Summary:
Now that the DataLayout is a mandatory part of the module, let's start
cleaning the codebase. This patch is a first attempt at doing that.
This patch is not exactly NFC as for instance some places were passing
a nullptr instead of the DataLayout, possibly just because there was a
default value on the DataLayout argument to many functions in the API.
Even though it is not purely NFC, there is no change in the
validation.
I turned as many pointer to DataLayout to references, this helped
figuring out all the places where a nullptr could come up.
I had initially a local version of this patch broken into over 30
independant, commits but some later commit were cleaning the API and
touching part of the code modified in the previous commits, so it
seemed cleaner without the intermediate state.
Test Plan:
Reviewers: echristo
Subscribers: llvm-commits
From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com>
llvm-svn: 231740
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
If a loop predecessor has an invoke as its terminator, and the return value
from that invoke is used to determine the loop iteration space, then we can't
insert a computation based on that value in the loop predecessor prior to the
terminator (oops). If there's such an invoke, or just no predecessor for that
matter, insert a new loop preheader.
llvm-svn: 228488
PowerPC supports pre-increment load/store instructions (except for Altivec/VSX
vector load/stores). Using these on embedded cores can be very important, but
most loops are not naturally set up to use them. We can often change that,
however, by placing loops into a non-canonical form. Generically, this means
transforming loops like this:
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
array[i] = c;
to look like this:
T *p = array[-1];
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
*++p = c;
the key point is that addresses accessed are pulled into dedicated PHIs and
"pre-decremented" in the loop preheader. This allows the use of pre-increment
load/store instructions without loop peeling.
A target-specific late IR-level pass (running post-LSR), PPCLoopPreIncPrep, is
introduced to perform this transformation. I've used this code out-of-tree for
generating code for the PPC A2 for over a year. Somewhat to my surprise,
running the test suite + externals on a P7 with this transformation enabled
showed no performance regressions, and one speedup:
External/SPEC/CINT2006/483.xalancbmk/483.xalancbmk
-2.32514% +/- 1.03736%
So I'm going to enable it on everything for now. I was surprised by this
because, on the POWER cores, these pre-increment load/store instructions are
cracked (and, thus, harder to schedule effectively). But seeing no regressions,
and feeling that it is generally easier to split instructions apart late than
it is to combine them late, this might be the better approach regardless.
In the future, we might want to integrate this functionality into LSR (but
currently LSR does not create new PHI nodes, so (for that and other reasons)
significant work would need to be done).
llvm-svn: 228328
Mehdi Amini