already in a class, just inline the four of them. I suspect that this
class could be simplified some to not always keep distinct variables for
these things, but it wasn't clear to me how given the usage so I opted
for a trivial and mechanical translation.
This removes one of the two remaining users of a header in include/llvm
which does nothing more than define a 4 member struct.
llvm-svn: 171738
TargetTransformInfo rather than TargetLowering, removing one of the
primary instances of the layering violation of Transforms depending
directly on Target.
This is a really big deal because LSR used to be a "special" pass that
could only be tested fully using llc and by looking at the full output
of it. It also couldn't run with any other loop passes because it had to
be created by the backend. No longer is this true. LSR is now just
a normal pass and we should probably lift the creation of LSR out of
lib/CodeGen/Passes.cpp and into the PassManagerBuilder. =] I've not done
this, or updated all of the tests to use opt and a triple, because
I suspect someone more familiar with LSR would do a better job. This
change should be essentially without functional impact for normal
compilations, and only change behvaior of targetless compilations.
The conversion required changing all of the LSR code to refer to the TTI
interfaces, which fortunately are very similar to TargetLowering's
interfaces. However, it also allowed us to *always* expect to have some
implementation around. I've pushed that simplification through the pass,
and leveraged it to simplify code somewhat. It required some test
updates for one of two things: either we used to skip some checks
altogether but now we get the default "no" answer for them, or we used
to have no information about the target and now we do have some.
I've also started the process of removing AddrMode, as the TTI interface
doesn't use it any longer. In some cases this simplifies code, and in
others it adds some complexity, but I think it's not a bad tradeoff even
there. Subsequent patches will try to clean this up even further and use
other (more appropriate) abstractions.
Yet again, almost all of the formatting changes brought to you by
clang-format. =]
llvm-svn: 171735
into their new header subdirectory: include/llvm/IR. This matches the
directory structure of lib, and begins to correct a long standing point
of file layout clutter in LLVM.
There are still more header files to move here, but I wanted to handle
them in separate commits to make tracking what files make sense at each
layer easier.
The only really questionable files here are the target intrinsic
tablegen files. But that's a battle I'd rather not fight today.
I've updated both CMake and Makefile build systems (I think, and my
tests think, but I may have missed something).
I've also re-sorted the includes throughout the project. I'll be
committing updates to Clang, DragonEgg, and Polly momentarily.
llvm-svn: 171366
Sooooo many of these had incorrect or strange main module includes.
I have manually inspected all of these, and fixed the main module
include to be the nearest plausible thing I could find. If you own or
care about any of these source files, I encourage you to take some time
and check that these edits were sensible. I can't have broken anything
(I strictly added headers, and reordered them, never removed), but they
may not be the headers you'd really like to identify as containing the
API being implemented.
Many forward declarations and missing includes were added to a header
files to allow them to parse cleanly when included first. The main
module rule does in fact have its merits. =]
llvm-svn: 169131
The TargetTransform changes are breaking LTO bootstraps of clang. I am
working with Nadav to figure out the problem, but I am reverting it for now
to get our buildbots working.
This reverts svn commits: 165665 165669 165670 165786 165787 165997
and I have also reverted clang svn 165741
llvm-svn: 166168
This class is used by LSR and a number of places in the codegen.
This is the first step in de-coupling LSR from TLI, and creating
a new interface in between them.
llvm-svn: 165455
This places limits on CollectSubexprs to constrains the number of
reassociation possibilities. It limits the recursion depth and skips
over chains of nested recurrences outside the current loop.
Fixes PR13361. Although underlying SCEV behavior is still potentially bad.
llvm-svn: 160340
All SCEV expressions used by LSR formulae must be safe to
expand. i.e. they may not contain UDiv unless we can prove nonzero
denominator.
Fixes PR11356: LSR hoists UDiv.
llvm-svn: 160205
For non-address users, Base and Scaled registers are not specially
associated to fit an address mode, so SCEVExpander should apply normal
expansion rules. Otherwise we may sink computation into inner loops
that have already been optimized.
llvm-svn: 158537
The required checks are moved to ChainInstruction() itself and the
policy decisions are moved to IVChain::isProfitableInc().
Also cache the ExprBase in IVChain to avoid frequent recomputations.
No functional change intended.
llvm-svn: 155676
This introduces a threshold of 200 IV Users, which is very
conservative but should be sufficient to avoid serious compile time
sink or stack overflow. The llvm test-suite with LTO never exceeds 190
users per loop.
