This pass is like DeadCodeEliminationPass, but only does one pass
through a function instead of iterating on users of eliminated
instructions.
DeadCodeEliminationPass should be used in all cases.
Reviewed By: asbirlea
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87933
Making use of undef is not safe if the simplification result is not used
to replace all uses of the result. This leads to problems in NewGVN,
which does not replace all uses in the IR directly. See PR33165 for more
details.
This patch adds an option to SimplifyQuery to disable the use of undef.
Note that I've only guarded uses if isa<UndefValue>/m_Undef where
SimplifyQuery is currently available. If we agree on the general
direction, I'll update the remaining uses.
Reviewed By: nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84792
Summary: To match NewPM name. Also the new name is clearer and more consistent.
Subscribers: jvesely, nhaehnle, hiraditya, asbirlea, kerbowa, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84542
Place the ssa.copy instructions for assumes after the assume,
instead of before it. Both options are valid, but placing them
afterwards prevents assumes from being replaced with assume(true).
This fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37541 in NewGVN
and will avoid a similar issue in SCCP when we handle more
predicate infos.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83631
The legacy pass manager implicitly adds BasicAA, but the new PM does
not. This causes pr33196.ll to fail under NPM.
There are almost certainly lots of other failures like this, wanted to
get some input on if adding -basic-aa to tests makes sense at scale.
Reviewed By: fhahn
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82915
Summary:
this reduces significantly the number of assumes generated without aftecting too much
the information that is preserved. this improves the compile-time cost
of enable-knowledge-retention significantly.
Reviewers: jdoerfert, sstefan1
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Subscribers: hiraditya, asbirlea, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79650
Summary:
this reduces significantly the number of assumes generated without aftecting too much
the information that is preserved. this improves the compile-time cost
of enable-knowledge-retention significantly.
Reviewers: jdoerfert, sstefan1
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Subscribers: hiraditya, asbirlea, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79650
Along the lines of D77454 and D79968. Unlike loads and stores, the
default alignment is getPrefTypeAlign, to match the existing handling in
various places, including SelectionDAG and InstCombine.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80044
This is D77454, except for stores. All the infrastructure work was done
for loads, so the remaining changes necessary are relatively small.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79968
For IR generated by a compiler, this is really simple: you just take the
datalayout from the beginning of the file, and apply it to all the IR
later in the file. For optimization testcases that don't care about the
datalayout, this is also really simple: we just use the default
datalayout.
The complexity here comes from the fact that some LLVM tools allow
overriding the datalayout: some tools have an explicit flag for this,
some tools will infer a datalayout based on the code generation target.
Supporting this properly required plumbing through a bunch of new
machinery: we want to allow overriding the datalayout after the
datalayout is parsed from the file, but before we use any information
from it. Therefore, IR/bitcode parsing now has a callback to allow tools
to compute the datalayout at the appropriate time.
Not sure if I covered all the LLVM tools that want to use the callback.
(clang? lli? Misc IR manipulation tools like llvm-link?). But this is at
least enough for all the LLVM regression tests, and IR without a
datalayout is not something frontends should generate.
This change had some sort of weird effects for certain CodeGen
regression tests: if the datalayout is overridden with a datalayout with
a different program or stack address space, we now parse IR based on the
overridden datalayout, instead of the one written in the file (or the
default one, if none is specified). This broke a few AVR tests, and one
AMDGPU test.
Outside the CodeGen tests I mentioned, the test changes are all just
fixing CHECK lines and moving around datalayout lines in weird places.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78403
Summary:
The assume builder was non-deterministic when working on unamed values.
this patch fixes this.
Reviewers: jdoerfert
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Subscribers: hiraditya, mgrang, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78616
This will allow us to use the datalayout to disambiguate other
constructs in IR, like load alignment. Split off from D78403.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78413
Check that a call has an attached MemoryAccess before calling
getClobbering on the instruction.
If no access is attached, the instruction does not access memory.
Resolves PR43441.
llvm-svn: 374920
The AllConstant check needs to be moved out of the if/else if chain to
avoid a test regression. The "there is no SimplifyZExt" comment
puzzles me, since there is SimplifyCastInst. Additionally, the
Simplify* calls seem to not see the operand as constant, so this needs
to be tried if the simplify failed.
llvm-svn: 362653
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).
