Commit Graph

10 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Mandeep Singh Grang 636d94db3b [Transforms] Change std::sort to llvm::sort in response to r327219
Summary:
r327219 added wrappers to std::sort which randomly shuffle the container before sorting.
This will help in uncovering non-determinism caused due to undefined sorting
order of objects having the same key.

To make use of that infrastructure we need to invoke llvm::sort instead of std::sort.

Note: This patch is one of a series of patches to replace *all* std::sort to llvm::sort.
Refer the comments section in D44363 for a list of all the required patches.

Reviewers: kcc, pcc, danielcdh, jmolloy, sanjoy, dberlin, ruiu

Reviewed By: ruiu

Subscribers: ruiu, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45142

llvm-svn: 330059
2018-04-13 19:47:57 +00:00
David Blaikie 2be3922807 Fix a couple of layering violations in Transforms
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
2018-03-21 22:34:23 +00:00
Easwaran Raman a17f220590 Add hasProfileData() to check if a function has profile data. NFC.
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
2017-12-22 01:33:52 +00:00
Chandler Carruth e9b18e3d34 [PM] Port LoopSink to the new pass manager.
Like several other loop passes (the vectorizer, etc) this pass doesn't
really fit the model of a loop pass. The critical distinction is that it
isn't intended to be pipelined together with other loop passes. I plan
to add some documentation to the loop pass manager to make this more
clear on that side.

LoopSink is also different because it doesn't really need a lot of the
infrastructure of our loop passes. For example, if there aren't loop
invariant instructions causing a preheader to exist, there is no need to
form a preheader. It also doesn't need LCSSA because this pass is
only involved in sinking invariant instructions from a preheader into
the loop, not reasoning about live-outs.

This allows some nice simplifications to the pass in the new PM where we
can directly walk the loops once without restructuring them.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28921

llvm-svn: 292589
2017-01-20 08:42:19 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 1725c8c315 [LoopSink] Trivial comment cleanup.
llvm-svn: 292588
2017-01-20 08:42:14 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 3bab7e1a79 [PM] Separate the LoopAnalysisManager from the LoopPassManager and move
the latter to the Transforms library.

While the loop PM uses an analysis to form the IR units, the current
plan is to have the PM itself establish and enforce both loop simplified
form and LCSSA. This would be a layering violation in the analysis
library.

Fundamentally, the idea behind the loop PM is to *transform* loops in
addition to running passes over them, so it really seemed like the most
natural place to sink this was into the transforms library.

We can't just move *everything* because we also have loop analyses that
rely on a subset of the invariants. So this patch splits the the loop
infrastructure into the analysis management that has to be part of the
analysis library, and the transform-aware pass manager.

This also required splitting the loop analyses' printer passes out to
the transforms library, which makes sense to me as running these will
transform the code into LCSSA in theory.

I haven't split the unittest though because testing one component
without the other seems nearly intractable.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28452

llvm-svn: 291662
2017-01-11 09:43:56 +00:00
Xin Tong 12c8cb3745 Add an assert for hasLoopInvariantOperands
Summary: Add an assert for hasLoopInvariantOperands

Reviewers: danielcdh, sanjoy

Subscribers: mzolotukhin, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28501

llvm-svn: 291516
2017-01-10 00:39:49 +00:00
Xin Tong 9efb049fb3 Remove a unnecessary hasLoopInvariantOperands check in loop sink.
Summary:
Preheader instruction's operands will always be invariant w.r.t. the loop which its the preheader
for.

Memory aliases are handled in canSinkOrHoistInst.

Reviewers: danielcdh, davidxl

Subscribers: mzolotukhin, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28270

llvm-svn: 291132
2017-01-05 16:52:37 +00:00
Dehao Chen 947dbe1254 Enable Loop Sink pass for functions that has profile.
Summary: For functions with profile data, we are confident that loop sink will be optimal in sinking code.

Reviewers: davidxl, hfinkel

Subscribers: mehdi_amini, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26155

llvm-svn: 286325
2016-11-09 00:58:19 +00:00
Dehao Chen b94c09baa0 Add Loop Sink pass to reverse the LICM based of basic block frequency.
Summary: LICM may hoist instructions to preheader speculatively. Before code generation, we need to sink down the hoisted instructions inside to loop if it's beneficial. This pass is a reverse of LICM: looking at instructions in preheader and sinks the instruction to basic blocks inside the loop body if basic block frequency is smaller than the preheader frequency.

Reviewers: hfinkel, davidxl, chandlerc

Subscribers: anna, modocache, mgorny, beanz, reames, dberlin, chandlerc, mcrosier, junbuml, sanjoy, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D22778

llvm-svn: 285308
2016-10-27 16:30:08 +00:00