The bug doesn't relate to a specific type of loop. Checking in an
arbitrary giant loop as a unit test would be silly.
Fixes rdar://11262507.
llvm-svn: 154983
LSR can fold three addressing modes into its ICmpZero node:
ICmpZero BaseReg + Offset => ICmp BaseReg, -Offset
ICmpZero -1*ScaleReg + Offset => ICmp ScaleReg, Offset
ICmpZero BaseReg + -1*ScaleReg => ICmp BaseReg, ScaleReg
The first two cases are only used if TLI->isLegalICmpImmediate() likes
the offset.
Make sure the right Offset sign is passed to this method in the second
case. The ARM version is not symmetric.
<rdar://problem/11184260>
llvm-svn: 154079
Only record IVUsers that are dominated by simplified loop
headers. Otherwise SCEVExpander will crash while looking for a
preheader.
I previously tried to work around this in LSR itself, but that was
insufficient. This way, LSR can continue to run if some uses are not
in simple loops, as long as we don't attempt to analyze those users.
Fixes <rdar://problem/11049788> Segmentation fault: 11 in LoopStrengthReduce
llvm-svn: 152892
LSR has gradually been improved to more aggressively reuse existing code, particularly existing phi cycles. This exposed problems with the SCEVExpander's sloppy treatment of its insertion point. I applied some rigor to the insertion point problem that will hopefully avoid an endless bug cycle in this area. Changes:
- Always used properlyDominates to check safe code hoisting.
- The insertion point provided to SCEV is now considered a lower bound. This is usually a block terminator or the use itself. Under no cirumstance may SCEVExpander insert below this point.
- LSR is reponsible for finding a "canonical" insertion point across expansion of different expressions.
- Robust logic to determine whether IV increments are in "expanded" form and/or can be safely hoisted above some insertion point.
Fixes PR11783: SCEVExpander assert.
llvm-svn: 148535
It's becoming clear that LoopSimplify needs to unconditionally create loop preheaders. But that is a bigger fix. For now, continuing to hack LSR.
Fixes rdar://10701050 "Cannot split an edge from an IndirectBrInst" assert.
llvm-svn: 148288
These heuristics are sufficient for enabling IV chains by
default. Performance analysis has been done for i386, x86_64, and
thumbv7. The optimization is rarely important, but can significantly
speed up certain cases by eliminating spill code within the
loop. Unrolled loops are prime candidates for IV chains. In many
cases, the final code could still be improved with more target
specific optimization following LSR. The goal of this feature is for
LSR to make the best choice of induction variables.
Instruction selection may not completely take advantage of this
feature yet. As a result, there could be cases of slight code size
increase.
Code size can be worse on x86 because it doesn't support postincrement
addressing. In fact, when chains are formed, you may see redundant
address plus stride addition in the addressing mode. GenerateIVChains
tries to compensate for the common cases.
On ARM, code size increase can be mitigated by using postincrement
addressing, but downstream codegen currently misses some opportunities.
llvm-svn: 147826
After collecting chains, check if any should be materialized. If so,
hide the chained IV users from the LSR solver. LSR will only solve for
the head of the chain. GenerateIVChains will then materialize the
chained IV users by computing the IV relative to its previous value in
the chain.
In theory, chained IV users could be exposed to LSR's solver. This
would be considerably complicated to implement and I'm not aware of a
case where we need it. In practice it's more important to
intelligently prune the search space of nontrivial loops before
running the solver, otherwise the solver is often forced to prune the
most optimal solutions. Hiding the chained users does this well, so
that LSR is more likely to find the best IV for the chain as a whole.
llvm-svn: 147801
This collects a set of IV uses within the loop whose values can be
computed relative to each other in a sequence. Following checkins will
make use of this information.
llvm-svn: 147797
This will be more important as we extend the LSR pass in ways that don't rely on the formula solver. In particular, we need it for constructing IV chains.
llvm-svn: 147724
LoopSimplify may not run on some outer loops, e.g. because of indirect
branches. SCEVExpander simply cannot handle outer loops with no preheaders.
Fixes rdar://10655343 SCEVExpander segfault.
llvm-svn: 147718
Since we're not rewriting IVs in other loops, there's not much reason
to consider their stride when generating formulae.
This should reduce the number of useless formulas considered by LSR.
llvm-svn: 146302
It's always good to prune early, but formulae that are unsatisfactory
in their own right need to be removed before running any other pruning
heuristics. We easily avoid generating such formulae, but we need them
as an intermediate basis for forming other good formulae.
llvm-svn: 145906
Chandler Carruth