Starting to update variable naming and types to match LLVM style. This will be an incremental process to minimize the chance of breakage as I work. Step one, rename member variables to LLVM CamelCase and use llvm's ADT. Much more to come.
llvm-svn: 230042
Before calling Function::getGC to test for enablement, we need to make sure there's actually a GC at all via Function::hasGC. Otherwise, we'd crash on functions without a GC. Thankfully, this only mattered if you manually scheduled the pass, but still, oops. :(
llvm-svn: 230040
When back merging the changes in 229945 I noticed that I forgot to mark the test cases with the appropriate GC. We want the rewriting to be off by default (even when manually added to the pass order), not on-by default. To keep the current test working, mark them as using the statepoint-example GC and whitelist that GC.
Longer term, we need a better selection mechanism here for both actual usage and testing. As I migrate more tests to the in tree version of this pass, I will probably need to update the enable/disable logic as well.
llvm-svn: 229954
This patch consists of a single pass whose only purpose is to visit previous inserted gc.statepoints which do not have gc.relocates inserted yet, and insert them. This can be used either immediately after IR generation to perform 'early safepoint insertion' or late in the pass order to perform 'late insertion'.
This patch is setting the stage for work to continue in tree. In particular, there are known naming and style violations in the current patch. I'll try to get those resolved over the next week or so. As I touch each area to make style changes, I need to make sure we have adequate testing in place. As part of the cleanup, I will be cleaning up a collection of test cases we have out of tree and submitting them upstream. The tests included in this change are very basic and mostly to provide examples of usage.
The pass has several main subproblems it needs to address:
- First, it has identify any live pointers. In the current code, the use of address spaces to distinguish pointers to GC managed objects is hard coded, but this will become parametrizable in the near future. Note that the current change doesn't actually contain a useful liveness analysis. It was seperated into a followup change as the code wasn't ready to be shared. Instead, the current implementation just considers any dominating def of appropriate pointer type to be live.
- Second, it has to identify base pointers for each live pointer. This is a fairly straight forward data flow algorithm.
- Third, the information in the previous steps is used to actually introduce rewrites. Rather than trying to do this by hand, we simply re-purpose the code behind Mem2Reg to do this for us.
llvm-svn: 229945
This is a function pass that runs the analysis on demand. The analysis
can be initiated by querying the loop access info via LAA::getInfo. It
either returns the cached info or runs the analysis.
Symbolic stride information continues to reside outside of this analysis
pass. We may move it inside later but it's not a priority for me right
now. The idea is that Loop Distribution won't support run-time stride
checking at least initially.
This means that when querying the analysis, symbolic stride information
can be provided optionally. Whether stride information is used can
invalidate the cache entry and rerun the analysis. Note that if the
loop does not have any symbolic stride, the entry should be preserved
across Loop Distribution and LV.
Since currently the only user of the pass is LV, I just check that the
symbolic stride information didn't change when using a cached result.
On the LV side, LoopVectorizationLegality requests the info object
corresponding to the loop from the analysis pass. A large chunk of the
diff is due to LAI becoming a pointer from a reference.
A test will be added as part of the -analyze patch.
Also tested that with AVX, we generate identical assembly output for the
testsuite (including the external testsuite) before and after.
This is part of the patchset that converts LoopAccessAnalysis into an
actual analysis pass.
llvm-svn: 229893
r229622: "[LoopAccesses] Make VectorizerParams global"
r229623: "[LoopAccesses] Stash the report from the analysis rather than emitting it"
r229624: "[LoopAccesses] Cache the result of canVectorizeMemory"
r229626: "[LoopAccesses] Create the analysis pass"
r229628: "[LoopAccesses] Change debug messages from LV to LAA"
r229630: "[LoopAccesses] Add canAnalyzeLoop"
r229631: "[LoopAccesses] Add missing const to APIs in VectorizationReport"
r229632: "[LoopAccesses] Split out LoopAccessReport from VectorizerReport"
r229633: "[LoopAccesses] Add -analyze support"
r229634: "[LoopAccesses] Change LAA:getInfo to return a constant reference"
r229638: "Analysis: fix buildbots"
llvm-svn: 229650
This is a function pass that runs the analysis on demand. The analysis
can be initiated by querying the loop access info via LAA::getInfo. It
either returns the cached info or runs the analysis.
Symbolic stride information continues to reside outside of this analysis
pass. We may move it inside later but it's not a priority for me right
now. The idea is that Loop Distribution won't support run-time stride
checking at least initially.
This means that when querying the analysis, symbolic stride information
can be provided optionally. Whether stride information is used can
invalidate the cache entry and rerun the analysis. Note that if the
loop does not have any symbolic stride, the entry should be preserved
across Loop Distribution and LV.
Since currently the only user of the pass is LV, I just check that the
symbolic stride information didn't change when using a cached result.
On the LV side, LoopVectorizationLegality requests the info object
corresponding to the loop from the analysis pass. A large chunk of the
diff is due to LAI becoming a pointer from a reference.
