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
behavior based on other files defining DEBUG_TYPE, which means it cannot
define DEBUG_TYPE at all. This is actually better IMO as it forces folks
to define relevant DEBUG_TYPEs for their files. However, it requires all
files that currently use DEBUG(...) to define a DEBUG_TYPE if they don't
already. I've updated all such files in LLVM and will do the same for
other upstream projects.
This still leaves one important change in how LLVM uses the DEBUG_TYPE
macro going forward: we need to only define the macro *after* header
files have been #include-ed. Previously, this wasn't possible because
Debug.h required the macro to be pre-defined. This commit removes that.
By defining DEBUG_TYPE after the includes two things are fixed:
- Header files that need to provide a DEBUG_TYPE for some inline code
can do so by defining the macro before their inline code and undef-ing
it afterward so the macro does not escape.
- We no longer have rampant ODR violations due to including headers with
different DEBUG_TYPE definitions. This may be mostly an academic
violation today, but with modules these types of violations are easy
to check for and potentially very relevant.
Where necessary to suppor headers with DEBUG_TYPE, I have moved the
definitions below the includes in this commit. I plan to move the rest
of the DEBUG_TYPE macros in LLVM in subsequent commits; this one is big
enough.
The comments in Debug.h, which were hilariously out of date already,
have been updated to reflect the recommended practice going forward.
llvm-svn: 206822
The -tailcallelim pass should be checking if byval or inalloca args can
be captured before marking calls as tail calls. This was the real root
cause of PR7272.
With a better fix in place, revert the inliner change from r105255. The
test case it introduced still passes and has been moved to
test/Transforms/Inline/byval-tail-call.ll.
Reviewers: chandlerc
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D3403
llvm-svn: 206789
Summary:
This prevents the discriminator generation pass from triggering if
the DWARF version being used in the module is prior to 4.
Reviewers: echristo, dblaikie
CC: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D3413
llvm-svn: 206507
Also updated as many loops as I could find using df_begin/idf_begin -
strangely I found no uses of idf_begin. Is that just used out of tree?
Also a few places couldn't use df_begin because either they used the
member functions of the depth first iterators or had specific ordering
constraints (I added a comment in the latter case).
Based on a patch by Jim Grosbach. (Jim - you just had iterator_range<T>
where you needed iterator_range<idf_iterator<T>>)
llvm-svn: 206016
Summary:
Tested with a unit test because we don't appear to have any transforms
that use this other than ASan, I think.
Fixes PR17935.
Reviewers: nicholas
CC: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D3194
llvm-svn: 204866
This option caused LowerInvoke to generate code using SJLJ-based
exception handling, but there is no code left that interprets the
jmp_buf stack that the resulting code maintained (llvm.sjljeh.jblist).
This option has been obsolete for a while, and replaced by
SjLjEHPrepare.
This leaves the default behaviour of LowerInvoke, which is to convert
invokes to calls.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D3136
llvm-svn: 204388
This allows us to generate table lookups for code such as:
unsigned test(unsigned x) {
switch (x) {
case 100: return 0;
case 101: return 1;
case 103: return 2;
case 105: return 3;
case 107: return 4;
case 109: return 5;
case 110: return 6;
default: return f(x);
}
}
Since cases 102, 104, etc. are not constants, the lookup table has holes
in those positions. We therefore guard the table lookup with a bitmask check.
Patch by Jasper Neumann!
llvm-svn: 203694
optimize a call to a llvm intrinsic to something that invovles a call to a C
library call, make sure it sets the right calling convention on the call.
e.g.
extern double pow(double, double);
double t(double x) {
return pow(10, x);
}
Compiles to something like this for AAPCS-VFP:
define arm_aapcs_vfpcc double @t(double %x) #0 {
entry:
%0 = call double @llvm.pow.f64(double 1.000000e+01, double %x)
ret double %0
}
declare double @llvm.pow.f64(double, double) #1
Simplify libcall (part of instcombine) will turn the above into:
define arm_aapcs_vfpcc double @t(double %x) #0 {
entry:
%__exp10 = call double @__exp10(double %x) #1
ret double %__exp10
}
declare double @__exp10(double)
The pre-instcombine code works because calls to LLVM builtins are special.
