Revert "[SROA] Propagate !range metadata when moving loads."
Revert "[Mem2Reg] Clang-format unformatted parts of this file. NFCI."
Davide says they broke a bot.
llvm-svn: 319131
This tries to propagate !range metadata to a pre-existing load
when a load is optimized out. This is done instead of adding an
assume because converting loads to and from assumes creates a
lot of IR.
Patch by Ariel Ben-Yehuda.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37216
llvm-svn: 319096
This is based heavily on the work done ni D34285. I mostly wanted to do
test cleanup for the author to save them some time, but I had a really
hard time understanding why it was so hard to write better test cases
for these issues.
The problem is that because SROA does a second rewrite of the loads and
because we *don't* propagate !nonnull for non-pointer loads, we first
introduced invalid !nonnull metadata and then stripped it back off just
in time to avoid most ways of this PR manifesting. Moving to the more
careful utility only fixes this by changing the predicate to look at the
new load's type rather than the target type. However, that *does* fix
the bug, and the utility is much nicer including adding range metadata
to model the nonnull property after a conversion to an integer.
However, we have bigger problems because we don't actually propagate
*range* metadata, and the utility to do this extracted from instcombine
isn't really in good shape to do this currently. It *only* handles the
case of copying range metadata from an integer load to a pointer load.
It doesn't even handle the trivial cases of propagating from one integer
load to another when they are the same width! This utility will need to
be beefed up prior to using in this location to get the metadata to
fully survive.
And even then, we need to go and teach things to turn the range metadata
into an assume the way we do with nonnull so that when we *promote* an
integer we don't lose the information.
All of this will require a new test case that looks kind-of like
`preserve-nonnull.ll` does here but focuses on range metadata. It will
also likely require more testing because it needs to correctly handle
changes to the integer width, especially as SROA actively tries to
change the integer width!
Last but not least, I'm a little worried about hooking the range
metadata up here because the instcombine logic for converting from
a range metadata *to* a nonnull metadata node seems broken in the face
of non-zero address spaces where null is not mapped to the integer `0`.
So that probably needs to get fixed with test cases both in SROA and in
instcombine to cover it.
But this *does* extract the core PR fix from D34285 of preventing the
!nonnull metadata from being propagated in a broken state just long
enough to feed into promotion and crash value tracking.
On D34285 there is some discussion of zero-extend handling because it
isn't necessary. First, the new load size covers all of the non-undef
(ie, possibly initialized) bits. This may even extend past the original
alloca if loading those bits could produce valid data. The only way its
valid for us to zero-extend an integer load in SROA is if the original
code had a zero extend or those bits were undef. And we get to assume
things like undef *never* satifies nonnull, so non undef bits can
participate here. No need to special case the zero-extend handling, it
just falls out correctly.
The original credit goes to Ariel Ben-Yehuda! I'm mostly landing this to
save a few rounds of trivial edits fixing style issues and test case
formulation.
Differental Revision: D34285
llvm-svn: 306379
Daniel Neilson