms, but subsequent changes to bring the APIs and code into
consistent and understandable patterns also ended up touching on other
aspects. There was no good way to separate these out without causing
*massive* merge conflicts. Ultimately, to a large degree this is
a rewrite of most of the core algorithms in the LCG class and so I don't
think it really matters much.

Many thanks to the careful review by Sanjoy Das!

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16802

llvm-svn: 261040
2016-02-17 00:18:16 +00:00
Chandler Carruth a4499e9f73 [LCG] Build an edge abstraction for the LazyCallGraph and use it to
differentiate between indirect references to functions an direct calls.

This doesn't do a whole lot yet other than change the print out produced
by the analysis, but it lays the groundwork for a very major change I'm
working on next: teaching the call graph to actually be a call graph,
modeling *both* the indirect reference graph and the call graph
simultaneously. More details on that in the next patch though.

The rest of this is essentially a bunch of over-engineering that won't
be interesting until the next patch. But this also isolates essentially
all of the churn necessary to introduce the edge abstraction from the
very important behavior change necessary in order to separately model
the two graphs. So it should make review of the subsequent patch a bit
easier at the cost of making this patch seem poorly motivated. ;]

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16038

llvm-svn: 259463
2016-02-02 03:57:13 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 9153911551 [lcg] Fix a few more formatting goofs found by clang-format. NFC.
llvm-svn: 256480
2015-12-28 01:54:20 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 11f5032368 Revert r225854: [PM] Move the LazyCallGraph printing functionality to
a print method.

This was formulated on a bad idea, but sadly I didn't uncover how bad
this was until I got further down the path. I had hoped that we could
provide a low boilerplate way of printing analyses, but it just doesn't
seem like this really fits the needs of the analyses. Not all analyses
really want to do printing, and those that do don't all use the same
interface. Instead, with the new pass manager let's just take advantage
of the fact that creating an explicit printer pass like the LCG has is
pretty low boilerplate already and rely on that for testing.

llvm-svn: 225861
2015-01-14 00:27:45 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 76890d82c0 [PM] Move the LazyCallGraph printing functionality to a print method.
I'm adding generic analysis printing utility pass support which will
require such a method (or a specialization) so this will let the
existing printing logic satisfy that.

llvm-svn: 225854
2015-01-13 23:53:50 +00:00
Chandler Carruth d174ce4ad1 [PM] Switch the new pass manager to use a reference-based API for IR
units.

This was debated back and forth a bunch, but using references is now
clearly cleaner. Of all the code written using pointers thus far, in
only one place did it really make more sense to have a pointer. In most
cases, this just removes immediate dereferencing from the code. I think
it is much better to get errors on null IR units earlier, potentially
at compile time, than to delay it.

Most notably, the legacy pass manager uses references for its routines
and so as more and more code works with both, the use of pointers was
likely to become really annoying. I noticed this when I ported the
domtree analysis over and wrote the entire thing with references only to
have it fail to compile. =/ It seemed better to switch now than to
delay. We can, of course, revisit this is we learn that references are
really problematic in the API.

llvm-svn: 225145
2015-01-05 02:47:05 +00:00
David Blaikie 70573dcd9f Update SetVector to rely on the underlying set's insert to return a pair<iterator, bool>
This is to be consistent with StringSet and ultimately with the standard
library's associative container insert function.

This lead to updating SmallSet::insert to return pair<iterator, bool>,
and then to update SmallPtrSet::insert to return pair<iterator, bool>,
and then to update all the existing users of those functions...

llvm-svn: 222334
2014-11-19 07:49:26 +00:00
Alp Toker beaca19c7c Fix typos
llvm-svn: 208839
2014-05-15 01:52:21 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 312dddfb81 [LCG] Add the last (and most complex) of the edge insertion mutation
operations on the call graph. This one forms a cycle, and while not as
complex as removing an internal edge from an SCC, it involves
a reasonable amount of work to find all of the nodes newly connected in
a cycle.

