Commit Graph

157 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Eli Friedman 2a65dd1ba6 [SROA] Fix crash with lifetime intrinsic partially covering alloca.
Summary:
PromoteMemToReg looks specifically for the pattern
bitcast+lifetime.start (or a bitcast-equivalent GEP); any offset
will lead to an assertion failure.

Fixes https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=27999 .

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D22737

llvm-svn: 277969
2016-08-08 01:30:53 +00:00
Jack Liu f101c0f7a1 [SROA] Function canConvertValue needs to check whether both NewTy and OldTy pointers are
pointing to the same addr space. This can prevent SROA from creating a bitcast
between pointers with different addr spaces.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19697

llvm-svn: 268424
2016-05-03 19:30:48 +00:00
Jack Liu 430e2c2140 Revert 268409 due to missing comment.
llvm-svn: 268421
2016-05-03 19:15:02 +00:00
Jack Liu 1ff4a0b7ee (no commit message)
llvm-svn: 268409
2016-05-03 18:01:43 +00:00
Jack Liu cd777c8b35 test commit
llvm-svn: 268358
2016-05-03 04:06:24 +00:00
Adrian Prantl 75819aedf6 [PR27284] Reverse the ownership between DICompileUnit and DISubprogram.
Currently each Function points to a DISubprogram and DISubprogram has a
scope field. For member functions the scope is a DICompositeType. DIScopes
point to the DICompileUnit to facilitate type uniquing.

Distinct DISubprograms (with isDefinition: true) are not part of the type
hierarchy and cannot be uniqued. This change removes the subprograms
list from DICompileUnit and instead adds a pointer to the owning compile
unit to distinct DISubprograms. This would make it easy for ThinLTO to
strip unneeded DISubprograms and their transitively referenced debug info.

Motivation
----------

Materializing DISubprograms is currently the most expensive operation when
doing a ThinLTO build of clang.

We want the DISubprogram to be stored in a separate Bitcode block (or the
same block as the function body) so we can avoid having to expensively
deserialize all DISubprograms together with the global metadata. If a
function has been inlined into another subprogram we need to store a
reference the block containing the inlined subprogram.

Attached to https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=27284 is a python script
that updates LLVM IR testcases to the new format.

http://reviews.llvm.org/D19034
<rdar://problem/25256815>

llvm-svn: 266446
2016-04-15 15:57:41 +00:00
Adrian Prantl f95164227e Fix missing DICompileUnits in testcases
llvm-svn: 265974
2016-04-11 18:15:44 +00:00
Michael Kuperstein 5abc2765fa Have DataLayout::isLegalInteger() accept uint64_t
While not strictly necessary, since we don't support large integer
types, this avoids bugs due to silent truncation from uint64_t to a
32-bit unsigned (e.g. DL.isLegalInteger(DL.getTypeSizeInBits(Ty) )

This fixes PR26972.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18258

llvm-svn: 263850
2016-03-18 23:19:29 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 37f1f12226 [SROA] Fix PR25873, which Andrea Di Biagio analyzed the daylights out
of, and I misdiagnosed for months and months.

Andrea has had a patch for this forever, but I just couldn't see how
it was fixing the root cause of the problem. It didn't make sense to me,
even though the patch was perfectly good and the analysis of the actual
failure event was *fantastic*.

Well, I came back to it today because the patch has sat for *far* too
long and needs attention and decided I wouldn't let it go until I really
understood what was going on. After quite some time in the debugger,
I finally realized that in fact I had just missed an important case with
my previous attempt to fix PR22093 in r225149. Not only do we need to
handle loads that won't be split, but stores-of-loads that we won't
split. We *do* actually have enough logic in the presplitting to form
new slices for split stores.... *unless* we decided not to split them!

I'm so sorry that it took me this long to come to the realization that
this is the issue. It seems so obvious in hind sight (of course).
Anyways, the fix becomes *much* smaller and more focused. The fact that
we're left doing integer smashing is related to the FIXME in my original
commit: fundamentally, we're not aggressive about pre-splitting for
loads and stores to the same alloca. If we want to get aggressive about
this, it'll need both what Andrea had put into the proposed fix, but
also a *lot* more logic to essentially iteratively pre-split the alloca
until we can't do any more. As I said in that commit log, its really
unclear that this is the right call. Instead, the integer blending and
letting targets lower this to narrower stores seems slightly better. But
we definitely shouldn't really go down that path just to fix this bug.

Again, tons of thanks are owed to Andrea and others at Sony for working
on this bug. I really should have seen what was going on here and
re-directed them sooner. =////

llvm-svn: 263121
2016-03-10 15:31:17 +00:00
Keno Fischer d5354fdddb [SROA] Also insert a bit piece expression if only one piece is needed
Summary: If SROA creates only one piece (e.g. because the other is not needed),
it still needs to create a bit_piece expression if that bit piece is smaller
than the original size of the alloca.

Reviewers: aprantl

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16187

llvm-svn: 257795
2016-01-14 20:06:34 +00:00
Pete Cooper 67cf9a723b Revert "Change memcpy/memset/memmove to have dest and source alignments."
This reverts commit r253511.

This likely broke the bots in
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64-elf-linux2/builds/20202
http://bb.pgr.jp/builders/clang-3stage-i686-linux/builds/3787

llvm-svn: 253543
2015-11-19 05:56:52 +00:00
Pete Cooper 72bc23ef02 Change memcpy/memset/memmove to have dest and source alignments.
Note, this was reviewed (and more details are in) http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20151109/312083.html

These intrinsics currently have an explicit alignment argument which is
required to be a constant integer.  It represents the alignment of the
source and dest, and so must be the minimum of those.

This change allows source and dest to each have their own alignments
by using the alignment attribute on their arguments.  The alignment
argument itself is removed.

There are a few places in the code for which the code needs to be
checked by an expert as to whether using only src/dest alignment is
safe.  For those places, they currently take the minimum of src/dest
alignments which matches the current behaviour.

For example, code which used to read:
  call void @llvm.memcpy.p0i8.p0i8.i32(i8* %dest, i8* %src, i32 500, i32 8, i1 false)
will now read:
  call void @llvm.memcpy.p0i8.p0i8.i32(i8* align 8 %dest, i8* align 8 %src, i32 500, i1 false)

For out of tree owners, I was able to strip alignment from calls using sed by replacing:
  (call.*llvm\.memset.*)i32\ [0-9]*\,\ i1 false\)
with:
  $1i1 false)

and similarly for memmove and memcpy.

I then added back in alignment to test cases which needed it.

A similar commit will be made to clang which actually has many differences in alignment as now
IRBuilder can generate different source/dest alignments on calls.

In IRBuilder itself, a new argument was added.  Instead of calling:
  CreateMemCpy(Dst, Src, getInt64(Size), DstAlign, /* isVolatile */ false)
you now call
  CreateMemCpy(Dst, Src, getInt64(Size), DstAlign, SrcAlign, /* isVolatile */ false)

There is a temporary class (IntegerAlignment) which takes the source alignment and rejects
implicit conversion from bool.  This is to prevent isVolatile here from passing its default
parameter to the source alignment.

Note, changes in future can now be made to codegen.  I didn't change anything here, but this
change should enable better memcpy code sequences.

Reviewed by Hal Finkel.

llvm-svn: 253511
2015-11-18 22:17:24 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 29a18a4663 [PM] Port SROA to the new pass manager.
In some ways this is a very boring port to the new pass manager as there
are no interesting analyses or dependencies or other oddities.

However, this does introduce the first good example of a transformation
pass with non-trivial state porting to the new pass manager. I've tried
to carve out patterns here to replicate elsewhere, and would appreciate
comments on whether folks like these patterns:

- A common need in the new pass manager is to effectively lift the pass
  class and some of its state into a public header file. Prior to this,
  LLVM used anonymous namespaces to provide "module private" types and
  utilities, but that doesn't scale to cases where a public header file
  is needed and the new pass manager will exacerbate that. The pattern
  I've adopted here is to use the namespace-cased-name of the core pass
  (what would be a module if we had them) as a module-private namespace.
  Then utility and other code can be declared and defined in this
  namespace. At some point in the future, we could even have
  (conditionally compiled) code that used modules features when
  available to do the same basic thing.

- I've split the actual pass run method in two in order to expose
  a private method usable by the old pass manager to wrap the new class
  with a minimum of duplicated code. I actually looked at a bunch of
  ways to automate or generate these, but they are all quite terrible
  IMO. The fundamental need is to extract the set of analyses which need
  to cross this interface boundary, and that will end up being too
  unpredictable to effectively encapsulate IMO. This is also
  a relatively small amount of boiler plate that will live a relatively
  short time, so I'm not too worried about the fact that it is boiler
  plate.

The rest of the patch is totally boring but results in a massive diff
(sorry). It just moves code around and removes or adds qualifiers to
reflect the new name and nesting structure.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12773

llvm-svn: 247501
2015-09-12 09:09:14 +00:00
Hans Wennborg 4a61370b8f Fix CHECK directives that weren't checking.
llvm-svn: 246485
2015-08-31 21:10:35 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 4b682f6f24 [SROA] Fix PR24463, a crash I introduced in SROA by allowing it to
handle more allocas with loads past the end of the alloca.

