Summary: This patch introduces two new iterator ranges and updates existing code to use it. No functional change intended.
Test Plan: All tests (make check-all) still pass.
Reviewers: dblaikie
Reviewed By: dblaikie
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4481
llvm-svn: 213474
isSafeToSpeculativelyExecute can optionally take a DataLayout pointer. In the
past, this was mainly used to make better decisions regarding divisions known
not to trap, and so was not all that important for users concerned with "cheap"
instructions. However, now it also helps look through bitcasts for
dereferencable loads, and will also be important if/when we add a
dereferencable pointer attribute.
This is some initial work to feed a DataLayout pointer through to callers of
isSafeToSpeculativelyExecute, generally where one was already available.
llvm-svn: 212720
During loop-unroll, loop exits from the current loop may end up in in different
outer loop. This requires to re-form LCSSA recursively for one level down from
the outer most loop where loop exits are landed during unroll. This fixes PR18861.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D2976
llvm-svn: 209796
Summary:
This adds two new diagnostics: -pass-remarks-missed and
-pass-remarks-analysis. They take the same values as -pass-remarks but
are intended to be triggered in different contexts.
-pass-remarks-missed is used by LLVMContext::emitOptimizationRemarkMissed,
which passes call when they tried to apply a transformation but
couldn't.
-pass-remarks-analysis is used by LLVMContext::emitOptimizationRemarkAnalysis,
which passes call when they want to inform the user about analysis
results.
The patch also:
1- Adds support in the inliner for the two new remarks and a
test case.
2- Moves emitOptimizationRemark* functions to the llvm namespace.
3- Adds an LLVMContext argument instead of making them member functions
of LLVMContext.
Reviewers: qcolombet
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D3682
llvm-svn: 209442
Summary:
This calls emitOptimizationRemark from the loop unroller and vectorizer
at the point where they make a positive transformation. For the
vectorizer, it reports vectorization and interleave factors. For the
loop unroller, it reports all the different supported types of
unrolling.
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D3456
llvm-svn: 207528
definition below all of the header #include lines, lib/Transforms/...
edition.
This one is tricky for two reasons. We again have a couple of passes
that define something else before the includes as well. I've sunk their
name macros with the DEBUG_TYPE.
Also, InstCombine contains headers that need DEBUG_TYPE, so now those
headers #define and #undef DEBUG_TYPE around their code, leaving them
well formed modular headers. Fixing these headers was a large motivation
for all of these changes, as "leaky" macros of this form are hard on the
modules implementation.
llvm-svn: 206844
LCSSA from it caused a crasher with the LoopUnroll pass.
This crasher is really nasty. We destroy LCSSA form in a suprising way.
When unrolling a loop into an outer loop, we not only need to restore
LCSSA form for the outer loop, but for all children of the outer loop.
This is somewhat obvious in retrospect, but hey!
While this seems pretty heavy-handed, it's not that bad. Fundamentally,
we only do this when we unroll a loop, which is already a heavyweight
operation. We're unrolling all of these hypothetical inner loops as
well, so their size and complexity is already on the critical path. This
is just adding another pass over them to re-canonicalize.
I have a test case from PR18616 that is great for reproducing this, but
pretty useless to check in as it relies on many 10s of nested empty
loops that get unrolled and deleted in just the right order. =/ What's
worse is that investigating this has exposed another source of failure
that is likely to be even harder to test. I'll try to come up with test
cases for these fixes, but I want to get the fixes into the tree first
as they're causing crashes in the wild.
llvm-svn: 200273
function and a FunctionPass.
This has many benefits. The motivating use case was to be able to
compute function analysis passes *after* running LoopSimplify (to avoid
invalidating them) and then to run other passes which require
LoopSimplify. Specifically passes like unrolling and vectorization are
critical to wire up to BranchProbabilityInfo and BlockFrequencyInfo so
that they can be profile aware. For the LoopVectorize pass the only
things in the way are LoopSimplify and LCSSA. This fixes LoopSimplify
and LCSSA is next on my list.
There are also a bunch of other benefits of doing this:
- It is now very feasible to make more passes *preserve* LoopSimplify
because they can simply run it after changing a loop. Because
subsequence passes can assume LoopSimplify is preserved we can reduce
the runs of this pass to the times when we actually mutate a loop
structure.
- The new pass manager should be able to more easily support loop passes
factored in this way.
- We can at long, long last observe that LoopSimplify is preserved
across SCEV. This *halves* the number of times we run LoopSimplify!!!
Now, getting here wasn't trivial. First off, the interfaces used by
LoopSimplify are all over the map regarding how analysis are updated. We
end up with weird "pass" parameters as a consequence. I'll try to clean
at least some of this up later -- I'll have to have it all clean for the
new pass manager.
Next up I discovered a really frustrating bug. LoopUnroll *claims* to
preserve LoopSimplify. That's actually a lie. But the way the
LoopPassManager ends up running the passes, it always ran LoopSimplify
on the unrolled-into loop, rectifying this oversight before any
verification could kick in and point out that in fact nothing was
preserved. So I've added code to the unroller to *actually* simplify the
surrounding loop when it succeeds at unrolling.
The only functional change in the test suite is that we now catch a case
that was previously missed because SCEV and other loop transforms see
their containing loops as simplified and thus don't miss some
opportunities. One test case has been converted to check that we catch
this case rather than checking that we miss it but at least don't get
the wrong answer.
