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
a LoopInfoWrapperPass to wire the object up to the legacy pass manager.
This switches all the clients of LoopInfo over and paves the way to port
LoopInfo to the new pass manager. No functionality change is intended
with this iteration.
llvm-svn: 226373
The pass is really just a means of accessing a cached instance of the
TargetLibraryInfo object, and this way we can re-use that object for the
new pass manager as its result.
Lots of delta, but nothing interesting happening here. This is the
common pattern that is developing to allow analyses to live in both the
old and new pass manager -- a wrapper pass in the old pass manager
emulates the separation intrinsic to the new pass manager between the
result and pass for analyses.
llvm-svn: 226157
While the term "Target" is in the name, it doesn't really have to do
with the LLVM Target library -- this isn't an abstraction which LLVM
targets generally need to implement or extend. It has much more to do
with modeling the various runtime libraries on different OSes and with
different runtime environments. The "target" in this sense is the more
general sense of a target of cross compilation.
This is in preparation for porting this analysis to the new pass
manager.
No functionality changed, and updates inbound for Clang and Polly.
llvm-svn: 226078
Determining the address of a TLS variable results in a function call in
certain TLS models. This means that a simple ICmpInst might actually
result in invalidating the CTR register.
In such cases, do not attempt to rely on the CTR register for loop
optimization purposes.
This fixes PR22034.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6786
llvm-svn: 224890
be deleted. This will be reapplied as soon as possible and before
the 3.6 branch date at any rate.
Approved by Jim Grosbach, Lang Hames, Rafael Espindola.
This reverts commits r215111, 215115, 215116, 215117, 215136.
llvm-svn: 215154
I am sure we will be finding bits and pieces of dead code for years to
come, but this is a good start.
Thanks to Lang Hames for making MCJIT a good replacement!
llvm-svn: 215111
The counter-loops formation pass needs to know what operations might be
function calls (because they can't appear in counter-based loops). On PPC32,
128-bit shifts might be runtime calls (even though you can't use __int128 on
PPC32, it seems that SROA might form them).
Fixes PR19709.
llvm-svn: 208501
Move the test for this class into the IR unittests as well.
This uncovers that ValueMap too is in the IR library. Ironically, the
unittest for ValueMap is useless in the Support library (honestly, so
was the ValueHandle test) and so it already lives in the IR unittests.
Mmmm, tasty layering.
llvm-svn: 202821
We need to abort the formation of counter-register-based loops where there are
128-bit integer operations that might become function calls.
llvm-svn: 202192
can be used by both the new pass manager and the old.
This removes it from any of the virtual mess of the pass interfaces and
lets it derive cleanly from the DominatorTreeBase<> template. In turn,
tons of boilerplate interface can be nuked and it turns into a very
straightforward extension of the base DominatorTree interface.
The old analysis pass is now a simple wrapper. The names and style of
this split should match the split between CallGraph and
CallGraphWrapperPass. All of the users of DominatorTree have been
updated to match using many of the same tricks as with CallGraph. The
goal is that the common type remains the resulting DominatorTree rather
than the pass. This will make subsequent work toward the new pass
manager significantly easier.
Also in numerous places things became cleaner because I switched from
re-running the pass (!!! mid way through some other passes run!!!) to
directly recomputing the domtree.
llvm-svn: 199104
directory. These passes are already defined in the IR library, and it
doesn't make any sense to have the headers in Analysis.
Long term, I think there is going to be a much better way to divide
these matters. The dominators code should be fully separated into the
abstract graph algorithm and have that put in Support where it becomes
obvious that evn Clang's CFGBlock's can use it. Then the verifier can
manually construct dominance information from the Support-driven
interface while the Analysis library can provide a pass which both
caches, reconstructs, and supports a nice update API.
But those are very long term, and so I don't want to leave the really
confusing structure until that day arrives.
llvm-svn: 199082
subsequent changes are easier to review. About to fix some layering
issues, and wanted to separate out the necessary churn.