I suspect there are some related crashers with slightly different
patterns, but I'll fix those and add test cases as I find them.

Thanks to David Majnemer for the excellent test case reduction here.
Made this super simple to debug and fix.

llvm-svn: 246289
2015-08-28 09:03:52 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 748d095ff0 [SROA] Rip out all support for SSAUpdater in SROA.
This was only added to preserve the old ScalarRepl's use of SSAUpdater
which was originally to avoid use of dominance frontiers. Now, we only
need a domtree, and we'll need a domtree right after this pass as well
and so it makes perfect sense to always and only use the dom-tree
powered mem2reg. This was flag-flipper earlier and has stuck reasonably
so I wanted to gut the now-dead code out of SROA before we waste more
time with it. Among other things, this will make passmanager porting
easier.

llvm-svn: 246028
2015-08-26 09:09:29 +00:00
Chandler Carruth ccffdaf7ed [SROA] Fix a nasty pile of bugs to do with big-endian, different alloca
types and loads, loads or stores widened past the size of an alloca,
etc.

This started off with a bug report about big-endian behavior with
bitfields and loads and stores to a { i32, i24 } struct. An initial
attempt to fix this was sent for review in D10357, but that didn't
really get to the root of the problem.

The core issue was that canConvertValue and convertValue in SROA were
handling different bitwidth integers by doing a zext of the integer. It
wouldn't do a trunc though, only a zext! This would in turn lead SROA to
form an i24 load from an i24 alloca, zext it to i32, and then use it.
This would at least produce the wrong value for big-endian systems.

One of my many false starts here was to correct the computation for
big-endian systems by shifting. But this doesn't actually work because
the original code has a 64-bit store to the entire 8 bytes, and a 32-bit
load of the last 4 bytes, and because the alloc size is 8 bytes, we
can't lose that last (least significant if bigendian) byte! The real
problem here is that we're forming an i24 load in SROA which is actually
not sufficiently wide to load all of the necessary bits here. The source
has an i32 load, and SROA needs to form that as well.

The straightforward way to do this is to disable the zext logic in
canConvertValue and convertValue, forcing us to actually load all
32-bits. This seems like a really good change, but it in turn breaks
several other parts of SROA.

First in the chain of knock-on failures, we had places where we were
doing integer-widening promotion even though some of the integer loads
or stores extended *past the end* of the alloca's memory! There was even
a comment about preventing this, but it only prevented the case where
the type had a different bit size from its store size. So I added checks
to handle the cases where we actually have a widened load or store and
to avoid trying to special integer widening promotion in those cases.

Second, we actually rely on the ability to promote in the face of loads
past the end of an alloca! This is important so that we can (for
example) speculate loads around PHI nodes to do more promotion. The bits
loaded are garbage, but as long as they aren't used and the alignment is
suitable high (which it wasn't in the test case!) this is "fine". And we
can't stop promoting here, lots of things stop working well if we do. So
we need to add specific logic to handle the extension (and truncation)
case, but *only* where that extension or truncation are over bytes that
*are outside the alloca's allocated storage* and thus totally bogus to
load or store.

And of course, once we add back this correct handling of extension or
truncation, we need to correctly handle bigendian systems to avoid
re-introducing the exact bug that started us off on this chain of misery
in the first place, but this time even more subtle as it only happens
along speculated loads atop a PHI node.

I've ported an existing test for PHI speculation to the big-endian test
file and checked that we get that part correct, and I've added several
more interesting big-endian test cases that should help check that we're
getting this correct.

Fun times.

llvm-svn: 242869
2015-07-22 03:32:42 +00:00
David Majnemer 62690b1952 [SROA] Don't de-atomic volatile loads and stores
Volatile loads and stores are made visible in global state regardless of
what memory is involved.  It is not correct to disregard the ordering
and synchronization scope because it is possible to synchronize with
memory operations performed by hardware.

This partially addresses PR23737.

llvm-svn: 242126
2015-07-14 06:19:58 +00:00
Hal Finkel cd5553ed39 [ConstantFold] Don't fold ppc_fp128 <-> int bitcasts
PPC_FP128 is really the sum of two consecutive doubles, where the first double
is always stored first in memory, regardless of the target endianness. The
memory layout of i128, however, depends on the target endianness, and so we
can't fold this without target endianness information. As a result, we must not
do this folding in lib/IR/ConstantFold.cpp (it could be done instead in
Analysis/ConstantFolding.cpp, but that's not done now).

Fixes PR23026.

llvm-svn: 233481
2015-03-28 16:44:57 +00:00
David Blaikie f72d05bc7b [opaque pointer type] Add textual IR support for explicit type parameter to gep operator
Similar to gep (r230786) and load (r230794) changes.

Similar migration script can be used to update test cases, which
successfully migrated all of LLVM and Polly, but about 4 test cases
needed manually changes in Clang.

(this script will read the contents of stdin and massage it into stdout
- wrap it in the 'apply.sh' script shown in previous commits + xargs to
apply it over a large set of test cases)

import fileinput
import sys
import re

rep = re.compile(r"(getelementptr(?:\s+inbounds)?\s*\()((<\d*\s+x\s+)?([^@]*?)(|\s*addrspace\(\d+\))\s*\*(?(3)>)\s*)(?=$|%|@|null|undef|blockaddress|getelementptr|addrspacecast|bitcast|inttoptr|zeroinitializer|<|\[\[[a-zA-Z]|\{\{)", re.MULTILINE | re.DOTALL)

def conv(match):
  line = match.group(1)
  line += match.group(4)
  line += ", "
  line += match.group(2)
  return line

line = sys.stdin.read()
off = 0
for match in re.finditer(rep, line):
  sys.stdout.write(line[off:match.start()])
  sys.stdout.write(conv(match))
  off = match.end()
sys.stdout.write(line[off:])

llvm-svn: 232184
2015-03-13 18:20:45 +00:00
David Blaikie a79ac14fa6 [opaque pointer type] Add textual IR support for explicit type parameter to load instruction
Essentially the same as the GEP change in r230786.

A similar migration script can be used to update test cases, though a few more
test case improvements/changes were required this time around: (r229269-r229278)

import fileinput
import sys
import re

pat = re.compile(r"((?:=|:|^)\s*load (?:atomic )?(?:volatile )?(.*?))(| addrspace\(\d+\) *)\*($| *(?:%|@|null|undef|blockaddress|getelementptr|addrspacecast|bitcast|inttoptr|\[\[[a-zA-Z]|\{\{).*$)")

for line in sys.stdin:
  sys.stdout.write(re.sub(pat, r"\1, \2\3*\4", line))

Reviewers: rafael, dexonsmith, grosser

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7649

llvm-svn: 230794
2015-02-27 21:17:42 +00:00
David Blaikie 79e6c74981 [opaque pointer type] Add textual IR support for explicit type parameter to getelementptr instruction
One of several parallel first steps to remove the target type of pointers,
replacing them with a single opaque pointer type.

This adds an explicit type parameter to the gep instruction so that when the
first parameter becomes an opaque pointer type, the type to gep through is
still available to the instructions.

* This doesn't modify gep operators, only instructions (operators will be
  handled separately)

* Textual IR changes only. Bitcode (including upgrade) and changing the
  in-memory representation will be in separate changes.

* geps of vectors are transformed as:
    getelementptr <4 x float*> %x, ...
  ->getelementptr float, <4 x float*> %x, ...
  Then, once the opaque pointer type is introduced, this will ultimately look
  like:
    getelementptr float, <4 x ptr> %x
  with the unambiguous interpretation that it is a vector of pointers to float.

* address spaces remain on the pointer, not the type:
    getelementptr float addrspace(1)* %x
  ->getelementptr float, float addrspace(1)* %x
  Then, eventually:
    getelementptr float, ptr addrspace(1) %x

Importantly, the massive amount of test case churn has been automated by
same crappy python code. I had to manually update a few test cases that
wouldn't fit the script's model (r228970,r229196,r229197,r229198). The
python script just massages stdin and writes the result to stdout, I
then wrapped that in a shell script to handle replacing files, then
using the usual find+xargs to migrate all the files.

update.py:
import fileinput
import sys
import re

ibrep = re.compile(r"(^.*?[^%\w]getelementptr inbounds )(((?:<\d* x )?)(.*?)(| addrspace\(\d\)) *\*(|>)(?:$| *(?:%|@|null|undef|blockaddress|getelementptr|addrspacecast|bitcast|inttoptr|\[\[[a-zA-Z]|\{\{).*$))")
normrep = re.compile(       r"(^.*?[^%\w]getelementptr )(((?:<\d* x )?)(.*?)(| addrspace\(\d\)) *\*(|>)(?:$| *(?:%|@|null|undef|blockaddress|getelementptr|addrspacecast|bitcast|inttoptr|\[\[[a-zA-Z]|\{\{).*$))")

def conv(match, line):
  if not match:
    return line
  line = match.groups()[0]
  if len(match.groups()[5]) == 0:
    line += match.groups()[2]
  line += match.groups()[3]
  line += ", "
  line += match.groups()[1]
  line += "\n"
  return line

for line in sys.stdin:
  if line.find("getelementptr ") == line.find("getelementptr inbounds"):
    if line.find("getelementptr inbounds") != line.find("getelementptr inbounds ("):
      line = conv(re.match(ibrep, line), line)
  elif line.find("getelementptr ") != line.find("getelementptr ("):
    line = conv(re.match(normrep, line), line)
  sys.stdout.write(line)

apply.sh:
for name in "$@"
do
  python3 `dirname "$0"`/update.py < "$name" > "$name.tmp" && mv "$name.tmp" "$name"
  rm -f "$name.tmp"
done

The actual commands:
From llvm/src:
find test/ -name *.ll | xargs ./apply.sh
From llvm/src/tools/clang:
find test/ -name *.mm -o -name *.m -o -name *.cpp -o -name *.c | xargs -I '{}' ../../apply.sh "{}"
From llvm/src/tools/polly:
find test/ -name *.ll | xargs ./apply.sh

After that, check-all (with llvm, clang, clang-tools-extra, lld,
compiler-rt, and polly all checked out).