This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.
llvm-svn: 358546
As discussed on PR41125 and D59363, we have a mismatch between icmp eq/ne cases with an undef operand:
When the other operand is constant we fold to undef (handled in ConstantFoldCompareInstruction)
When the other operand is non-constant we fold to a bool constant based on isTrueWhenEqual (handled in SimplifyICmpInst).
Neither is really wrong, but this patch changes the logic in SimplifyICmpInst to consistently fold to undef.
The NewGVN test change is annoying (as with most heavily reduced tests) but AFAICT I have kept the purpose of the test based on rL291968.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59541
llvm-svn: 356456
compiler identification lines in test-cases.
(Doing so only because it's then easier to search for references which
are actually important and need fixing.)
llvm-svn: 351200
The current code relies on LeaderUseCount to determine if we can remove
an SSA copy, but in that the LeaderUseCount does not refer to the SSA
copy. If a SSA copy is a dominating leader, we use the operand as dominating
leader instead. This means we removed a user of a ssa copy and we should
decrement its use count, so we can remove the ssa copy once it becomes dead.
Fixes PR38804.
Reviewers: efriedma, davide
Reviewed By: davide
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51595
llvm-svn: 349217
If we simplify an instruction to itself, we do not need to add a user to
itself. For congruence classes with a defining expression, we already
use a similar logic.
Fixes PR38259.
Reviewers: davide, efriedma, mcrosier
Reviewed By: davide
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51168
llvm-svn: 346335
As K has to dominate I, IIUC I's range metadata must be a subset of
K's. After Eli's recent clarification to the LangRef, loading a value
outside of the range is undefined behavior.
Therefore if I's range contains elements outside of K's range and we would load
one such value, K would cause undefined behavior.
In cases like hoisting/sinking, we still want the most generic range
over all code paths to/from the hoist/sink point. As suggested in the
patches related to D47339, I will refactor the handling of those
scenarios and try to decouple it from this function as follow up, once
we switched to a similar handling of metadata in most of
combineMetadata.
I updated some tests checking mostly the merging of metadata to keep the
metadata of to dominating load. The most interesting one is probably test8 in
test/Transforms/JumpThreading/thread-loads.ll. It contained a comment
about the alias metadata preventing us to eliminate the branch, but it
seem like the actual problem currently is that we merge the ranges of
both loads and cannot eliminate the icmp afterwards. With this patch, we
manage to eliminate the icmp, as the range of the first load excludes 8.
Reviewers: efriedma, nlopes, davide
Reviewed By: efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51629
llvm-svn: 345456
Currently eliminateInstructions only returns true if any instruction got
replaced. In the test case for this patch, we eliminate the trivially
dead calls, for which eliminateInstructions not do a replacement and the
function is not marked as changed, which is why the inliner crashes
while traversing the call graph.
Alternatively we could also change eliminateInstructions to return true
in case we mark instructions for deletion, but that's slightly more code
and doing it at the place where the replacement happens seems safer.
Fixes PR37517.
Reviewers: davide, mcrosier, efriedma, bjope
Reviewed By: bjope
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51169
llvm-svn: 341651
NewGVN uses InstructionSimplify for simplifications of leaders of
congruence classes. It is not guaranteed that the metadata or other
flags/keywords (like nsw or exact) of the leader is available for all members
in a congruence class, so we cannot use it for simplification.
This patch adds a InstrInfoQuery struct with a boolean field
UseInstrInfo (which defaults to true to keep the current behavior as
default) and a set of helper methods to get metadata/keywords for a
given instruction, if UseInstrInfo is true. The whole thing might need a
better name, to avoid confusion with TargetInstrInfo but I am not sure
what a better name would be.
The current patch threads through InstrInfoQuery to the required
places, which is messier then it would need to be, if
InstructionSimplify and ValueTracking would share the same Query struct.
The reason I added it as a separate struct is that it can be shared
between InstructionSimplify and ValueTracking's query objects. Also,
some places do not need a full query object, just the InstrInfoQuery.
It also updates some interfaces that do not take a Query object, but a
set of optional parameters to take an additional boolean UseInstrInfo.
See https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37540.
Reviewers: dberlin, davide, efriedma, sebpop, hiraditya
Reviewed By: hiraditya
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47143
llvm-svn: 340031
Matt Arsenault