a module-specific interface. This is the first of many steps necessary
to generalize the infrastructure such that we can support both
a Module-to-Function and Module-to-SCC-to-Function pass manager
nestings.
After a *lot* of attempts that never worked and didn't even make it to
a committable state, it became clear that I had gotten the layering
design of analyses flat out wrong. Four days later, I think I have most
of the plan for how to correct this, and I'm starting to reshape the
code into it. This is just a baby step I'm afraid, but starts separating
the fundamentally distinct concepts of function analysis passes and
module analysis passes so that in subsequent steps we can effectively
layer them, and have a consistent design for the eventual SCC layer.
As part of this, I've started some interface changes to make passes more
regular. The module pass accepts the module in the run method, and some
of the constructor parameters are gone. I'm still working out exactly
where constructor parameters vs. method parameters will be used, so
I expect this to fluctuate a bit.
This actually makes the invalidation less "correct" at this phase,
because now function passes don't invalidate module analysis passes, but
that was actually somewhat of a misfeature. It will return in a better
factored form which can scale to other units of IR. The documentation
has gotten less verbose and helpful.
llvm-svn: 195189
AnalysisManager. All this method did was assert something and we have
a perfectly good way to trigger that assert from the query path.
llvm-svn: 194947
more smarts in it. This is where most of the interesting logic that used
to live in the implicit-scheduling-hackery of the old pass manager will
live.
Like the previous commits, note that this is a very early prototype!
I expect substantial changes before this is ready to use.
The core of the design is the following:
- We have an AnalysisManager which can be used across a series of
passes over a module.
- The code setting up a pass pipeline registers the analyses available
with the manager.
- Individual transform passes can check than an analysis manager
provides the analyses they require in order to fail-fast.
- There is *no* implicit registration or scheduling.
- Analysis passes are different from other passes: they produce an
analysis result that is cached and made available via the analysis
manager.
- Cached results are invalidated automatically by the pass managers.
- When a transform pass requests an analysis result, either the analysis
is run to produce the result or a cached result is provided.
There are a few aspects of this design that I *know* will change in
subsequent commits:
- Currently there is no "preservation" system, that needs to be added.
- All of the analysis management should move up to the analysis library.
- The analysis management needs to support at least SCC passes. Maybe
loop passes. Living in the analysis library will facilitate this.
- Need support for analyses which are *both* module and function passes.
- Need support for pro-actively running module analyses to have cached
results within a function pass manager.
- Need a clear design for "immutable" passes.
- Need support for requesting cached results when available and not
re-running the pass even if that would be necessary.
- Need more thorough testing of all of this infrastructure.
There are other aspects that I view as open questions I'm hoping to
resolve as I iterate a bit on the infrastructure, and especially as
I start writing actual passes against this.
- Should we have separate management layers for function, module, and
SCC analyses? I think "yes", but I'm not yet ready to switch the code.
Adding SCC support will likely resolve this definitively.
- How should the 'require' functionality work? Should *that* be the only
way to request results to ensure that passes always require things?
- How should preservation work?
- Probably some other things I'm forgetting. =]
Look forward to more patches in shorter order now that this is in place.
llvm-svn: 194538
This is still just a skeleton. I'm trying to pull together the
experimentation I've done into committable chunks, and this is the first
coherent one. Others will follow in hopefully short order that move this
more toward a useful initial implementation. I still expect the design
to continue evolving in small ways as I work through the different
requirements and features needed here though.
Keep in mind, all of this is off by default.
Currently, this mostly exercises the use of a polymorphic smart pointer
and templates to hide the polymorphism for the pass manager from the
pass implementation. The next step will be more significant, adding the
first framework of analysis support.
llvm-svn: 194325
give the files a legacy prefix in the right directory. Use forwarding
headers in the old locations to paper over the name change for most
clients during the transitional period.
No functionality changed here! This is just clearing some space to
reduce renaming churn later on with a new system.
Even when the new stuff starts to go in, it is going to be hidden behind
a flag and off-by-default as it is still WIP and under development.
This patch is specifically designed so that very little out-of-tree code
has to change. I'm going to work as hard as I can to keep that the case.
Only direct forward declarations of the PassManager class are impacted
by this change.
llvm-svn: 194324
The function verifyFunction() in lib/IR/Verifier.cpp misses some
calls. It creates a temporary FunctionPassManager that will run a
single Verifier pass. Unfortunately, FunctionPassManager is no
PassManager and does not call doInitialization() and doFinalization()
by itself. Verifier does important tasks in doInitialization() such as
collecting type information used to check DebugInfo metadata and
doFinalization() does some additional checks. Therefore these checks
were missed and debug info couldn't be verified at all, it just
crashed if the function had some.
verifyFunction() is currently not used in llvm unless -debug option is
enabled, and in unittests/IR/VerifierTest.cpp
VerifierTest had to be changed to create the function in a module from
which the type debug info can be collected.
Patch by Michael Kruse.
llvm-svn: 193719
Inspired by the object from the SLPVectorizer. This found a minor bug in the
debug loc restoration in the vectorizer where the location of a following
instruction was attached instead of the location from the original instruction.
llvm-svn: 191673
The work on this project was left in an unfinished and inconsistent state.
Hopefully someone will eventually get a chance to implement this feature, but
in the meantime, it is better to put things back the way the were. I have
left support in the bitcode reader to handle the case-range bitcode format,
so that we do not lose bitcode compatibility with the llvm 3.3 release.
This reverts the following commits: 155464, 156374, 156377, 156613, 156704,
156757, 156804 156808, 156985, 157046, 157112, 157183, 157315, 157384, 157575,
157576, 157586, 157612, 157810, 157814, 157815, 157880, 157881, 157882, 157884,
157887, 157901, 158979, 157987, 157989, 158986, 158997, 159076, 159101, 159100,
159200, 159201, 159207, 159527, 159532, 159540, 159583, 159618, 159658, 159659,
159660, 159661, 159703, 159704, 160076, 167356, 172025, 186736
llvm-svn: 190328
One form would accept a vector of pointers, and the other did not.
Make both accept vectors of pointers, and add an assertion
for the number of elements.
llvm-svn: 187464
This avoids constant folding bitcast/ptrtoint/inttoptr combinations
that have illegal bitcasts between differently sized address spaces.
llvm-svn: 187455
It will now only convert the arguments / return value and call
the underlying function if the types are able to be bitcasted.
This avoids using fp<->int conversions that would occur before.
llvm-svn: 187444
Add support for matching 'ordered' and 'unordered' floating point min/max
constructs.
In LLVM we can express min/max functions as a combination of compare and select.
We have support for matching such constructs for integers but not for floating
point. In floating point math there is no total order because of the presence of
'NaN'. Therefore, we have to be careful to preserve the original fcmp semantics
when interpreting floating point compare select combinations as a minimum or
maximum function. The resulting 'ordered/unordered' floating point maximum
function has to select the same value as the select/fcmp combination it is based
on.
ordered_max(x,y) = max(x,y) iff x and y are not NaN, y otherwise
unordered_max(x,y) = max(x,y) iff x and y are not NaN, x otherwise
ordered_min(x,y) = min(x,y) iff x and y are not NaN, y otherwise
unordered_min(x,y) = min(x,y) iff x and y are not NaN, x otherwise
This matches the behavior of the underlying select(fcmp(olt/ult/.., L, R), L, R)
construct.
Any code using this predicate has to preserve this semantics.
A follow-up patch will use this to implement floating point min/max reductions
in the vectorizer.
radar://13723044
llvm-svn: 181143
Chandler Carruth