Essentially, fold OrderedBasicBlock into BasicBlock, and make it
auto-invalidate the instruction ordering when new instructions are
added. Notably, we don't need to invalidate it when removing
instructions, which is helpful when a pass mostly delete dead
instructions rather than transforming them.
The downside is that Instruction grows from 56 bytes to 64 bytes. The
resulting LLVM code is substantially simpler and automatically handles
invalidation, which makes me think that this is the right speed and size
tradeoff.
The important change is in SymbolTableTraitsImpl.h, where the numbering
is invalidated. Everything else should be straightforward.
We probably want to implement a fancier re-numbering scheme so that
local updates don't invalidate the ordering, but I plan for that to be
future work, maybe for someone else.
Reviewed By: lattner, vsk, fhahn, dexonsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51664
The insertion of an unconditional branch during FastISel can differ depending on
building with or without debug information. This happens because FastISel::fastEmitBranch
emits an unconditional branch depending on the size of the current basic block
without distinguishing between debug and non-debug instructions.
This patch fixes this issue by ignoring debug instructions when getting the size
of the basic block.
Reviewers: aprantl
Reviewed By: aprantl
Subscribers: ormris, aprantl, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67703
llvm-svn: 372389
This cleans up all CallInst creation in LLVM to explicitly pass a
function type rather than deriving it from the pointer's element-type.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57170
llvm-svn: 352909
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
r332057 introduced distance() for ranges. Based on post-commit feedback,
this renames distance() to size(). The new size() is also only enabled
when the operation is O(1).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46976
llvm-svn: 332551
This commit adds a wrapper for std::distance() which works with ranges.
As it would be a common case to write `distance(predecessors(BB))`, this
also introduces `pred_size()` and `succ_size()` helpers to make that
easier to write.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46668
llvm-svn: 332057
This makes it possible to reverse a filtered range. For example, here's
a way to visit memory accesses in a BasicBlock in reverse order:
auto MemInsts = reverse(make_filter_range(BB, [](Instruction &I) {
return isa<StoreInst>(&I) || isa<LoadInst>(&I);
}));
for (auto &MI : MemInsts)
...
To implement this functionality, I factored out forward iteration
functionality into filter_iterator_base, and added a specialization of
filter_iterator_impl which supports bidirectional iteration. Thanks to
Tim Shen, Zachary Turner, and others for suggesting this design and
providing feedback! This version of the patch supersedes the original
(https://reviews.llvm.org/D45792).
This was motivated by a problem we encountered in D45657: we'd like to
visit the non-debug-info instructions in a BasicBlock in reverse order.
Testing: check-llvm, check-clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45853
llvm-svn: 330875
block.
This allows writing much more natural and readable range based for loops
directly over the PHI nodes. It also takes advantage of the same tricks
for terminating the sequence as the hand coded versions.
I've replaced one example of this mostly to showcase the difference and
I've added a unit test to make sure the facilities really work the way
they're intended. I want to use this inside of SimpleLoopUnswitch but it
seems generally nice.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33533
llvm-svn: 303964
Reid Kleckner