Summary:
ScopDetection used to check if a loop withing a region was infinite and emitted a diagnostic in such cases. After r310940 there's no point checking against that situation, as infinite loops don't appear in regions anymore.
The test failure was observed on these two polly buildbots:
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/polly-arm-linux/builds/8368http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/polly-amd64-linux/builds/10310
This patch XFAILs `ReportLoopHasNoExit.ll` and turns infinite loop detection into an assert.
Reviewers: grosser, sanjoy, bollu
Reviewed By: grosser
Subscribers: efriedma, aemerson, kristof.beyls, dberlin, llvm-commits
Tags: #polly
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36776
llvm-svn: 311503
ReportLoopHasNoExit started failing after r310940 that added
infinite loops to postdominators. The change made regions not
contain infinite loops anymore.
This patch unbreaks the polly tree by XFAILING the
ReportLoopHasNoExit test. Full fix is under review in D36776.
llvm-svn: 310980
Summary:
Both `canUseISLTripCount()` and `addOverApproximatedRegion()` contained checks
to reject endless loops which are now removed and replaced by a single check
in `isValidLoop()`.
For reporting such loops the `ReportLoopOverlapWithNonAffineSubRegion` is
renamed to `ReportLoopHasNoExit`. The test case
`ReportLoopOverlapWithNonAffineSubRegion.ll` is adapted and renamed as well.
The schedule generation in `buildSchedule()` is based on the following
assumption:
Given some block B that is contained in a loop L and a SESE region R,
we assume that L is contained in R or the other way around.
However, this assumption is broken in the presence of endless loops that are
nested inside other loops. Therefore, in order to prevent erroneous behavior
in `buildSchedule()`, r265280 introduced a corresponding check in
`canUseISLTripCount()` to reject endless loops. Unfortunately, it was possible
to bypass this check with -polly-allow-nonaffine-loops which was fixed by adding
another check to reject endless loops in `allowOverApproximatedRegion()` in
r273905. Hence there existed two separate locations that handled this case.
Thank you Johannes Doerfert for helping to provide the above background
information.
Reviewers: Meinersbur, grosser
Subscribers: _jdoerfert, pollydev
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24560
Contributed-by: Matthias Reisinger <d412vv1n@gmail.com>
llvm-svn: 281987
Tobias Grosser