The extra 'rm' in the apply.sh script is due to a few files in clang's test
suite using interesting unicode stuff that my python script was throwing
exceptions on. None of those files needed to be migrated, so it seemed
sufficient to ignore those cases.

Reviewers: rafael, dexonsmith, grosser

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7636

llvm-svn: 230786
2015-02-27 19:29:02 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 73b0164fe5 [SROA] Apply a somewhat heavy and unpleasant hammer to fix PR22093, an
assert out of the new pre-splitting in SROA.

This fix makes the code do what was originally intended -- when we have
a store of a load both dealing in the same alloca, we force them to both
be pre-split with identical offsets. This is really quite hard to do
because we can keep discovering problems as we go along. We have to
track every load over the current alloca which for any resaon becomes
invalid for pre-splitting, and go back to remove all stores of those
loads. I've included a couple of test cases derived from PR22093 that
cover the different ways this can happen. While that PR only really
triggered the first of these two, its the same fundamental issue.

The other challenge here is documented in a FIXME now. We end up being
quite a bit more aggressive for pre-splitting when loads and stores
don't refer to the same alloca. This aggressiveness comes at the cost of
introducing potentially redundant loads. It isn't clear that this is the
right balance. It might be considerably better to require that we only
do pre-splitting when we can presplit every load and store involved in
the entire operation. That would give more consistent if conservative
results. Unfortunately, it requires a non-trivial change to the actual
pre-splitting operation in order to correctly handle cases where we end
up pre-splitting stores out-of-order. And it isn't 100% clear that this
is the right direction, although I'm starting to suspect that it is.

llvm-svn: 225149
2015-01-05 04:17:53 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 24ac830d7c [SROA] Teach SROA to be more aggressive in splitting now that we have
a pre-splitting pass over loads and stores.

Historically, splitting could cause enough problems that I hamstrung the
entire process with a requirement that splittable integer loads and
stores must cover the entire alloca. All smaller loads and stores were
unsplittable to prevent chaos from ensuing. With the new pre-splitting
logic that does load/store pair splitting I introduced in r225061, we
can now very nicely handle arbitrarily splittable loads and stores. In
order to fully benefit from these smarts, we need to mark all of the
integer loads and stores as splittable.

However, we don't actually want to rewrite partitions with all integer
loads and stores marked as splittable. This will fail to extract scalar
integers from aggregates, which is kind of the point of SROA. =] In
order to resolve this, what we really want to do is only do
pre-splitting on the alloca slices with integer loads and stores fully
splittable. This allows us to uncover all non-integer uses of the alloca
that would benefit from a split in an integer load or store (and where
introducing the split is safe because it is just memory transfer from
a load to a store). Once done, we make all the non-whole-alloca integer
loads and stores unsplittable just as they have historically been,
repartition and rewrite.

The result is that when there are integer loads and stores anywhere
within an alloca (such as from a memcpy of a sub-object of a larger
object), we can split them up if there are non-integer components to the
aggregate hiding beneath. I've added the challenging test cases to
demonstrate how this is able to promote to scalars even a case where we
have even *partially* overlapping loads and stores.

This restores the single-store behavior for small arrays of i8s which is
really nice. I've restored both the little endian testing and big endian
testing for these exactly as they were prior to r225061. It also forced
me to be more aggressive in an alignment test to actually defeat SROA.
=] Without the added volatiles there, we actually split up the weird i16
loads and produce nice double allocas with better alignment.

This also uncovered a number of bugs where we failed to handle
splittable load and store slices which didn't have a begininng offset of
zero. Those fixes are included, and without them the existing test cases
explode in glorious fireworks. =]

I've kept support for leaving whole-alloca integer loads and stores as
splittable even for the purpose of rewriting, but I think that's likely
no longer needed. With the new pre-splitting, we might be able to remove
all the splitting support for loads and stores from the rewriter. Not
doing that in this patch to try to isolate any performance regressions
that causes in an easy to find and revert chunk.

llvm-svn: 225074
2015-01-02 03:55:54 +00:00
Chandler Carruth e65ae89327 [SROA] Add a test case for r225068 / PR22080.
llvm-svn: 225070
2015-01-02 00:34:29 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 0715cba02d [SROA] Teach SROA how to much more intelligently handle split loads and
stores.

When there are accesses to an entire alloca with an integer
load or store as well as accesses to small pieces of the alloca, SROA
splits up the large integer accesses. In order to do that, it uses bit
math to merge the small accesses into large integers. While this is
effective, it produces insane IR that can cause significant problems in
the rest of the optimizer:

- It can cause load and store mismatches with GVN on the non-alloca side
  where we end up loading an i64 (or some such) rather than loading
  specific elements that are stored.
- We can't always get rid of the integer bit math, which is why we can't
  always fix the loads and stores to work well with GVN.
- This is especially bad when we have operations that mix poorly with
  integer bit math such as floating point operations.
- It will block things like the vectorizer which might be able to handle
  the scalar stores that underly the aggregate.

At the same time, we can't just directly split up these loads and stores
in all cases. If there is actual integer arithmetic involved on the
values, then using integer bit math is actually the perfect lowering
because we can often combine it heavily with the surrounding math.

The solution this patch provides is to find places where SROA is
partitioning aggregates into small elements, and look for splittable
loads and stores that it can split all the way to some other adjacent
load and store. These are uniformly the cases where failing to split the
loads and stores hurts the optimizer that I have seen, and I've looked
extensively at the code produced both from more and less aggressive
approaches to this problem.

However, it is quite tricky to actually do this in SROA. We may have
loads and stores to the same alloca, or other complex patterns that are
hard to handle. This complexity leads to the somewhat subtle algorithm
implemented here. We have to do this entire process as a separate pass
over the partitioning of the alloca, and split up all of the loads prior
to splitting the stores so that we can handle safely the cases of
overlapping, including partially overlapping, loads and stores to the
same alloca. We also have to reconstitute the post-split slice
configuration so we can avoid iterating again over all the alloca uses
(the slow part of SROA). But we also have to ensure that when we split
up loads and stores to *other* allocas, we *do* re-iterate over them in
SROA to adapt to the more refined partitioning now required.

With this, I actually think we can fix a long-standing TODO in SROA
where I avoided splitting as many loads and stores as probably should be
splittable. This limitation historically mitigated the fallout of all
the bad things mentioned above. Now that we have more intelligent
handling, I plan to remove the FIXME and more aggressively mark integer
loads and stores as splittable. I'll do that in a follow-up patch to
help with bisecting any fallout.

The net result of this change should be more fine-grained and accurate
scalars being formed out of aggregates. At the very least, Clang now
generates perfect code for this high-level test case using
std::complex<float>:

  #include <complex>

  void g1(std::complex<float> &x, float a, float b) {
    x += std::complex<float>(a, b);
  }
  void g2(std::complex<float> &x, float a, float b) {
    x -= std::complex<float>(a, b);
  }

  void foo(const std::complex<float> &x, float a, float b,
           std::complex<float> &x1, std::complex<float> &x2) {
    std::complex<float> l1 = x;
    g1(l1, a, b);
    std::complex<float> l2 = x;
    g2(l2, a, b);
    x1 = l1;
    x2 = l2;
  }

This code isn't just hypothetical either. It was reduced out of the hot
inner loops of essentially every part of the Eigen math library when
using std::complex<float>. Those loops would consistently and
pervasively hop between the floating point unit and the integer unit due
to bit math extraction and insertion of floating point values that were
"stored" in a 64-bit integer register around the loop backedge.

So far, this change has passed a bootstrap and I have done some other
testing and so far, no issues. That doesn't mean there won't be though,
so I'll be prepared to help with any fallout. If you performance swings
in particular, please let me know. I'm very curious what all the impact
of this change will be. Stay tuned for the follow-up to also split more
integer loads and stores.

llvm-svn: 225061
2015-01-01 11:54:38 +00:00
David Majnemer c0a313b57c SROA: The alloca type isn't a candidate promotion type for vectors
The alloca's type is irrelevant, only those types which are used in a
load or store of the exact size of the slice should be considered.