Note that I have #if-ed out all of the verification logic in
LoopSimplify! This is a temporary workaround while extracting these bits
from the LoopPassManager. Currently, there is no way to have a pass in
the LoopPassManager which preserves LoopSimplify along with one which
does not. The LPM will try to verify on each loop in the nest that
LoopSimplify holds but the now-Function-pass cannot distinguish what
loop is being verified and so must try to verify all of them. The inner
most loop is clearly no longer simplified as there is a pass which
didn't even *attempt* to preserve it. =/ Once I get LCSSA out (and maybe
LoopVectorize and some other fixes) I'll be able to re-enable this check
and catch any places where we are still failing to preserve
LoopSimplify. If this causes problems I can back this out and try to
commit *all* of this at once, but so far this seems to work and allow
much more incremental progress.
llvm-svn: 199884
can be used by both the new pass manager and the old.
This removes it from any of the virtual mess of the pass interfaces and
lets it derive cleanly from the DominatorTreeBase<> template. In turn,
tons of boilerplate interface can be nuked and it turns into a very
straightforward extension of the base DominatorTree interface.
The old analysis pass is now a simple wrapper. The names and style of
this split should match the split between CallGraph and
CallGraphWrapperPass. All of the users of DominatorTree have been
updated to match using many of the same tricks as with CallGraph. The
goal is that the common type remains the resulting DominatorTree rather
than the pass. This will make subsequent work toward the new pass
manager significantly easier.
Also in numerous places things became cleaner because I switched from
re-running the pass (!!! mid way through some other passes run!!!) to
directly recomputing the domtree.
llvm-svn: 199104
directory. These passes are already defined in the IR library, and it
doesn't make any sense to have the headers in Analysis.
Long term, I think there is going to be a much better way to divide
these matters. The dominators code should be fully separated into the
abstract graph algorithm and have that put in Support where it becomes
obvious that evn Clang's CFGBlock's can use it. Then the verifier can
manually construct dominance information from the Support-driven
interface while the Analysis library can provide a pass which both
caches, reconstructs, and supports a nice update API.
But those are very long term, and so I don't want to leave the really
confusing structure until that day arrives.
llvm-svn: 199082
into their new header subdirectory: include/llvm/IR. This matches the
directory structure of lib, and begins to correct a long standing point
of file layout clutter in LLVM.
There are still more header files to move here, but I wanted to handle
them in separate commits to make tracking what files make sense at each
layer easier.
The only really questionable files here are the target intrinsic
tablegen files. But that's a battle I'd rather not fight today.
I've updated both CMake and Makefile build systems (I think, and my
tests think, but I may have missed something).
I've also re-sorted the includes throughout the project. I'll be
committing updates to Clang, DragonEgg, and Polly momentarily.
llvm-svn: 171366
Sooooo many of these had incorrect or strange main module includes.
I have manually inspected all of these, and fixed the main module
include to be the nearest plausible thing I could find. If you own or
care about any of these source files, I encourage you to take some time
and check that these edits were sensible. I can't have broken anything
(I strictly added headers, and reordered them, never removed), but they
may not be the headers you'd really like to identify as containing the
API being implemented.
Many forward declarations and missing includes were added to a header
files to allow them to parse cleanly when included first. The main
module rule does in fact have its merits. =]
llvm-svn: 169131
Take this opportunity to generalize the indirectbr bailout logic for
loop transformations. CFG transformations will never get indirectbr
right, and there's no point trying.
llvm-svn: 154386
Patch by Brendon Cahoon!
This extends the existing LoopUnroll and LoopUnrollPass. Brendon
measured no regressions in the llvm test suite with -unroll-runtime
enabled. This implementation works by using the existing loop
unrolling code to unroll the loop by a power-of-two (default 8). It
generates an if-then-else sequence of code prior to the loop to
execute the extra iterations before entering the unrolled loop.
llvm-svn: 146245
These are not individual bug fixes. I had to rewrite a good chunk of
the unroller to make it sane. I think it was getting lucky on trivial
completely unrolled loops with no early exits. I included some fairly
simple unit tests for partial unrolling. I didn't do much stress
testing, so it may not be perfect, but should be usable now.
llvm-svn: 137190
"Reinstate r133435 and r133449 (reverted in r133499) now that the clang
self-hosted build failure has been fixed (r133512)."
Due to some additional warnings.
llvm-svn: 133700
Change PHINodes to store simple pointers to their incoming basic blocks,
instead of full-blown Uses.
Note that this loses an optimization in SplitCriticalEdge(), because we
can no longer walk the use list of a BasicBlock to find phi nodes. See
the comment I removed starting "However, the foreach loop is slow for
blocks with lots of predecessors".
Extend replaceAllUsesWith() on a BasicBlock to also update any phi
nodes in the block's successors. This mimics what would have happened
when PHINodes were proper Users of their incoming blocks. (Note that
this only works if OldBB->replaceAllUsesWith(NewBB) is called when
OldBB still has a terminator instruction, so it still has some
successors.)
llvm-svn: 133435
This is part of a futile attempt to not "break" bizzaro
code like this:
l1:
printf("l1: %p\n", &&l1);
++x;
if( x < 3 ) goto l1;
Previously we'd fold &&l1 to 1, which is fine per our semantics
but not helpful to the user.
llvm-svn: 125827
Duncan P. N. Exon Smith