This version has two fixes compared to the original:
* In Registry.h the template static members are instantiated before they are
used, as clang gives an error if you do it the other way around.
* The use of the Registry template in clang-tidy is updated in the same way as
has been done everywhere else.
Original commit message:
Currently the Registry class contains the vestiges of a previous attempt to
allow plugins to be used on Windows without using BUILD_SHARED_LIBS, where a
plugin would have its own copy of a registry and export it to be imported by
the tool that's loading the plugin. This only works if the plugin is entirely
self-contained with the only interface between the plugin and tool being the
registry, and in particular this conflicts with how IR pass plugins work.
This patch changes things so that instead the add_node function of the registry
is exported by the tool and then imported by the plugin, which solves this
problem and also means that instead of every plugin having to export every
registry they use instead LLVM only has to export the add_node functions. This
allows plugins that use a registry to work on Windows if
LLVM_EXPORT_SYMBOLS_FOR_PLUGINS is used.
llvm-svn: 276973
Currently the Registry class contains the vestiges of a previous attempt to
allow plugins to be used on Windows without using BUILD_SHARED_LIBS, where a
plugin would have its own copy of a registry and export it to be imported by
the tool that's loading the plugin. This only works if the plugin is entirely
self-contained with the only interface between the plugin and tool being the
registry, and in particular this conflicts with how IR pass plugins work.
This patch changes things so that instead the add_node function of the registry
is exported by the tool and then imported by the plugin, which solves this
problem and also means that instead of every plugin having to export every
registry they use instead LLVM only has to export the add_node functions. This
allows plugins that use a registry to work on Windows if
LLVM_EXPORT_SYMBOLS_FOR_PLUGINS is used.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21385
llvm-svn: 276856
According the build bots, clang is using the Registry class somewhere as well. Will reapply with appropriate clang changes at a later point.
llvm-svn: 258159
The Registry class constructs a linked list of nodes whose storage is inside static variables and nodes are added via static initializers. The trick is that those static initializers are in both the LLVM code base, and some random plugin that might get loaded in at runtime. The existing code tries to use C++ templates and their ODR rules to get a single definition of the registry for each type, but, experimentally, this doesn't quite work as designed. (Well, the entire structure doesn't. It might not actually be an ODR problem.)
Previously, when I tried moving the GCStrategy class (along with it's registry) from CodeGen to IR, I ran into a problem where asking the GCStrategyRegistry a question would return inconsistent results depending on whether you asked from CodeGen (where the static initializers still were) or Transforms. My best guess is that this is a result of either a) an order of initialization error, or b) we ended up with two copies of the registry being created. I remember at the time having convinced myself it was probably (b), but I don't have any of my notes around from that investigation any more.
See http://reviews.llvm.org/rL226311 for the original patch in question.
This patch tries to remove the possibility of (b) above. (a) was already fixed in change 258109.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16170
llvm-svn: 258157
This change reverts the interesting parts of 226311 (and 227046). This change introduced two problems, and I've been convinced that an alternate approach is preferrable anyways.
The bugs were:
- Registery appears to require all users be within the same linkage unit. After this change, asking for "statepoint-example" in Transform/ would sometimes get you nullptr, whereas asking the same question in CodeGen would return the right GCStrategy. The correct long term fix is to get rid of the utter hack which is Registry, but I don't have time for that right now. 227046 appears to have been an attempt to fix this, but I don't believe it does so completely.
- GCMetadataPrinter::finishAssembly was being called more than once per GCStrategy. Each Strategy was being added to the GCModuleInfo multiple times.
Once I get time again, I'm going to split GCModuleInfo into the gc.root specific part and a GCStrategy owning Analysis pass. I'm probably also going to kill off the Registry. Once that's done, I'll move the new GCStrategyAnalysis and all built in GCStrategies into Analysis. (As original suggested by Chandler.) This will accomplish my original goal of being able to access GCStrategy from Transform/ without adding all of the builtin GCs to IR/.
llvm-svn: 227109
Note: This change ended up being slightly more controversial than expected. Chandler has tentatively okayed this for the moment, but I may be revisiting this in the near future after we settle some high level questions.
Rather than have the GCStrategy object owned by the GCModuleInfo - which is an immutable analysis pass used mainly by gc.root - have it be owned by the LLVMContext. This simplifies the ownership logic (i.e. can you have two instances of the same strategy at once?), but more importantly, allows us to access the GCStrategy in the middle end optimizer. To this end, I add an accessor through Function which becomes the canonical way to get at a GCStrategy instance.
In the near future, this will allows me to move some of the checks from http://reviews.llvm.org/D6808 into the Verifier itself, and to introduce optimization legality predicates for some of the recent additions to InstCombine. (These will follow as separate changes.)
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6811
llvm-svn: 226311
Searching all of the existing gc.root implementations I'm aware of (all three of them), there was exactly one use of this mechanism, and that was to implement a performance improvement that should have been applied to the default lowering.
Having this function is requiring a dependency on a CodeGen class (MachineFunction), in a class which is otherwise completely independent of CodeGen. I could solve this differently, but given that I see absolutely no value in preserving this mechanism, I going to just get rid of it.
