LazyBlockFrequenceInfoPass, LazyBranchProbabilityInfoPass and
LoopAccessLegacyAnalysis all cache pointers to their nestled required
analysis passes. One need to use addRequiredTransitive to describe
that the nestled passes can't be freed until those analysis passes
no longer are used themselves.
There is still a bit of a mess considering the getLazyBPIAnalysisUsage
and getLazyBFIAnalysisUsage functions. Those functions are used from
both Transform, CodeGen and Analysis passes. I figure it is OK to
use addRequiredTransitive also when being used from Transform and
CodeGen passes. On the other hand, I figure we must do it when
used from other Analysis passes. So using addRequiredTransitive should
be more correct here. An alternative solution would be to add a
bool option in those functions to let the user tell if it is a
analysis pass or not. Since those lazy passes will be obsolete when
new PM has conquered the world I figure we can leave it like this
right now.
Intention with the patch is to fix PR49950. It at least solves the
problem for the reproducer in PR49950. However, that reproducer
need five passes in a specific order, so there are lots of various
"solutions" that could avoid the crash without actually fixing the
root cause.
This is a reapply of commit 3655f0757f, that was reverted in
33ff3c2049 due to problems with assertions in the polly
lit tests. That problem is supposed to be solved by also adjusting
ScopPass to explicitly preserve LazyBlockFrequencyInfo and
LazyBranchProbabilityInfo (it already preserved
OptimizationRemarkEmitter which depends on those lazy passes).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100958
LazyBlockFrequenceInfoPass, LazyBranchProbabilityInfoPass and
LoopAccessLegacyAnalysis all cache pointers to their nestled required
analysis passes. One need to use addRequiredTransitive to describe
that the nestled passes can't be freed until those analysis passes
no longer are used themselves.
There is still a bit of a mess considering the getLazyBPIAnalysisUsage
and getLazyBFIAnalysisUsage functions. Those functions are used from
both Transform, CodeGen and Analysis passes. I figure it is OK to
use addRequiredTransitive also when being used from Transform and
CodeGen passes. On the other hand, I figure we must do it when
used from other Analysis passes. So using addRequiredTransitive should
be more correct here. An alternative solution would be to add a
bool option in those functions to let the user tell if it is a
analysis pass or not. Since those lazy passes will be obsolete when
new PM has conquered the world I figure we can leave it like this
right now.
Intention with the patch is to fix PR49950. It at least solves the
problem for the reproducer in PR49950. However, that reproducer
need five passes in a specific order, so there are lots of various
"solutions" that could avoid the crash without actually fixing the
root cause.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100958
This file lists every pass in LLVM, and is included by Pass.h, which is
very popular. Every time we add, remove, or rename a pass in LLVM, it
caused lots of recompilation.
I found this fact by looking at this table, which is sorted by the
number of times a file was changed over the last 100,000 git commits
multiplied by the number of object files that depend on it in the
current checkout:
recompiles touches affected_files header
342380 95 3604 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/STLExtras.h
314730 234 1345 llvm/include/llvm/InitializePasses.h
307036 118 2602 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/APInt.h
213049 59 3611 llvm/include/llvm/Support/MathExtras.h
170422 47 3626 llvm/include/llvm/Support/Compiler.h
162225 45 3605 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/Optional.h
158319 63 2513 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/Triple.h
140322 39 3598 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/StringRef.h
137647 59 2333 llvm/include/llvm/Support/Error.h
131619 73 1803 llvm/include/llvm/Support/FileSystem.h
Before this change, touching InitializePasses.h would cause 1345 files
to recompile. After this change, touching it only causes 550 compiles in
an incremental rebuild.
Reviewers: bkramer, asbirlea, bollu, jdoerfert
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70211
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
Summary:
Require DominatorTree when requiring/preserving LoopInfo in the old pass manager
BreakCriticalEdges tries to keep LoopInfo and DominatorTree updated if they
exist. However, since commit r321653 and r321805, to update LoopInfo we
must have a DominatorTree, or we will hit an assert.
To fix this we now make a couple of passes that only required/preserved
LoopInfo also require DominatorTree.
This solves PR37334.
Reviewers: eli.friedman, efriedma
Reviewed By: efriedma
Subscribers: efriedma, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46829
llvm-svn: 332583
Summary:
The motivation is the same as in D22141: In order to add the hotness
attribute to optimization remarks we need BFI to be available in all
passes that emit optimization remarks. BFI depends on BPI so unless we
make this lazy as well we would still compute BPI unconditionally.
The solution is to use the new LazyBPI pass in LazyBFI and only compute
BPI when computation of BFI is requested by the client.
I extended the laziness test using a LoopDistribute test to also cover
BPI.
Reviewers: hfinkel, davidxl
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D22835
llvm-svn: 277083
Summary:
This is necessary for D21771. In order to add the hotness attribute to
optimization remarks we need BFI to be available in all passes that emit
optimization remarks.
However we don't want to pay for computing BFI unless the hotness
attribute is requested.
This is achieved by making BFI lazy at the very high-level through a new
analysis pass -- BFI is not calculated unless requested.
I am adding a test to check the laziness under D21771 where the first
user of the analysis is added.
Reviewers: hfinkel, dexonsmith, davidxl
Subscribers: davidxl, dexonsmith, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D22141
llvm-svn: 275250
Bjorn Pettersson