Also somewhat alarming is the worst case complexity here: it might have
to walk roughly the entire SCC inverse DAG to insert a single edge. This
is carefully documented in the API (I hope).

llvm-svn: 207935
2014-05-04 09:38:32 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 7cc4ed8202 [LCG] Add the other simple edge insertion API to the call graph. This
just connects an SCC to one of its descendants directly. Not much of an
impact. The last one is the hard one -- connecting an SCC to one of its
ancestors, and thereby forming a cycle such that we have to merge all
the SCCs participating in the cycle.

llvm-svn: 207751
2014-05-01 12:18:20 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 034d0d6805 [LCG] Don't lookup the child SCC twice. Spotted this by inspection, and
no functionality changed.

llvm-svn: 207750
2014-05-01 12:16:31 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 4b096741b4 [LCG] Add some basic methods for querying the parent/child relationships
of SCCs in the SCC DAG. Exercise them in the big graph test case. These
will be especially useful for establishing invariants in insertion
logic.

llvm-svn: 207749
2014-05-01 12:12:42 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 5217c94522 [LCG] Add the really, *really* boring edge insertion case: adding an
edge entirely within an existing SCC. Shockingly, making the connected
component more connected is ... a total snooze fest. =]

Anyways, its wired up, and I even added a test case to make sure it
pretty much sorta works. =D

llvm-svn: 207631
2014-04-30 10:48:36 +00:00
Chandler Carruth c5026b670e [LCG] Actually test the *basic* edge removal bits (IE, the non-SCC
bits), and discover that it's totally broken. Yay tests. Boo bug. Fix
the basic edge removal so that it works by nulling out the removed edges
rather than actually removing them. This leaves the indices valid in the
map from callee to index, and preserves some of the locality for
iterating over edges. The iterator is made bidirectional to reflect that
it now has to skip over null entries, and the skipping logic is layered
onto it.

As future work, I would like to track essentially the "load factor" of
the edge list, and when it falls below a threshold do a compaction.

An alternative I considered (and continue to consider) is storing the
callees in a doubly linked list where each element of the list is in
a set (which is essentially the classical linked-hash-table
datastructure). The problem with that approach is that either you need
to heap allocate the linked list nodes and use pointers to them, or use
a bucket hash table (with even *more* linked list pointer overhead!),
etc. It's pretty easy to get 5x overhead for values that are just
pointers. So far, I think punching holes in the vector, and periodic
compaction is likely to be much more efficient overall in the space/time
tradeoff.

llvm-svn: 207619
2014-04-30 07:45:27 +00:00
Chandler Carruth c00a7ff4b7 [LCG] Add the most basic of edge insertion to the lazy call graph. This
just handles the pre-DFS case. Also add some test cases for this case to
make sure it works.

llvm-svn: 207411
2014-04-28 11:10:23 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 3f5f5fe164 [LCG] Make the return of the IntraSCC removal method actually match its
contract (and be much more useful). It now provides exactly the
post-order traversal a caller might need to perform on newly formed
SCCs.

llvm-svn: 207410
2014-04-28 10:49:06 +00:00
Chandler Carruth aa839b22c9 [LCG] Re-organize the methods for mutating a call graph to make their
API requirements much more obvious.

The key here is that there are two totally different use cases for
mutating the graph. Prior to doing any SCC formation, it is very easy to
mutate the graph. There may be users that want to do small tweaks here,
and then use the already-built graph for their SCC-based operations.
This method remains on the graph itself and is documented carefully as
being cheap but unavailable once SCCs are formed.

Once SCCs are formed, and there is some in-flight DFS building them, we
have to be much more careful in how we mutate the graph. These mutation
operations are sunk onto the SCCs themselves, which both simplifies
things (the code was already there!) and helps make it obvious that
these interfaces are only applicable within that context. The other
primary constraint is that the edge being mutated is actually related to
the SCC on which we call the method. This helps make it obvious that you
cannot arbitrarily mutate some other SCC.

I've tried to write much more complete documentation for the interesting
mutation API -- intra-SCC edge removal. Currently one aspect of this
documentation is a lie (the result list of SCCs) but we also don't even
have tests for that API. =[ I'm going to add tests and fix it to match
the documentation next.

llvm-svn: 207339
2014-04-27 01:59:50 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 90821c2a93 [LCG] Rather than removing nodes from the SCC entry set when we process
them, just skip over any DFS-numbered nodes when finding the next root
of a DFS. This allows the entry set to just be a vector as we populate
it from a uniqued source. It also removes the possibility for a linear
scan of the entry set to actually do the removal which can make things
go quadratic if we get unlucky.

llvm-svn: 207312
2014-04-26 09:45:55 +00:00