This manifested as an assertion failure when we compared the various
types: we had a size mismatch.

This fixes PR21480.

llvm-svn: 222499
2014-11-21 02:34:55 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 2dc9682e59 [SROA] Change how SROA does vector-based promotion of allocas to handle
cases where the alloca type, the load types, and the store types used
all disagree.

Previously, the only way that vector-based promotion occured was if the
alloca type was a vector type. This was one of the *very* few remaining
uses of the alloca's type to guide SROA/mem2reg left in LLVM. It turns
out it was a bad idea.

The alloca type can change very easily based on the mixture of types
loaded and stored to that alloca. We shouldn't be relying on it as
a signal for very much. Instead, the source of truth should be loads and
stores. We should canonicalize the loads and stores as much as possible
and then rely on them exclusively in SROA.

When looking and loads and stores, we may find many different candidate
vector types. This change will let SROA try all of them to find a vector
type which is a viable way to promote the entire alloca to a vector
register.

With this change, it becomes possible to do better canonicalization and
optimization of loads and stores without breaking SROA in random ways,
and that should allow fixing a core source of performance loss in hot
numerical loops such as those in Eigen.

llvm-svn: 220116
2014-10-18 00:44:02 +00:00
David Majnemer d4cffcf073 SROA: Don't insert instructions before a PHI
SROA may decide that it needs to insert a bitcast and would set it's
insertion point before a PHI.  This will create an invalid module
right quick.

Instead, choose the first insertion point in the basic block that holds
our PHI.

This fixes PR20822.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5141

llvm-svn: 216891
2014-09-01 21:20:14 +00:00
Yunzhong Gao 300bdb35d4 Add a test case for SROA where the store size is bigger than slice size. The
test case was fixed in r216248.

llvm-svn: 216303
2014-08-22 23:27:04 +00:00
Jingyue Wu ec33fa9aca [SROA] Fold a PHI node if all its incoming values are the same
Summary:
Fixes PR20425.

During slice building, if all of the incoming values of a PHI node are the same, replace the PHI node with the common value. This simplification makes alloca's used by PHI nodes easier to promote.

Test Plan: Added three more tests in phi-and-select.ll

Reviewers: nlewycky, eliben, meheff, chandlerc

Reviewed By: chandlerc

Subscribers: zinovy.nis, hfinkel, baldrick, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4659

llvm-svn: 216299
2014-08-22 22:45:57 +00:00
Reid Kleckner c36f48f08a SROA: Handle a case of store size being smaller than allocation size
In this case, we are creating an x86_fp80 slice for a union from C where
the padding bytes may contain real data. An x86_fp80 alloca is 16 bytes,
and that's just fine. We can't, however, use regular loads and stores to
access the slice, because the store size is only 10 bytes / 80 bits.
Instead, use memcpy and memset.

Fixes PR18726.

Reviewed By: chandlerc

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5012

llvm-svn: 216248
2014-08-22 00:09:56 +00:00
Owen Anderson 6c19ab1b5d Fix a case in SROA where lifetime intrinsics could inhibit alloca promotion. In
this case, the code path dealing with vector promotion was missing the explicit
checks for lifetime intrinsics that were present on the corresponding integer
promotion path.

llvm-svn: 215148
2014-08-07 21:07:35 +00:00
Duncan P. N. Exon Smith 73686d305a SROA: Only split loads on byte boundaries
r199771 accidently broke the logic that makes sure that SROA only splits
load on byte boundaries.  If such a split happens, some bits get lost
when reassembling loads of wider types, causing data corruption.

Move the width check up to reject such splits early, avoiding the
corruption.  Fixes PR19250.

Patch by: Björn Steinbrink <bsteinbr@gmail.com>

llvm-svn: 211082
2014-06-17 00:19:35 +00:00
Chandler Carruth dfb2efd0da [SROA] Use the correct index integer size in GEPs through non-default
address spaces.

This isn't really a correctness issue (the values are truncated) but its
much cleaner.

Patch by Matt Arsenault!

llvm-svn: 202252
2014-02-26 10:08:16 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 286d87ed38 [SROA] Teach SROA how to handle pointers from address spaces other than
the default.

Based on the patch by Matt Arsenault, D1764!

I switched one place to use the more direct pointer type to compute the
desired address space, and I reworked the memcpy rewriting section to
reflect significant refactorings that this patch helped inspire.

Thanks to several of the folks who helped review and improve the patch
as well.

llvm-svn: 202247
2014-02-26 08:25:02 +00:00
Chandler Carruth aa72b93ae7 [SROA] Split the alignment computation complete for the memcpy rewriting
to work independently for the slice side and the other side.

This allows us to only compute the minimum of the two when we actually
rewrite to a memcpy that needs to take the minimum, and preserve higher
alignment for one side or the other when rewriting to loads and stores.

This fix was inspired by seeing the result of some refactoring that
makes addrspace handling better.

llvm-svn: 202242
2014-02-26 07:29:54 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 6aedc106ba [SROA] Fix PR18615 with some long overdue simplifications to the bounds
checking in SROA.

The primary change is to just rely on uge for checking that the offset
is within the allocation size. This removes the explicit checks against
isNegative which were terribly error prone (including the reversed logic
that led to PR18615) and prevented us from supporting stack allocations
larger than half the address space.... Ok, so maybe the latter isn't
*common* but it's a silly restriction to have.

Also, we used to try to support a PHI node which loaded from before the
start of the allocation if any of the loaded bytes were within the
allocation. This doesn't make any sense, we have never really supported
loading or storing *before* the allocation starts. The simplified logic
just doesn't care.

We continue to allow loading past the end of the allocation in part to
support cases where there is a PHI and some loads are larger than others
and the larger ones reach past the end of the allocation. We could solve
this a different and more conservative way, but I'm still somewhat
paranoid about this.

llvm-svn: 202224
2014-02-26 03:14:14 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 3bf18ed5e3 [SROA] Fix another instability in SROA with respect to the slice
ordering.

The fundamental problem that we're hitting here is that the use-def
chain ordering is *itself* not a stable thing to be relying on in the
rewriting for SROA. Further, we use a non-stable sort over the slices to
arrange them based on the section of the alloca they're operating on.
With a debugging STL implementation (or different implementations in
stage2 and stage3) this can cause stage2 != stage3.

The specific aspect of this problem fixed in this commit deals with the
rewriting and load-speculation around PHIs and Selects. This, like many
other aspects of the use-rewriting in SROA, is really part of the
"strong SSA-formation" that is doen by SROA where it works very hard to
canonicalize loads and stores in *just* the right way to satisfy the
needs of mem2reg[1]. When we have a select (or a PHI) with 2 uses of the
same alloca, we test that loads downstream of the select are
speculatable around it twice. If only one of the operands to the select
needs to be rewritten, then if we get lucky we rewrite that one first
and the select is immediately speculatable. This can cause the order of
operand visitation, and thus the order of slices to be rewritten, to
change an alloca from promotable to non-promotable and vice versa.

The fix is to defer all of the speculation until *after* the rewrite
phase is done. Once we've rewritten everything, we can accurately test
for whether speculation will work (once, instead of twice!) and the
order ceases to matter.

This also happens to simplify the other subtlety of speculation -- we
need to *not* speculate anything unless the result of speculating will
make the alloca fully promotable by mem2reg. I had a previous attempt at
simplifying this, but it was still pretty horrible.

There is actually already a *really* nice test case for this in
basictest.ll, but on multiple STL implementations and inputs, we just
got "lucky". Fortunately, the test case is very small and we can
essentially build it in exactly the opposite way to get reasonable
coverage in both directions even from normal STL implementations.

llvm-svn: 202092
2014-02-25 00:07:09 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 1bf38c6a71 Fix a really nasty SROA bug with how we handled out-of-bounds memcpy
intrinsics.

Reported on the list by Evan with a couple of attempts to fix, but it
took a while to dig down to the root cause. There are two overlapping
bugs here, both centering around the circumstance of discovering
a memcpy operand which is known to be completely outside the bounds of
the alloca.

First, we need to kill the *other* side of the memcpy if it was added to
this alloca. Otherwise we'll factor it into our slicing and try to
rewrite it even though we know for a fact that it is dead. This is made
more tricky because we can visit the sides in either order. So we have
to both kill the other side and skip instructions marked as dead. The
latter really should be goodness in every case, but here is a matter of
correctness.

Second, we need to actually remove the *uses* of the alloca by the
memcpy when queuing it for later deletion. Otherwise it may still be
using the alloca when we go to promote it (if the rewrite re-uses the
existing alloca instruction). Do this by factoring out the
use-clobbering used when for nixing a Phi argument and re-using it
across the operands of a to-be-deleted instruction.

llvm-svn: 199590
2014-01-19 12:16:54 +00:00
Chandler Carruth a126200665 Fix an issue where SROA computed different results based on the relative
order of slices of the alloca which have exactly the same size and other
properties. This was found by a perniciously unstable sort
implementation used to flush out buggy uses of the algorithm.

