Summary:
Expand existing loopsink testing to also test loopsinking using new pass
manager. Enable memoryssa for loopsink with new pass manager. This
combination exposed a bug that was previously fixed for loopsink
without memoryssa. When sinking an instruction into a loop, the source
block may not be part of the loop but still needs to be checked for
pointer invalidation. This is the fix for bugzilla #39695 (PR 54659)
expanded to also work with memoryssa.
Respond to review comments. Enable Memory SSA in legacy Loop Sink pass
under EnableMSSALoopDependency option control. Update tests accordingly.
Respond to review comments. Add options controlling whether memoryssa is
used for loop sink, defaulting to off. Expand testing based on these
options.
Respond to review comments. Properly indicated preserved analyses.
This relanding addresses a compile-time performance problem by moving
test for profile data earlier to avoid unnecessary computations.
Author: Jamie Schmeiser <schmeise@ca.ibm.com>
Reviewed By: asbirlea (Alina Sbirlea)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90249
This reverts commit 562addba65.
Reverted change too quickly, the failing test cases passed on the next build.
So reverting revert (to include the changes).
Summary:
Expand existing loopsink testing to also test loopsinking using new pass
manager. Enable memoryssa for loopsink with new pass manager. This
combination exposed a bug that was previously fixed for loopsink
without memoryssa. When sinking an instruction into a loop, the source
block may not be part of the loop but still needs to be checked for
pointer invalidation. This is the fix for bugzilla #39695 (PR 54659)
expanded to also work with memoryssa.
Respond to review comments. Enable Memory SSA in legacy Loop Sink pass
under EnableMSSALoopDependency option control. Update tests accordingly.
Respond to review comments. Add options controlling whether memoryssa is
used for loop sink, defaulting to off. Expand testing based on these
options.
Respond to review comments. Properly indicated preserved analyses.
Author: Jamie Schmeiser <schmeise@ca.ibm.com>
Reviewed By: asbirlea (Alina Sbirlea)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90249
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).
This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.
llvm-svn: 358546
Before r324429 we essentially didn't have a verification of LCSSA, so
no wonder that it has been broken: currently loop-sink breaks it (the
attached test illustrates the failure).
It was detected during a stage2 RA build, so to unbreak it I'm disabling
the check for now.
llvm-svn: 324445
This test checks that load from constant memory will be sunk regardless of
aliasing stores in the loop.
Patch by Daniil Suchkov!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39113
llvm-svn: 316207
Sinking of unordered atomic load into loop must be disallowed because it turns
a single load into multiple loads. The relevant section of the documentation
is: http://llvm.org/docs/Atomics.html#unordered, specifically the Notes for
Optimizers section. Here is the full text of this section:
> Notes for optimizers
> In terms of the optimizer, this **prohibits any transformation that
> transforms a single load into multiple loads**, transforms a store into
> multiple stores, narrows a store, or stores a value which would not be
> stored otherwise. Some examples of unsafe optimizations are narrowing
> an assignment into a bitfield, rematerializing a load, and turning loads
> and stores into a memcpy call. Reordering unordered operations is safe,
> though, and optimizers should take advantage of that because unordered
> operations are common in languages that need them.
Patch by Daniil Suchkov!
Reviewed By: reames
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38392
llvm-svn: 315438
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
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
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
Jamie Schmeiser