A test will be added as part of the -analyze patch.
Also tested that with AVX, we generate identical assembly output for the
testsuite (including the external testsuite) before and after.
This is part of the patchset that converts LoopAccessAnalysis into an
actual analysis pass.
llvm-svn: 229626
When visiting the initial list of "root" instructions (those which must always
be alive), for those that are integer-valued (such as invokes returning an
integer), we mark their bits as (initially) all dead (we might, obviously, find
uses of those bits later, but all bits are assumed dead until proven
otherwise). Don't do so, however, if we're already seen a use of those bits by
another root instruction (such as a store).
Fixes a miscompile of the sanitizer unit tests on x86_64.
Also, add a debug line for visiting the root instructions, and remove a debug
line which tried to print instructions being removed (printing dead
instructions is dangerous, and can sometimes crash).
llvm-svn: 229618
The problem was in store-sink barrier check.
Store sink barrier should be checked for ModRef (read-write) mode.
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=22613
llvm-svn: 229495
BDCE is a bit-tracking dead code elimination pass. It is based on ADCE (the
"aggressive DCE" pass), with the added capability to track dead bits of integer
valued instructions and remove those instructions when all of the bits are
dead.
Currently, it does not actually do this all-bits-dead removal, but rather
replaces the instruction's uses with a constant zero, and lets instcombine (and
the later run of ADCE) do the rest. Because we essentially get a run of ADCE
"for free" while tracking the dead bits, we also do what ADCE does and removes
actually-dead instructions as well (this includes instructions newly trivially
dead because all bits were dead, but not all such instructions can be removed).
The motivation for this is a case like:
int __attribute__((const)) foo(int i);
int bar(int x) {
x |= (4 & foo(5));
x |= (8 & foo(3));
x |= (16 & foo(2));
x |= (32 & foo(1));
x |= (64 & foo(0));
x |= (128& foo(4));
return x >> 4;
}
As it turns out, if you order the bit-field insertions so that all of the dead
ones come last, then instcombine will remove them. However, if you pick some
other order (such as the one above), the fact that some of the calls to foo()
are useless is not locally obvious, and we don't remove them (without this
pass).
I did a quick compile-time overhead check using sqlite from the test suite
(Release+Asserts). BDCE took ~0.4% of the compilation time (making it about
twice as expensive as ADCE).
I've not looked at why yet, but we eliminate instructions due to having
all-dead bits in:
External/SPEC/CFP2006/447.dealII/447.dealII
External/SPEC/CINT2006/400.perlbench/400.perlbench
External/SPEC/CINT2006/403.gcc/403.gcc
MultiSource/Applications/ClamAV/clamscan
MultiSource/Benchmarks/7zip/7zip-benchmark
llvm-svn: 229462
We won't find a root with index zero in any loop that we are able to reroll.
However, we may find one in a non-rerollable loop, so bail gracefully instead
of failing hard.
llvm-svn: 229406
If a PHI has no users, don't crash; bail gracefully. This shouldn't
happen often, but we can make no guarantees that previous passes didn't leave
dead code around.
llvm-svn: 229405
Canonicalize access to function attributes to use the simpler API.
getAttributes().getAttribute(AttributeSet::FunctionIndex, Kind)
=> getFnAttribute(Kind)
getAttributes().hasAttribute(AttributeSet::FunctionIndex, Kind)
=> hasFnAttribute(Kind)
llvm-svn: 229202
LLVM's include tree and the use of using declarations to hide the
'legacy' namespace for the old pass manager.
This undoes the primary modules-hostile change I made to keep
out-of-tree targets building. I sent an email inquiring about whether
this would be reasonable to do at this phase and people seemed fine with
it, so making it a reality. This should allow us to start bootstrapping
with modules to a certain extent along with making it easier to mix and
match headers in general.
The updates to any code for users of LLVM are very mechanical. Switch
from including "llvm/PassManager.h" to "llvm/IR/LegacyPassManager.h".
Qualify the types which now produce compile errors with "legacy::". The
most common ones are "PassManager", "PassManagerBase", and
"FunctionPassManager".
llvm-svn: 229094
The issues with the new unroll analyzer are more fundamental than code
cleanup, algorithm, or data structure changes. I've sent an email to the
original commit thread with details and a proposal for how to redesign
things. I'm disabling this for now so that we don't spend time
debugging issues with it in its current state.
llvm-svn: 229064
UnrollAnalyzer.
Now they share a single worklist and have less implicit state between
them. There was no real benefit to separating these two things out.
I'm going to subsequently refactor things to share even more code.
llvm-svn: 229062
contained in it each time we try to add it to the worklist, just check
this when pulling it off the worklist. That way we do it at most once
per instruction with the cost of the worklist set we would need to pay
anyways.
llvm-svn: 229060
vector.