The fundamental idea is that findCommonType should return the best
common type it can find across all of the slices in the range. There
were two bugs here previously:

1) We would accept an integer type smaller than a byte-width multiple,
   and if there were different bit-width integer types, we would accept
   the first one. This caused an actual failure in the testcase updated
   here when the sort order changed.
2) If we found a bad combination of types or a non-load, non-store use
   before an integer typed load or store we would bail, but if we found
   the integere typed load or store, we would use it. The correct
   behavior is to always use an integer typed operation which covers the
   partition if one exists.

While a clever debugging sort algorithm found problem #1 in our existing
test cases, I have no useful test case ideas for #2. I spotted in by
inspection when looking at this code.

llvm-svn: 195118
2013-11-19 09:03:18 +00:00
Benjamin Kramer 90901a35ce SROA: Handle casts involving vectors of pointers and integer scalars.
SROA wants to convert any types of equivalent widths but it's not possible to
convert vectors of pointers to an integer scalar with a single cast. As a
workaround we add a bitcast to the corresponding int ptr type first. This type
of cast used to be an edge case but has become common with SLP vectorization.
Fixes PR17271.

llvm-svn: 191143
2013-09-21 20:36:04 +00:00
Daniel Dunbar 9efbedfd35 [tests] Cleanup initialization of test suffixes.
- Instead of setting the suffixes in a bunch of places, just set one master
   list in the top-level config. We now only modify the suffix list in a few
   suites that have one particular unique suffix (.ml, .mc, .yaml, .td, .py).

 - Aside from removing the need for a bunch of lit.local.cfg files, this enables
   4 tests that were inadvertently being skipped (one in
   Transforms/BranchFolding, a .s file each in DebugInfo/AArch64 and
   CodeGen/PowerPC, and one in CodeGen/SI which is now failing and has been
   XFAILED).

 - This commit also fixes a bunch of config files to use config.root instead of
   older copy-pasted code.

llvm-svn: 188513
2013-08-16 00:37:11 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 58e25d3905 Fix a problem I introduced in r187029 where we would over-eagerly
schedule an alloca for another iteration in SROA. This only showed up
with a mixture of promotable and unpromotable selects and phis. Added
a test case for this.

llvm-svn: 187031
2013-07-24 12:12:17 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 83ea195d40 Fix PR16687 where we were incorrectly promoting an alloca that had
pending speculation for a phi node. The problem here is that we were
using growth of the specluation set as an indicator of whether
speculation would occur, and if the phi node is already in the set we
don't see it grow. This is a symptom of the fact that this signal is
a total hack.

Unfortunately, I couldn't really come up with a non-hacky way of
signaling that promotion remains valid *after* speculation occurs, such
that we only speculate when all else looks good for promotion. In the
end, I went with at least a much more explicit approach of doing the
work of queuing inside the phi and select processing and setting
a preposterously named flag to convey that we're in the special state of
requiring speculating before promotion.

Thanks to Richard Trieu and Nick Lewycky for the excellent work reducing
a testcase for this from a pretty giant, nasty assert in a big
application. =] The testcase was excellent.

llvm-svn: 187029
2013-07-24 09:47:28 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 1ed848d55c Fix another assert failure very similar to PR16651's test case. This
test case came from Benjamin and found the parallel bug in the vector
promotion code.

llvm-svn: 186666
2013-07-19 10:57:32 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 5955c9e4da Fix PR16651, an assert introduced in my recent re-work of the innards of
SROA.

The crux of the issue is that now we track uses of a partition of the
alloca in two places: the iterators over the partitioning uses and the
previously collected split uses vector. We weren't accounting for the
fact that the split uses might invalidate integer widening in ways other
than due to their width (in this case due to being volatile).

Further reduced testcase added to the tests.

llvm-svn: 186655
2013-07-19 07:12:23 +00:00
Chandler Carruth f0546402af Reapply r186316 with a fix for one bug where the code could walk off the
end of a vector. This was found with ASan. I've had one other report of
a crasher, but thus far been unable to reproduce the crash. It may well
be fixed with this version, and if not I'd like to get more information
from the build bots about what is happening.

See r186316 for the full commit log for the new implementation of the
SROA algorithm.

llvm-svn: 186565
2013-07-18 07:15:00 +00:00
Chandler Carruth e3899f2c2c Revert r186316 while I track down an ASan failure and an assert from
a bot.

This reverts the commit which introduced a new implementation of the
fancy SROA pass designed to reduce its overhead. I'll skip the huge
commit log here, refer to r186316 if you're looking for how this all
works and why it works that way.

llvm-svn: 186332
2013-07-15 17:36:21 +00:00
Chandler Carruth e74ff4c643 Reimplement SROA yet again. Same fundamental principle, but a totally
different core implementation strategy.

Previously, SROA would build a relatively elaborate partitioning of an
alloca, associate uses with each partition, and then rewrite the uses of
each partition in an attempt to break apart the alloca into chunks that
could be promoted. This was very wasteful in terms of memory and compile
time because regardless of how complex the alloca or how much we're able
to do in breaking it up, all of the datastructure work to analyze the
partitioning was done up front.

The new implementation attempts to form partitions of the alloca lazily
and on the fly, rewriting the uses that make up that partition as it
goes. This has a few significant effects:
1) Much simpler data structures are used throughout.
2) No more double walk of the recursive use graph of the alloca, only
   walk it once.
3) No more complex algorithms for associating a particular use with
   a particular partition.
4) PHI and Select speculation is simplified and happens lazily.
5) More precise information is available about a specific use of the
   alloca, removing the need for some side datastructures.

Ultimately, I think this is a much better implementation. It removes
about 300 lines of code, but arguably removes more like 500 considering
that some code grew in the process of being factored apart and cleaned
up for this all to work.

I've re-used as much of the old implementation as possible, which
includes the lion's share of code in the form of the rewriting logic.
The interesting new logic centers around how the uses of a partition are
sorted, and split into actual partitions.

Each instruction using a pointer derived from the alloca gets
a 'Partition' entry. This name is totally wrong, but I'll do a rename in
a follow-up commit as there is already enough churn here. The entry
describes the offset range accessed and the nature of the access. Once
we have all of these entries we sort them in a very specific way:
increasing order of begin offset, followed by whether they are
splittable uses (memcpy, etc), followed by the end offset or whatever.
Sorting by splittability is important as it simplifies the collection of
uses into a partition.

Once we have these uses sorted, we walk from the beginning to the end
building up a range of uses that form a partition of the alloca.
Overlapping unsplittable uses are merged into a single partition while
splittable uses are broken apart and carried from one partition to the
next. A partition is also introduced to bridge splittable uses between
the unsplittable regions when necessary.

I've looked at the performance PRs fairly closely. PR15471 no longer
will even load (the module is invalid). Not sure what is up there.
PR15412 improves by between 5% and 10%, however it is nearly impossible
to know what is holding it up as SROA (the entire pass) takes less time
than reading the IR for that test case. The analysis takes the same time
as running mem2reg on the final allocas. I suspect (without much
evidence) that the new implementation will scale much better however,
and it is just the small nature of the test cases that makes the changes
small and noisy. Either way, it is still simpler and cleaner I think.

llvm-svn: 186316
2013-07-15 10:30:19 +00:00
Stephen Lin c1c7a1309c Update Transforms tests to use CHECK-LABEL for easier debugging. No functionality change.
This update was done with the following bash script:

  find test/Transforms -name "*.ll" | \
  while read NAME; do
    echo "$NAME"
    if ! grep -q "^; *RUN: *llc" $NAME; then
      TEMP=`mktemp -t temp`
      cp $NAME $TEMP
      sed -n "s/^define [^@]*@\([A-Za-z0-9_]*\)(.*$/\1/p" < $NAME | \
      while read FUNC; do
        sed -i '' "s/;\(.*\)\([A-Za-z0-9_]*\):\( *\)@$FUNC\([( ]*\)\$/;\1\2-LABEL:\3@$FUNC(/g" $TEMP
      done
      mv $TEMP $NAME
    fi
  done

llvm-svn: 186268
2013-07-14 01:42:54 +00:00
Nadav Rotem 1e211913b5 SROA: Generate selects instead of shuffles when blending values because this is the cannonical form.
Shuffles are more difficult to lower and we usually don't touch them, while we do optimize selects more often.

llvm-svn: 180875
2013-05-01 19:53:30 +00:00
Benjamin Kramer 0212dc27ed SROA: Don't crash on a select with two identical operands.
This is an edge case that can happen if we modify a chain of multiple selects.
Update all operands in that case and remove the assert. PR15805.

llvm-svn: 179982
2013-04-21 17:48:39 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 0e8a52d18f Fix PR15674 (and PR15603): a SROA think-o.
The fix for PR14972 in r177055 introduced a real think-o in the *store*
side, likely because I was much more focused on the load side. While we
can arbitrarily widen (or narrow) a loaded value, we can't arbitrarily
widen a value to be stored, as that changes the width of memory access!
Lock down the code path in the store rewriting which would do this to
only handle the intended circumstance.

