This method has been commented as deprecated for a while. Remove
it and replace all uses with the equivalent getCalledOperand().
I also made a few cleanups in here. For example, to removes use
of getElementType on a pointer when we could just use getFunctionType
from the call.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78882
Add llvm.call.preallocated.{setup,arg} instrinsics.
Add "preallocated" operand bundle which takes a token produced by llvm.call.preallocated.setup.
Add "preallocated" parameter attribute, which is like byval but without the copy.
Verifier changes for these IR constructs.
See https://github.com/rnk/llvm-project/blob/call-setup-docs/llvm/docs/CallSetup.md
Subscribers: hiraditya, jdoerfert, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74651
We may want to identify sequences that are not
reductions, but still qualify as load-combines
in the back-end, so make most of the body a
helper function.
When folding tail, branch taken count is computed during initial VPlan execution
and recorded to be used by the compare computing the loop's mask. This recording
should directly set the State, instead of reusing Value2VPValue mapping which
serves original Values present prior to vectorization.
The branch taken count may be a constant Value, which may be used elsewhere in
the loop; trying to employ Value2VPValue for both leads to the issue reported in
https://reviews.llvm.org/D76992#inline-721028
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78847
Integer ranges can be used for loaded/stored values. Note that widening
can be disabled for loads/stores, as we only rely on instructions that
cause continued increases to ranges to be widened (like binary
operators).
Reviewers: efriedma, mssimpso, davide
Reviewed By: efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78433
Summary:
Missing error mangling is noticed in
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45636
where inconsistent profiling input caused
llvm/lld to crash as:
```
Program aborted due to an unhandled Error:
linking module flags 'ProfileSummary':
IDs have conflicting values in 'Mutex_posix.o' and 'nsBrowserApp.o'
```
The change does not change the fact that LLVM crashes
but changes error output to say what was incorrect:
```
LLVM ERROR: Function Import: link error:
linking module flags 'ProfileSummary':
IDs have conflicting values in 'Mutex_posix.o' and 'nsBrowserApp.o'
```
Actual crash has yet to be fixed.
Reviewers: lattner
Reviewed By: lattner
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78676
(X | MaskC) == C --> (X & ~MaskC) == C ^ MaskC
(X | MaskC) != C --> (X & ~MaskC) != C ^ MaskC
We have more analyis for 'and' patterns and already lean this way
in the existing code, so this should be neutral or better in IR.
If this does not do as well in codegen, the problem already exists
and we should fix that based on target costs/heuristics.
http://volta.cs.utah.edu:8080/z/oP3ecL
define void @src(i8 %x, i8 %OrC, i8 %C, i1* %p0, i1* %p1) {
%or = or i8 %x, %OrC
%eq = icmp eq i8 %or, %C
store i1 %eq, i1* %p0
%ne = icmp ne i8 %or, %C
store i1 %ne, i1* %p1
ret void
}
define void @tgt(i8 %x, i8 %OrC, i8 %C, i1* %p0, i1* %p1) {
%NotOrC = xor i8 %OrC, -1
%a = and i8 %x, %NotOrC
%NewC = xor i8 %C, %OrC
%eq = icmp eq i8 %a, %NewC
store i1 %eq, i1* %p0
%ne = icmp ne i8 %a, %NewC
store i1 %ne, i1* %p1
ret void
}
Using the existing NumFastStores statistic can be misleading when
comparing the impact of DSE patches.
For example, consider the case where a store gets removed from a
function before it is inlined into another function. A less
powerful DSE might only remove the store from functions it has
been inlined into, which will result in more stores being removed, but
no difference in the actual number of stores after DSE.
The new stat provides the absolute number of stores surviving after
DSE.
Reviewers: dmgreen, bryant, asbirlea, jfb
Reviewed By: asbirlea
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78830
Summary:
refactor assume bulider for the next patch.
the assume builder now generate only one assume per attribute kind and per value they are on. to do this it takes the highest. this is desirable because currently, for all attributes the higest value is the most valuable.
Reviewers: jdoerfert
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78013
We should only skip `lifetime` and `dbg` intrinsics when searching for users.
Other intrinsics are legit users that can't be ignored.
Without this fix, the testcase would result in an invalid IR. `memcpy`
will have a reference to the, now, external value (local to the
extracted loop function).
Fix PR42194
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78749
The CallSite and ImmutableCallSite were removed in a previous
commit. So rename the file to match the remaining class and
the name of the cpp that implements it.
