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
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).
This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.
llvm-svn: 358546
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
The code have been developed by Daniel Berlin over the years, and
the new implementation goal is that of addressing shortcomings of
the current GVN infrastructure, i.e. long compile time for large
testcases, lack of phi predication, no load/store value numbering
etc...
The current code just implements the "core" GVN algorithm, although
other pieces (load coercion, phi handling, predicate system) are
already implemented in a branch out of tree. Once the core is stable,
we'll start adding pieces on top of the base framework.
The test currently living in test/Transform/NewGVN are a copy
of the ones in GVN, with proper `XFAIL` (missing features in NewGVN).
A flag will be added in a future commit to enable NewGVN, so that
interested parties can exercise this code easily.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26224
llvm-svn: 290346
Arthur Eubanks