All of the existing tests continue to pass, and I've added a test from
the PR.

llvm-svn: 178974
2013-04-07 11:47:54 +00:00
Chandler Carruth a1c54bbe34 PR14972: SROA vs. GVN exposed a really bad bug in SROA.
The fundamental problem is that SROA didn't allow for overly wide loads
where the bits past the end of the alloca were masked away and the load
was sufficiently aligned to ensure there is no risk of page fault, or
other trapping behavior. With such widened loads, SROA would delete the
load entirely rather than clamping it to the size of the alloca in order
to allow mem2reg to fire. This was exposed by a test case that neatly
arranged for GVN to run first, widening certain loads, followed by an
inline step, and then SROA which miscompiles the code. However, I see no
reason why this hasn't been plaguing us in other contexts. It seems
deeply broken.

Diagnosing all of the above took all of 10 minutes of debugging. The
really annoying aspect is that fixing this completely breaks the pass.
;] There was an implicit reliance on the fact that no loads or stores
extended past the alloca once we decided to rewrite them in the final
stage of SROA. This was used to encode information about whether the
loads and stores had been split across multiple partitions of the
original alloca. That required threading explicit tracking of whether
a *use* of a partition is split across multiple partitions.

Once that was done, another problem arose: we allowed splitting of
integer loads and stores iff they were loads and stores to the entire
alloca. This is a really arbitrary limitation, and splitting at least
some integer loads and stores is crucial to maximize promotion
opportunities. My first attempt was to start removing the restriction
entirely, but currently that does Very Bad Things by causing *many*
common alloca patterns to be fully decomposed into i8 operations and
lots of or-ing together to produce larger integers on demand. The code
bloat is terrifying. That is still the right end-goal, but substantial
work must be done to either merge partitions or ensure that small i8
values are eagerly merged in some other pass. Sadly, figuring all this
out took essentially all the time and effort here.

So the end result is that we allow splitting only when the load or store
at least covers the alloca. That ensures widened loads and stores don't
hurt SROA, and that we don't rampantly decompose operations more than we
have previously.

All of this was already fairly well tested, and so I've just updated the
tests to cover the wide load behavior. I can add a test that crafts the
pass ordering magic which caused the original PR, but that seems really
brittle and to provide little benefit. The fundamental problem is that
widened loads should Just Work.

llvm-svn: 177055
2013-03-14 11:32:24 +00:00
Nadav Rotem cb23342876 Rename the test so that we can add additional vectors-of-pointers tests
into the same file in the future.

llvm-svn: 170414
2012-12-18 05:50:54 +00:00
Nadav Rotem a5024fc3e1 SROA: Replace calls to getScalarSizeInBits to DataLayout's API because
getScalarSizeInBits could not handle vectors of pointers.

llvm-svn: 170412
2012-12-18 05:23:31 +00:00
Chandler Carruth e3f4119b06 Fix another SROA crasher, PR14601.
This was a silly oversight, we weren't pruning allocas which were used
by variable-length memory intrinsics from the set that could be widened
and promoted as integers. Fix that.

llvm-svn: 170353
2012-12-17 18:48:07 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 21eb4e96c2 Teach the rewriting of memcpy calls to support subvector copies.
This also cleans up a bit of the memcpy call rewriting by sinking some
irrelevant code further down and making the call-emitting code a bit
more concrete.

Previously, memcpy of a subvector would actually miscompile (!!!) the
copy into a single vector element copy. I have no idea how this ever
worked. =/ This is the memcpy half of PR14478 which we probably weren't
noticing previously because it didn't actually assert.

The rewrite relies on the newly refactored insert- and extractVector
functions to do the heavy lifting, and those are the same as used for
loads and stores which makes the test coverage a bit more meaningful
here.

llvm-svn: 170338
2012-12-17 14:51:24 +00:00
Chandler Carruth cacda256a1 Fix a secondary bug I introduced while fixing the first part of PR14478.
The first half of fixing this bug was actually in r170328, but was
entirely coincidental. It did however get me to realize the nature of
the bug, and adapt the test case to test more interesting behavior. In
turn, that uncovered the rest of the bug which I've fixed here.

This should fix two new asserts that showed up in the vectorize nightly
tester.

llvm-svn: 170333
2012-12-17 14:03:01 +00:00
Chandler Carruth ccca504f3a Fix the first part of PR14478: memset now works.
PR14478 highlights a serious problem in SROA that simply wasn't being
exercised due to a lack of vector input code mixed with C-library
function calls. Part of SROA was written carefully to handle subvector
accesses via memset and memcpy, but the rewriter never grew support for
this. Fixing it required refactoring the subvector access code in other
parts of SROA so it could be shared, and then fixing the splat formation
logic and using subvector insertion (this patch).

The PR isn't quite fixed yet, as memcpy is still broken in the same way.
I'm starting on that series of patches now.

Hopefully this will be enough to bring the bullet benchmark back to life
with the bb-vectorizer enabled, but that may require fixing memcpy as
well.

llvm-svn: 170301
2012-12-17 04:07:37 +00:00
Chandler Carruth c50394fcfa Add a corollary test for PR14572. We got this code path correct already.
llvm-svn: 170271
2012-12-15 09:31:54 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 067edd342f Relax an overly aggressive assert to fix PR14572.
The alloca width is based on the alloc size, not the type size.

llvm-svn: 170270
2012-12-15 09:26:06 +00:00
Jakub Staszak aee9cca331 Fix typo in test-case.
llvm-svn: 170015
2012-12-12 20:29:06 +00:00
Jakub Staszak 67bf76ebbc Fix typo.
llvm-svn: 170006
2012-12-12 19:47:04 +00:00
Chandler Carruth e45f4658a3 Fix PR14548: SROA was crashing on a mixture of i1 and i8 loads and stores.
When SROA was evaluating a mixture of i1 and i8 loads and stores, in
just a particular case, it would tickle a latent bug where we compared
bits to bytes rather than bits to bits. As a consequence of the latent
bug, we would allow integers through which were not byte-size multiples,
a situation the later rewriting code was never intended to handle.

In release builds this could trigger all manner of oddities, but the
reported issue in PR14548 was forming invalid bitcast instructions.

The only downside of this fix is that it makes it more clear that SROA
in its current form is not capable of handling mixed i1 and i8 loads and
stores. Sometimes with the previous code this would work by luck, but
usually it would crash, so I'm not terribly worried. I'll watch the LNT
numbers just to be sure.

llvm-svn: 169719
2012-12-10 00:54:45 +00:00
Dmitri Gribenko 1c704355cf Fix typos in CHECK lines.
Patch by Alexander Zinenko.

llvm-svn: 169547
2012-12-06 21:24:47 +00:00
Benjamin Kramer 47534c7440 SROA: Avoid struct and array types early to avoid creating an overly large integer type.
Fixes PR14465.

Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D148

llvm-svn: 169084
2012-12-01 11:53:32 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 845b73c06f PR14055: Implement support for sub-vector operations in SROA.
Now if we can transform an alloca into a single vector value, but it has
subvector, non-element accesses, we form the appropriate shufflevectors
to allow SROA to proceed. This fixes PR14055 which pointed out a very
common pattern that SROA couldn't handle -- mixed vec3 and vec4
operations on a single alloca.

llvm-svn: 168418
2012-11-21 08:16:30 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 3e994a26e2 Fix PR14132 and handle OOB loads speculated throuh PHI nodes.
The issue is that we may end up with newly OOB loads when speculating
a load into the predecessors of a PHI node, and this confuses the new
integer splitting logic in some cases, triggering an assertion failure.
In fact, the branch in question must be dead code as it loads from
a too-narrow alloca. Add code to handle this gracefully and leave the
requisite FIXMEs for both optimizing more aggressively and doing more to
aid sanitizing invalid code which triggers these patterns.

llvm-svn: 168361
2012-11-20 10:02:19 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 18db795b05 Rework the rewriting of loads and stores for vector and integer allocas
to properly handle the combinations of these with split integer loads
and stores. This essentially replaces Evan's r168227 by refactoring the
code in a different way, and trynig to mirror that refactoring in both
the load and store sides of the rewriting.

Generally speaking there was some really problematic duplicated code
here that led to poorly founded assumptions and then subtle bugs. Now
much of the code actually flows through and follows a more consistent
style and logical path. There is still a tiny bit of duplication on the
store side of things, but it is much less bad.

This also changes the logic to never re-use a load or store instruction
as that was simply too error prone in practice.

I've added a few tests (one a reduction of the one in Evan's original
patch, which happened to be the same as the report in PR14349). I'm
going to look at adding a few more tests for things I found and fixed in
passing (such as the volatile tests in the vectorizable predicate).