Note: Tis is the first time I'm intentionally breaking previously supported gc.root functionality. Given 3.6 has branched, I believe this is a good time to do this.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7004
llvm-svn: 226305
This preparation for an update to http://reviews.llvm.org/D6811. GCStrategy.cpp will hopefully be moving into IR/, where as the lowering logic needs to stay in CodeGen/
llvm-svn: 226195
This change includes the most basic possible GCStrategy for a GC which is using the statepoint lowering code. At the moment, this GCStrategy doesn't really do much - aside from actually generate correct stackmaps that is - but I went ahead and added a few extra correctness checks as proof of concept. It's mostly here to provide documentation on how to do one, and to provide a point for various optimization legality hooks I'd like to add going forward. (For context, see the TODOs in InstCombine around gc.relocate.)
Most of the validation logic added here as proof of concept will soon move in to the Verifier. That move is dependent on http://reviews.llvm.org/D6811
There was discussion in the review thread about addrspace(1) being reserved for something. I'm going to follow up on a seperate llvmdev thread. If needed, I'll update all the code at once.
Note that I am deliberately not making a GCStrategy required to use gc.statepoints with this change. I want to give folks out of tree - including myself - a chance to migrate. In a week or two, I'll make having a GCStrategy be required for gc.statepoints. To this end, I added the gc tag to one of the test cases but not others.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6808
llvm-svn: 225365
Updating comments to reflect the current state of the world after my recent changes to ownership structure and generally better describe what a GCStrategy is and how it works.
llvm-svn: 224086
This change moves the ownership and access of GCFunctionInfo (the object which describes the safepoints associated with a safepoint under GCRoot) to GCModuleInfo. Previously, this was owned by GCStrategy which was in turned owned by GCModuleInfo. This made GCStrategy module specific which is 'surprising' given it's name and other purposes.
There's a few more changes needed, but we're getting towards the point we can reuse GCStrategy for gc.statepoint as well.
p.s. The style of this code ends up being a mess. I was trying to move code around without otherwise changing much. Once I get the ownership structure rearranged, I will go through and fixup spacing, naming, comments etc.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6587
llvm-svn: 223994
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
trees into the Support library.
These are all expressed in terms of the generic GraphTraits and CFG,
with no reliance on any concrete IR types. Putting them in support
clarifies that and makes the fact that the static analyzer in Clang uses
them much more sane. When moving the Dominators.h file into the IR
library I claimed that this was the right home for it but not something
I planned to work on. Oops.
So why am I doing this? It happens to be one step toward breaking the
requirement that IR verification can only be performed from inside of
a pass context, which completely blocks the implementation of
verification for the new pass manager infrastructure. Fixing it will
also allow removing the concept of the "preverify" step (WTF???) and
allow the verifier to cleanly flag functions which fail verification in
a way that precludes even computing dominance information. Currently,
that results in a fatal error even when you ask the verifier to not
fatally error. It's awesome like that.
The yak shaving will continue...
llvm-svn: 199095
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
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
Moving toward a uniform style of pass definition to allow easier target configuration.
Globally declare Pass ID.
Globally declare pass initializer.
Use INITIALIZE_PASS consistently.
Add a call to the initializer from CodeGen.cpp.
Remove redundant "createPass" functions and "getPassName" methods.
While cleaning up declarations, cleaned up comments (sorry for large diff).
llvm-svn: 150100
generator to it. For non-bundle instructions, these behave exactly the same
as the MC layer API.
For properties like mayLoad / mayStore, look into the bundle and if any of the
bundled instructions has the property it would return true.
For properties like isPredicable, only return true if *all* of the bundled
instructions have the property.
For properties like canFoldAsLoad, isCompare, conservatively return false for
bundles.
llvm-svn: 146026
they all ready do). This removes two dominator recomputations prior to isel,
which is a 1% improvement in total llc time for 403.gcc.
The only potentially suspect thing is making GCStrategy recompute dominators if
it used a custom lowering strategy.
llvm-svn: 123064
must be called in the pass's constructor. This function uses static dependency declarations to recursively initialize
the pass's dependencies.
Clients that only create passes through the createFooPass() APIs will require no changes. Clients that want to use the
CommandLine options for passes will need to manually call the appropriate initialization functions in PassInitialization.h
before parsing commandline arguments.
I have tested this with all standard configurations of clang and llvm-gcc on Darwin. It is possible that there are problems
with the static dependencies that will only be visible with non-standard options. If you encounter any crash in pass
registration/creation, please send the testcase to me directly.
llvm-svn: 116820
with a fix for self-hosting
rotate CallInst operands, i.e. move callee to the back
of the operand array
the motivation for this patch are laid out in my mail to llvm-commits:
more efficient access to operands and callee, faster callgraph-construction,
smaller compiler binary
llvm-svn: 101465
with a fix
rotate CallInst operands, i.e. move callee to the back
of the operand array
the motivation for this patch are laid out in my mail to llvm-commits:
more efficient access to operands and callee, faster callgraph-construction,
smaller compiler binary
llvm-svn: 101397
of the operand array
the motivation for this patch are laid out in my mail to llvm-commits:
more efficient access to operands and callee, faster callgraph-construction,
smaller compiler binary
llvm-svn: 101364
John Brawn