In addition to dramatically reducing the work required for contrived
example loops, this also has to correct some serious latent bugs in the
cost computation. Previously, we might add an instruction onto the
worklist once for every load which it used and was simplified. Then we
would visit it many times and accumulate "savings" each time.
I mean, fortunately this couldn't matter for things like calls with 100s
of operands, but even for binary operators this code seems like it must
be double counting the savings.
I just noticed this by inspection and due to the runtime problems it can
introduce, I don't have any test cases for cases where the cost produced
by this routine is unacceptable.
llvm-svn: 229059
In the unroll analyzer, it is checking each user to see if that user
will become dead. However, it first checked if that user was missing
from the simplified values map, and then if was also missing from the
dead instructions set. We add everything from the simplified values map
to the dead instructions set, so the first step is completely subsumed
by the second. Moreover, the first step requires *inserting* something
into the simplified value map which isn't what we want at all.
This also replaces a dyn_cast with a cast as an instruction cannot be
used by a non-instruction.
llvm-svn: 229057
check.
Also hoist this into the enqueue process as it is faster even than
testing the worklist set, we should just directly filter these out much
like we filter out constants and such.
llvm-svn: 229056
We don't just want to handle duplicate operands within an instruction,
but also duplicates across operands of different instructions. I should
have gone straight to this, but I had convinced myself that it wasn't
going to be necessary briefly. I've come to my senses after chatting
more with Nick, and am now happier here.
llvm-svn: 229054
reasonably quickly.
I don't have a reduced test case, but for a version of FFMPEG, this
makes the loop unroller start finishing at all (after over 15 minutes of
running, it hadn't terminated for me, no idea if it was a true infloop
or just exponential work).
The key thing here is to check the DeadInstructions set when pulling
things off the worklist. Without this, we would re-walk the user list of
already dead instructions again and again and again. Consider phi nodes
with many, many operands and other patterns.
The other important aspect of this is that because we would keep
re-visiting instructions that were already known dead, we kept adding
their cost savings to this! This would cause our cost savings to be
*insanely* inflated from this.
While I was here, I also rotated the operand walk out of the worklist
loop to make the code easier to read. There is still work to be done to
minimize worklist traffic because we don't de-duplicate operands. This
means we may add the same instruction onto the worklist 1000s of times
if it shows up in 1000s of operansd to a PHI node for example.
Still, with this patch, the ffmpeg testcase I have finishes quickly and
I can't measure the runtime impact of the unroll analysis any more. I'll
probably try to do a few more cleanups to this code, but not sure how
much cleanup I can justify right now.
llvm-svn: 229038
readable.
The biggest thing that was causing me problems is recognizing the
references vs. poniters here. I also found that for maps naming the loop
variable as KeyValue helps make it obvious why you don't actually use it
directly. Finally, using 'auto' instead of 'User *' doesn't seem like
a good tradeoff. Much like with the other cases, I like to know its
a pointer, and 'User' is just as long and tells the reader a lot more.
llvm-svn: 229033
hard to type and read for me, and is inconsistent with the other
abbreviation in the base class "Inst". For most of these (where they are
used widely) I prefer just spelling it out as Instruction. I've changed
two of the short-lived variables to use "Inst" to match the base class.
llvm-svn: 229028
This is much more efficient. In particular, the query with the user
instruction has to insert a false for every missing instruction into the
set. This is just a cleanup a long the way to fixing the underlying
algorithm problems here.
llvm-svn: 228994
When we try to estimate number of potentially removed instructions in
loop unroller, we analyze first N iterations and then scale the
computed number by TripCount/N. We should bail out early if N is 0.
llvm-svn: 228988
We can't solve the full subgraph isomorphism problem. But we can
allow obvious cases, where for example two instructions of different
types are out of order. Due to them having different types/opcodes,
there is no ambiguity.
llvm-svn: 228931
Summary:
When trying to canonicalize negative constants out of
multiplication expressions, we need to check that the
constant is not INT_MIN which cannot be negated.
Reviewers: mcrosier
Reviewed By: mcrosier
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7286
From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com>
llvm-svn: 228872
A DAGRootSet models an induction variable being used in a rerollable
loop. For example:
x[i*3+0] = y1
x[i*3+1] = y2
x[i*3+2] = y3
Base instruction -> i*3
+---+----+
/ | \
ST[y1] +1 +2 <-- Roots
| |
ST[y2] ST[y3]
There may be multiple DAGRootSets, for example:
x[i*2+0] = ... (1)
x[i*2+1] = ... (1)
x[i*2+4] = ... (2)
x[i*2+5] = ... (2)
x[(i+1234)*2+5678] = ... (3)
x[(i+1234)*2+5679] = ... (3)
This concept is similar to the "Scale" member used previously, but allows
multiple independent sets of roots based off the same induction variable.
llvm-svn: 228821
This allows IDEs to recognize the entire set of header files for
each of the core LLVM projects.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7526
Reviewed By: Chris Bieneman
llvm-svn: 228798
Reid Kleckner