This patch has survived bootstrap, and modulo one bugfix survived
Duncan's test suite, but let me know if anything else explodes.

llvm-svn: 168346
2012-11-20 01:12:50 +00:00
Evan Cheng f1b6177b62 Teach SROA rewriteVectorizedStoreInst to handle cases when the loaded value is narrower than the stored value. rdar://12713675
llvm-svn: 168227
2012-11-17 00:05:06 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 1296b59522 Fix PR14212: For some strange reason I treated vectors differently from
integers in that the code to handle split alloca-wide integer loads or
stores doesn't come first. It should, for the same reasons as with
integers, and the PR attests to that. Also had to fix a busted assert in
that this test case also covers.

llvm-svn: 167051
2012-10-30 20:52:40 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 58d0556765 Teach SROA how to split whole-alloca integer loads and stores into
smaller integer loads and stores.

The high-level motivation is that the frontend sometimes generates
a single whole-alloca integer load or store during ABI lowering of
splittable allocas. We need to be able to break this apart in order to
see the underlying elements and properly promote them to SSA values. The
hope is that this fixes some performance regressions on x86-32 with the
new SROA pass.

Unfortunately, this causes quite a bit of churn in the test cases, and
bloats some IR that comes out. When we see an alloca that consists soley
of bits and bytes being extracted and re-inserted, we now do some
splitting first, before building widened integer "bucket of bits"
representations. These are always well folded by instcombine however, so
this shouldn't actually result in missed opportunities.

If this splitting of all-integer allocas does cause problems (perhaps
due to smaller SSA values going into the RA), we could potentially go to
some extreme measures to only do this integer splitting trick when there
are non-integer component accesses of an alloca, but discovering this is
quite expensive: it adds yet another complete walk of the recursive use
tree of the alloca.

Either way, I will be watching build bots and LNT bots to see what
fallout there is here. If anyone gets x86-32 numbers before & after this
change, I would be very interested.

llvm-svn: 166662
2012-10-25 04:37:07 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 6fab42aa39 This just in, it is a *bad idea* to use 'udiv' on an offset of
a pointer. A very bad idea. Let's not do that. Fixes PR14105.

Note that this wasn't *that* glaring of an oversight. Originally, these
routines were only called on offsets within an alloca, which are
intrinsically positive. But over the evolution of the pass, they ended
up being called for arbitrary offsets, and things went downhill...

llvm-svn: 166095
2012-10-17 09:23:48 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 49c8eea3c0 Update the memcpy rewriting to fully support widened int rewriting. This
includes extracting ints for copying elsewhere and inserting ints when
copying into the alloca. This should fix the CanSROA assertion coming
out of Clang's regression test suite.

llvm-svn: 165931
2012-10-15 10:24:43 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 9d966a2002 Follow-up fix to r165928: handle memset rewriting for widened integers,
and generally clean up the memset handling. It had rotted a bit as the
other rewriting logic got polished more.

llvm-svn: 165930
2012-10-15 10:24:40 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 435c4e0792 First major step toward addressing PR14059. This teaches SROA to handle
cases where we have partial integer loads and stores to an otherwise
promotable alloca to widen[1] those loads and stores to cover the entire
alloca and bitcast them into the appropriate type such that promotion
can proceed.

These partial loads and stores stem from an annoying confluence of ARM's
calling convention and ABI lowering and the FCA pre-splitting which
takes place in SROA. Clang lowers a { double, double } in-register
function argument as a [4 x i32] function argument to ensure it is
placed into integer 32-bit registers (a really unnerving implicit
contract between Clang and the ARM backend I would add). This results in
a FCA load of [4 x i32]* from the { double, double } alloca, and SROA
decomposes this into a sequence of i32 loads and stores. Inlining
proceeds, code gets folded, but at the end of the day, we still have i32
stores to the low and high halves of a double alloca. Widening these to
be i64 operations, and bitcasting them to double prior to loading or
storing allows promotion to proceed for these allocas.

I looked quite a bit changing the IR which Clang produces for this case
to be more friendly, but small changes seem unlikely to help. I think
the best representation we could use currently would be to pass 4 i32
arguments thereby avoiding any FCAs, but that would still require this
fix. It seems like it might eventually be nice to somehow encode the ABI
register selection choices outside of the parameter type system so that
the parameter can be a { double, double }, but the CC register
annotations indicate that this should be passed via 4 integer registers.

This patch does not address the second problem in PR14059, which is the
reverse: when a struct alloca is loaded as a *larger* single integer.

This patch also does not address some of the code quality issues with
the FCA-splitting. Those don't actually impede any optimizations really,
but they're on my list to clean up.

[1]: Pedantic footnote: for those concerned about memory model issues
here, this is safe. For the alloca to be promotable, it cannot escape or
have any use of its address that could allow these loads or stores to be
racing. Thus, widening is always safe.

llvm-svn: 165928
2012-10-15 08:40:30 +00:00
Chandler Carruth ba9319925e Teach SROA to cope with wrapper aggregates. These show up a lot in ABI
type coercion code, especially when targetting ARM. Things like [1
x i32] instead of i32 are very common there.

The goal of this logic is to ensure that when we are picking an alloca
type, we look through such wrapper aggregates and across any zero-length
aggregate elements to find the simplest type possible to form a type
partition.

This logic should (generally speaking) rarely fire. It only ends up
kicking in when an alloca is accessed using two different types (for
instance, i32 and float), and the underlying alloca type has wrapper
aggregates around it. I noticed a significant amount of this occurring
looking at stepanov_abstraction generated code for arm, and suspect it
happens elsewhere as well.

Note that this doesn't yet address truly heinous IR productions such as
PR14059 is concerning. Those result in mismatched *sizes* of types in
addition to mismatched access and alloca types.

llvm-svn: 165870
2012-10-13 10:49:33 +00:00
Duncan Sands 244e3ba5f1 Add the testcase from pr13254 (the old scalarreply pass handles this wrong;
the new sroa pass handles it right).

llvm-svn: 165644
2012-10-10 18:41:19 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 503eb2bb49 Fix PR14034, an infloop / heap corruption / crash bug in the new SROA.
Thanks to Benjamin for the raw test case. This one took about 50 times
longer to reduce than to fix. =/

llvm-svn: 165476
2012-10-09 01:58:35 +00:00
Chandler Carruth e5b7a2ccd2 Teach the new SROA a new trick. Now we zap any memcpy or memmoves which
are in fact identity operations. We detect these and kill their
partitions so that even splitting is unaffected by them. This is
particularly important because Clang relies on emitting identity memcpy
operations for struct copies, and these fold away to constants very
often after inlining.

Fixes the last big performance FIXME I have on my plate.

llvm-svn: 165285
2012-10-05 01:29:09 +00:00
Chandler Carruth ac8317fd36 Fix PR13969, a mini-phase-ordering issue with the new SROA pass.
Currently, we re-visit allocas when something changes about the way they
might be *split* to allow better scalarization to take place. However,
we weren't handling the case when the *promotion* is what would change
the behavior of SROA. When an address derived from an alloca is stored
into another alloca, we consider the first to have escaped. If the
second is ever promoted to an SSA value, we will suddenly be able to run
the SROA pass on the first alloca.

This patch adds explicit support for this form if iteration. When we
detect a store of a pointer derived from an alloca, we flag the
underlying alloca for reprocessing after promotion. The logic works hard
to only do this when there is definitely going to be promotion and it
might remove impediments to the analysis of the alloca.

Thanks to Nick for the great test case and Benjamin for some sanity
check review.

llvm-svn: 165223
2012-10-04 12:33:50 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 43c8b46deb Teach the integer-promotion rewrite strategy to be endianness aware.
Sorry for this being broken so long. =/

As part of this, switch all of the existing tests to be Little Endian,
which is the behavior I was asserting in them anyways! Add in a new
big-endian test that checks the interesting behavior there.

Another part of this is to tighten the rules abotu when we perform the
full-integer promotion. This logic now rejects cases where there fully
promoted integer is a non-multiple-of-8 bitwidth or cases where the
loads or stores touch bits which are in the allocated space of the
alloca but are not loaded or stored when accessing the integer. Sadly,
these aren't really observable today as the rest of the pass will
already ensure the invariants hold. However, the latter situation is
likely to become a potential concern in the future.

Thanks to Benjamin and Duncan for early review of this patch. I'm still
looking into whether there are further endianness issues, please let me
know if anyone sees BE failures persisting past this.

llvm-svn: 165219
2012-10-04 10:39:28 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 08e5f49f90 Fix an issue where we failed to adjust the alignment constraint on
a memcpy to reflect that '0' has a different meaning when applied to
a load or store. Now we correctly use underaligned loads and stores for
the test case added.

llvm-svn: 165101
2012-10-03 08:26:28 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 4b2b38d398 Try to use a better set of abstractions for computing the alignment
necessary during rewriting. As part of this, fix a real think-o here
where we might have left off an alignment specification when the address
is in fact underaligned. I haven't come up with any way to trigger this,
as there is always some other factor that reduces the alignment, but it
certainly might have been an observable bug in some way I can't think
of. This also slightly changes the strategy for placing explicit
alignments on loads and stores to only do so when the alignment does not
match that required by the ABI. This causes a few redundant alignments
to go away from test cases.