Also comment and sink the include of "Windows.h" in three .inc files to
match the usage in Memory.inc.
llvm-svn: 198685
This adds a llvm.copysign intrinsic; We already have Libfunc recognition for
copysign (which is turned into the FCOPYSIGN SDAG node). In order to
autovectorize calls to copysign in the loop vectorizer, we need a corresponding
intrinsic as well.
In addition to the expected changes to the language reference, the loop
vectorizer, BasicTTI, and the SDAG builder (the intrinsic is transformed into
an FCOPYSIGN node, just like the function call), this also adds FCOPYSIGN to a
few lists in LegalizeVector{Ops,Types} so that vector copysigns can be
expanded.
In TargetLoweringBase::initActions, I've made the default action for FCOPYSIGN
be Expand for vector types. This seems correct for all in-tree targets, and I
think is the right thing to do because, previously, there was no way to generate
vector-values FCOPYSIGN nodes (and most targets don't specify an action for
vector-typed FCOPYSIGN).
llvm-svn: 188728
copysign/copysignf never become function calls (because the SDAG expansion code
does not lower to the corresponding function call, but rather directly
implements the associated logic), but copysignl almost always is lowered into a
call to the requested libm functon (and, thus, might clobber CTR).
llvm-svn: 188727
All libm floating-point rounding functions, except for round(), had their own
ISD nodes. Recent PowerPC cores have an instruction for round(), and so here I'm
adding ISD::FROUND so that round() can be custom lowered as well.
For the most part, this is straightforward. I've added an intrinsic
and a matching ISD node just like those for nearbyint() and friends. The
SelectionDAG pattern I've named frnd (because ISD::FP_ROUND has already claimed
fround).
This will be used by the PowerPC backend in a follow-up commit.
llvm-svn: 187926
Because the builtin longjmp implementation uses a CTR-based indirect jump, when
the control flow arrives at the builtin setjmp call, the CTR register has
necessarily been clobbered. Correspondingly, this adds CTR to the list of
implicit definitions of the builtin setjmp pseudo instruction.
We don't need to add CTR to the implicit definitions of builtin longjmp
because, even though it does clobber the CTR register, the control flow cannot
return to inside the loop unless there is also a builtin setjmp call.
llvm-svn: 186488
Although you can't generate this from C on PPC64, if you have a loop using a
64-bit counter on PPC32 then you can't form a CTR-based loop for it. This had
been cauing the PPCCTRLoops pass to assert.
Thanks to Joerg Sonnenberger for providing a test case!
llvm-svn: 185361
On PPC32, [su]div,rem on i64 types are transformed into runtime library
function calls. As a result, they are not allowed in counter-based loops (the
counter-loops verification pass caught this error; this change fixes PR16169).
llvm-svn: 183581
Now that the preheader insertion logic in LoopSimplify is externally exposed,
use it, and remove the copy-and-pasted version.
No functionality change intended.
llvm-svn: 182300
As the pairing of this instruction form with the bdnz/bdz branches is now
enforced by the verification pass, make it clear from the name that these
are used only for counter-based loops.
No functionality change intended.
llvm-svn: 182296
When asserts are enabled, this adds a verification pass for PPC counter-loop
formation. Unfortunately, without sacrificing code quality, there is no better
way of forming counter-based loops except at the (late) IR level. This means
that we need to recognize, at the IR level, anything which might turn into a
function call (or indirect branch). Because this is currently a finite set of
things, and because SelectionDAG lowering is basic-block local, this can be
done. Nevertheless, it is fragile, and failure results in a miscompile. This
verification pass checks that all (reachable) counter-based branches are
dominated by a loop mtctr instruction, and that no instructions in between
clobber the counter register. If these conditions are not satisfied, then an
ICE will be triggered.