This patch slightly improves the formatting of the debug output, adds a
few missing outputs and makes some existing outputs more consistent with
the rest.
As discussed in PR45478:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45478
...propagating FMF from the outer (second) call is not correct,
so intersect them instead.
I suspect we could do better (see TODO comment), but mismatched
FMF is probably too rare to care about.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78631
One of transforms the loop vectorizer makes is LCSSA formation. In some cases it
is the only transform it makes. We should not drop CFG analyzes if only LCSSA was
formed and no actual CFG changes was made.
We should think of expanding this logic to other passes as well, and maybe make
it a part of PM framework.
Reviewed By: Florian Hahn
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78360
This reverts commit 9245c7ac13.
This is triggering a segfault in XLA downstream, we'll follow-up with
a reproducer, it is likely influenced by TTI/TLI settings or other
options as a simple `opt -loop-vectorize` invocation on the IR
before the crash does not reproduce immediately.
While we can do that, it doesn't increase instruction count,
if the old `sub` sticks around then the transform is not only
not a unlikely win, but a likely regression, since we likely
now extended live range and use count of both of the `sub` operands,
as opposed to just the result of `sub`.
As Kostya Serebryany notes in post-commit review in
https://reviews.llvm.org/D68408#1998112
this indeed can degrade final assembly,
increase register pressure, and spilling.
This isn't what we want here,
so at least for now let's guard it with an use check.
The motivation is to be able to play with the option and change if it is required.
Reviewers: fedor.sergeev, apilipenko, rnk, jdoerfert
Reviewed By: fedor.sergeev
Subscribers: hiraditya, dantrushin, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78624
This patch adds VPValue version of the instruction operands to
VPWidenRecipe and uses them during code-generation.
Similar to D76373 this reduces ingredient def-use usage by ILV as
a step towards full VPlan-based def-use relations.
Reviewers: rengolin, Ayal, gilr
Reviewed By: gilr
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D76992
I don't believe this pass deals with vectors of pointers. I think
this getScalarType() was added during a mechanical opaque pointer
change of the interface to GetElementPtrInst::getIndexedType.
Summary:
Teach MachineDebugify how to insert DBG_VALUE instructions. This can
help find bugs causing CodeGen differences when debug info is present.
DBG_VALUE instructions are only emitted when -debugify-level is set to
locations+variables.
There is essentially no attempt made to match up DBG_VALUE register
operands with the local variables they ought to correspond to. I'm not
sure how to improve the situation. In some cases (MachineMemOperand?)
it's possible to find the IR instruction a MachineInstr corresponds to,
but in general this seems to call for "undoing" the work done by ISel.
Reviewers: dsanders, aprantl
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78135
Summary:
This is RFC for fixes in poison-related functions of ValueTracking.
These functions assume that a value can be poison bitwisely, but the semantics
of bitwise poison is not clear at the moment.
Allowing a value to have bitwise poison adds complexity to reasoning about
correctness of optimizations.
This patch makes the analysis functions simply assume that a value is
either fully poison or not, which has been used to understand the correctness
of a few previous optimizations.
The bitwise poison semantics seems to be only used by these functions as well.
In terms of implementation, using value-wise poison concept makes existing
functions do more precise analysis, which is what this patch contains.
Reviewers: spatel, lebedev.ri, jdoerfert, reames, nikic, nlopes, regehr
Reviewed By: nikic
Subscribers: fhahn, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78503
Summary:
This is RFC for fixes in poison-related functions of ValueTracking.
These functions assume that a value can be poison bitwisely, but the semantics
of bitwise poison is not clear at the moment.
Allowing a value to have bitwise poison adds complexity to reasoning about
correctness of optimizations.
This patch makes the analysis functions simply assume that a value is
either fully poison or not, which has been used to understand the correctness
of a few previous optimizations.
The bitwise poison semantics seems to be only used by these functions as well.
In terms of implementation, using value-wise poison concept makes existing
functions do more precise analysis, which is what this patch contains.
Reviewers: spatel, lebedev.ri, jdoerfert, reames, nikic, nlopes, regehr
Reviewed By: nikic
Subscribers: fhahn, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78503
visitExtractValueInst uses mergeInValue, so it already can handle
constant ranges. Initially the early exit was using isOverdefined to
keep things as NFC during the initial move to ValueLatticeElement.
As the function already supports constant ranges, it can just use
ValueState[&I].isOverdefined.
Reviewers: efriedma, mssimpso, davide
Reviewed By: efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78393
Craig Topper