I've also added a couple of tests that really push on the alignment that
we end up with on loads and stores. More to come here as I try to fix an
underlying bug I have conjectured and produced test cases for, although
it's not clear if this bug is the one currently hitting dragonegg's
gcc47 bootstrap.

llvm-svn: 165100
2012-10-03 08:14:02 +00:00
Chandler Carruth b09f0a3c75 Teach the new SROA to handle cases where an alloca that has already been
scheduled for processing on the worklist eventually gets deleted while
we are processing another alloca, fixing the original test case in
PR13990.

To facilitate this, add a remove_if helper to the SetVector abstraction.
It's not easy to use the standard abstractions for this because of the
specifics of SetVectors types and implementation.

Finally, a nice small test case is included. Thanks to Benjamin for the
fantastic reduced test case here! All I had to do was delete some empty
basic blocks!

llvm-svn: 165065
2012-10-02 22:46:45 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 9866b97f94 Fix more misspellings found by Duncan during review.
llvm-svn: 164940
2012-10-01 12:30:45 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 176ca71a82 Fix several issues with alignment. We weren't always accounting for type
alignment requirements of the new alloca. As one consequence which was
reported as a bug by Duncan, we overaligned memcpy calls to ranges of
allocas after they were rewritten to types with lower alignment
requirements. Other consquences are possible, but I don't have any test
cases for them.

llvm-svn: 164937
2012-10-01 12:16:54 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 54e8f0b4cf Refactor the PartitionUse structure to actually use the Use* instead of
a pair of instructions, one for the used pointer and the second for the
user. This simplifies the representation and also makes it more dense.

This was noticed because of the miscompile in PR13926. In that case, we
were running up against a fundamental "bad idea" in the speculation of
PHI and select instructions: the speculation and rewriting are
interleaved, which requires phi speculation to also perform load
rewriting! This is bad, and causes us to miss opportunities to do (for
example) vector rewriting only exposed after PHI speculation, etc etc.
It also, in the old system, required us to insert *new* load uses into
the current partition's use list, which would then be ignored during
rewriting because we had already extracted an end iterator for the use
list. The appending behavior (and much of the other oddities) stem from
the strange de-duplication strategy in the PartitionUse builder.
Amusingly, all this went without notice for so long because it could
only be triggered by having *different* GEPs into the same partition of
the same alloca, where both different GEPs were operands of a single
PHI, and where the GEP which was not encountered first also had multiple
uses within that same PHI node... Hence the insane steps required to
reproduce.

So, step one in fixing this fundamental bad idea is to make the
PartitionUse actually contain a Use*, and to make the builder do proper
deduplication instead of funky de-duplication. This is enough to remove
the appending behavior, and fix the miscompile in PR13926, but there is
more work to be done here. Subsequent commits will lift the speculation
into its own visitor. It'll be a useful step toward potentially
extracting all of the speculation logic into a generic utility
transform.

The existing PHI test case for repeated operands has been made more
extreme to catch even these issues. This test case, run through the old
pass, will exactly reproduce the miscompile from PR13926. ;] We were so
close here!

llvm-svn: 164925
2012-10-01 01:49:22 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 903790eff5 Fix a somewhat surprising miscompile where code relying on an ABI
alignment could lose it due to the alloca type moving down to a much
smaller alignment guarantee.

Now SROA will actively compute a proper alignment, factoring the target
data, any explicit alignment, and the offset within the struct. This
will in some cases lower the alignment requirements, but when we lower
them below those of the type, we drop the alignment entirely to give
freedom to the code generator to align it however is convenient.

Thanks to Duncan for the lovely test case that pinned this down. =]

llvm-svn: 164891
2012-09-29 10:41:21 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 3e4273dd0c When rewriting the pointer operand to a load or store which has
alignment guarantees attached, re-compute the alignment so that we
consider offsets which impact alignment.

llvm-svn: 164690
2012-09-26 10:45:28 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 871ba7249c Teach all of the loads, stores, memsets and memcpys created by the
rewriter in SROA to carry a proper alignment. This involves
interrogating various sources of alignment, etc. This is a more complete
and principled fix to PR13920 as well as related bugs pointed out by Eli
in review and by inspection in the area.

Also by inspection fix the integer and vector promotion paths to create
aligned loads and stores. I still need to work up test cases for
these... Sorry for the delay, they were found purely by inspection.

llvm-svn: 164689
2012-09-26 10:27:46 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 4bd8f66ed9 Revert the business end of r164636 and try again. I'll come in again. ;]
This should really, really fix PR13916. For real this time. The
underlying bug is... a bit more subtle than I had imagined.

The setup is a code pattern that leads to an @llvm.memcpy call with two
equal pointers to an alloca in the source and dest. Now, not any pattern
will do. The alloca needs to be formed just so, and both pointers should
be wrapped in different bitcasts etc. When this precise pattern hits,
a funny sequence of events transpires. First, we correctly detect the
potential for overlap, and correctly optimize the memcpy. The first
time. However, we do simplify the set of users of the alloca, and that
causes us to run the alloca back through the SROA pass in case there are
knock-on simplifications. At this point, a curious thing has happened.
If we happen to have an i8 alloca, we have direct i8 pointer values. So
we don't bother creating a cast, we rewrite the arguments to the memcpy
to dircetly refer to the alloca.

Now, in an unrelated area of the pass, we have clever logic which
ensures that when visiting each User of a particular pointer derived
from an alloca, we only visit that User once, and directly inspect all
of its operands which refer to that particular pointer value. However,
the mechanism used to detect memcpy's with the potential to overlap
relied upon getting visited once per *Use*, not once per *User*. This is
always true *unless* the same exact value is both source and dest. It
turns out that almost nothing actually produces that pattern though.

We can hand craft test cases that more directly test this behavior of
course, and those are included. Also, note that there is a significant
missed optimization here -- we prove in many cases that there is
a non-volatile memcpy call with identical source and dest addresses. We
shouldn't prevent splitting the alloca in that case, and in fact we
should just remove such memcpy calls eagerly. I'll address that in
a subsequent commit.

llvm-svn: 164669
2012-09-26 07:41:40 +00:00
Nick Lewycky d9f7910671 Don't drop the alignment on a memcpy intrinsic when producing a store. This is
only a missed optimization opportunity if the store is over-aligned, but a
miscompile if the store's new type has a higher natural alignment than the
memcpy did. Fixes PR13920!

llvm-svn: 164641
2012-09-25 22:46:21 +00:00
Nick Lewycky 9f19349846 Don't try to promote the same alloca twice. Fixes PR13916!
Chandler, it's not obvious that it's okay that this alloca gets into the list
twice to begin with. Please review and see whether this is the fix you really
want, but I wanted to get a fix checked in quickly.

llvm-svn: 164634
2012-09-25 21:15:50 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 8b907e8acb Fix a case where SROA did not correctly detect dead PHI or selects due
to chains or cycles between PHIs and/or selects. Also add a couple of
really nice test cases reduced from Kostya's reports in PR13905 and
PR13906. Both are fixed by this patch.

llvm-svn: 164596
2012-09-25 10:03:40 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 92924fd28f Address one of the original FIXMEs for the new SROA pass by implementing
integer promotion analogous to vector promotion. When there is an
integer alloca being accessed both as its integer type and as a narrower
integer type, promote the narrower access to "insert" and "extract" the
smaller integer from the larger one, and make the integer alloca
a candidate for promotion.

In the new formulation, we don't care about target legal integer or use
thresholds to control things. Instead, we only perform this promotion to
an integer type which the frontend has already emitted a load or store
for. This bounds the scope and prevents optimization passes from
coalescing larger and larger entities into a single integer.

llvm-svn: 164479
2012-09-24 00:34:20 +00:00
Chandler Carruth e7a1ba5e8b Switch to a signed representation for the dynamic offsets while walking
across the uses of the alloca. It's entirely possible for negative
numbers to come up here, and in some rare cases simply doing the 2's
complement arithmetic isn't the correct decision. Notably, we can't zext
the index of the GEP. The definition of GEP is that these offsets are
sign extended or truncated to the size of the pointer, and then wrapping
2's complement arithmetic used.

This patch fixes an issue that comes up with *no* input from the
buildbots or bootstrap afaict. The only place where it manifested,
disturbingly, is Clang's own regression test suite. A reduced and
targeted collection of tests are added to cope with this. Note that I've
tried to pin down the potential cases of overflow, but may have missed
some cases. I've tried to add a few cases to test this, but its hard
because LLVM has quite limited support for >64bit constructs.

llvm-svn: 164475
2012-09-23 11:43:14 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 225d4bdb07 Fix a case where the new SROA pass failed to zap dead operands to
selects with a constant condition. This resulted in the operands
remaining live through the SROA rewriter. Most of the time, this just
caused some dead allocas to persist and get zapped by later passes, but
in one case found by Joerg, it caused a crash when we tried to *promote*
the alloca despite it having this dead use. We already have the
mechanisms in place to handle this, just wire select up to them.

llvm-svn: 164427
2012-09-21 23:36:40 +00:00