In short, this is to help us sleep better at night.
llvm-svn: 182295
We don't need to reject all inline asm as using the counter register (most does
not). Only those that explicitly clobber the counter register need to prevent
the transformation.
llvm-svn: 182191
Some IR-level instructions (such as FP <-> i64 conversions) are not chained
w.r.t. the mtctr intrinsic and yet may become function calls that clobber the
counter register. At the selection-DAG level, these might be reordered with the
mtctr intrinsic causing miscompiles. To avoid this situation, if an existing
preheader has instructions that might use the counter register, create a new
preheader for the mtctr intrinsic. This extra block will be remerged with the
old preheader at the MI level, but will prevent unwanted reordering at the
selection-DAG level.
llvm-svn: 182045
The old PPCCTRLoops pass, like the Hexagon pass version from which it was
derived, could only handle some simple loops in canonical form. We cannot
directly adapt the new Hexagon hardware loops pass, however, because the
Hexagon pass contains a fundamental assumption that non-constant-trip-count
loops will contain a guard, and this is not always true (the result being that
incorrect negative counts can be generated). With this commit, we replace the
pass with a late IR-level pass which makes use of SE to calculate the
backedge-taken counts and safely generate the loop-count expressions (including
any necessary max() parts). This IR level pass inserts custom intrinsics that
are lowered into the desired decrement-and-branch instructions.
The most fragile part of this new implementation is that interfering uses of
the counter register must be detected on the IR level (and, on PPC, this also
includes any indirect branches in addition to function calls). Also, to make
all of this work, we need a variant of the mtctr instruction that is marked
as having side effects. Without this, machine-code level CSE, DCE, etc.
illegally transform the resulting code. Hopefully, this can be improved
in the future.
This new pass is smaller than the original (and much smaller than the new
Hexagon hardware loops pass), and can handle many additional cases correctly.
In addition, the preheader-creation code has been copied from LoopSimplify, and
after we decide on where it belongs, this code will be refactored so that it
can be explicitly shared (making this implementation even smaller).
The new test-case files ctrloop-{le,lt,ne}.ll have been adapted from tests for
the new Hexagon pass. There are a few classes of loops that this pass does not
transform (noted by FIXMEs in the files), but these deficiencies can be
addressed within the SE infrastructure (thus helping many other passes as well).
llvm-svn: 181927
Thanks to Jakob for isolating the underlying problem from the
test case in r177423. The original commit had introduced
asymmetric copy operations, but these turned out to be a work-around
to the real problem (the use of == instead of hasSubClassEq in PPCCTRLoops).
llvm-svn: 177679
This commit fixes an assert that would occur on loops with large constant counts
(like looping for ((uint32_t) -1) iterations on PPC64). The existing code did
not handle counts that it computed to be negative (asserting instead), but
these can be created with valid inputs.
This bug was discovered by bugpoint while I was attempting to isolate a
completely different problem.
Also, in writing test cases for the negative-count problem, I discovered that
the ori/lsi handling was broken (there was a typo which caused the logic that
was supposed to detect these pairs and extract the iteration count to always
fail). This has now also been corrected (and is covered by one of the new test
cases).
llvm-svn: 177295
Because the initial-value constants had not been added to the list
of instructions considered for DCE the resulting code had redundant
constant-materialization instructions.
llvm-svn: 177294
into their new header subdirectory: include/llvm/IR. This matches the
directory structure of lib, and begins to correct a long standing point
of file layout clutter in LLVM.
There are still more header files to move here, but I wanted to handle
them in separate commits to make tracking what files make sense at each
layer easier.
The only really questionable files here are the target intrinsic
tablegen files. But that's a battle I'd rather not fight today.
I've updated both CMake and Makefile build systems (I think, and my
tests think, but I may have missed something).
I've also re-sorted the includes throughout the project. I'll be
committing updates to Clang, DragonEgg, and Polly momentarily.
llvm-svn: 171366
Sooooo many of these had incorrect or strange main module includes.
I have manually inspected all of these, and fixed the main module
include to be the nearest plausible thing I could find. If you own or
care about any of these source files, I encourage you to take some time
and check that these edits were sensible. I can't have broken anything
(I strictly added headers, and reordered them, never removed), but they
may not be the headers you'd really like to identify as containing the
API being implemented.
Many forward declarations and missing includes were added to a header
files to allow them to parse cleanly when included first. The main
module rule does in fact have its merits. =]
llvm-svn: 169131
This way of using getNextOperandForReg() was unlikely to work as
intended. We don't give any guarantees about the order of operands in
the use-def chains, so looking only at operands following a given
operand in the chain doesn't make sense.
llvm-svn: 161542
Mehdi Amini