Instruction selection will chose the right calling convention for the call.
However, the code after instcombine is wrong. The call to __exp10 will use
the C calling convention.
I can think of 3 options to fix this.
1. Make "C" calling convention just work since the target should know what CC
is being used.
This doesn't work because each function can use different CC with the "pcs"
attribute.
2. Have Clang add the right CC keyword on the calls to LLVM builtin.
This will work but it doesn't match the LLVM IR specification which states
these are "Standard C Library Intrinsics".
3. Fix simplify libcall so the resulting calls to the C routines will have the
proper CC keyword. e.g.
%__exp10 = call arm_aapcs_vfpcc double @__exp10(double %x) #1
This works and is the solution I implemented here.
Both solutions #2 and #3 would work. After carefully considering the pros and
cons, I decided to implement #3 for the following reasons.
1. It doesn't change the "spec" of the intrinsics.
2. It's a self-contained fix.
There are a couple of potential downsides.
1. There could be other places in the optimizer that is broken in the same way
that's not addressed by this.
2. There could be other calling conventions that need to be propagated by
simplify-libcall that's not handled.
But for now, this is the fix that I'm most comfortable with.
llvm-svn: 203488
This requires a number of steps.
1) Move value_use_iterator into the Value class as an implementation
detail
2) Change it to actually be a *Use* iterator rather than a *User*
iterator.
3) Add an adaptor which is a User iterator that always looks through the
Use to the User.
4) Wrap these in Value::use_iterator and Value::user_iterator typedefs.
5) Add the range adaptors as Value::uses() and Value::users().
6) Update *all* of the callers to correctly distinguish between whether
they wanted a use_iterator (and to explicitly dig out the User when
needed), or a user_iterator which makes the Use itself totally
opaque.
Because #6 requires churning essentially everything that walked the
Use-Def chains, I went ahead and added all of the range adaptors and
switched them to range-based loops where appropriate. Also because the
renaming requires at least churning every line of code, it didn't make
any sense to split these up into multiple commits -- all of which would
touch all of the same lies of code.
The result is still not quite optimal. The Value::use_iterator is a nice
regular iterator, but Value::user_iterator is an iterator over User*s
rather than over the User objects themselves. As a consequence, it fits
a bit awkwardly into the range-based world and it has the weird
extra-dereferencing 'operator->' that so many of our iterators have.
I think this could be fixed by providing something which transforms
a range of T&s into a range of T*s, but that *can* be separated into
another patch, and it isn't yet 100% clear whether this is the right
move.
However, this change gets us most of the benefit and cleans up
a substantial amount of code around Use and User. =]
llvm-svn: 203364
This compiles with no changes to clang/lld/lldb with MSVC and includes
overloads to various functions which are used by those projects and llvm
which have OwningPtr's as parameters. This should allow out of tree
projects some time to move. There are also no changes to libs/Target,
which should help out of tree targets have time to move, if necessary.
llvm-svn: 203083
a bit surprising, as the class is almost entirely abstracted away from
any particular IR, however it encodes the comparsion predicates which
mutate ranges as ICmp predicate codes. This is reasonable as they're
used for both instructions and constants. Thus, it belongs in the IR
library with instructions and constants.
llvm-svn: 202838
Move the test for this class into the IR unittests as well.
This uncovers that ValueMap too is in the IR library. Ironically, the
unittest for ValueMap is useless in the Support library (honestly, so
was the ValueHandle test) and so it already lives in the IR unittests.
Mmmm, tasty layering.
llvm-svn: 202821
name might indicate, it is an iterator over the types in an instruction
in the IR.... You see where this is going.
Another step of modularizing the support library.
llvm-svn: 202815
DWARF discriminators are used to distinguish multiple control flow paths
on the same source location. When this happens, instructions across
basic block boundaries will share the same debug location.
This pass detects this situation and creates a new lexical scope to one
of the two instructions. This lexical scope is a child scope of the
original and contains a new discriminator value. This discriminator is
then picked up from MCObjectStreamer::EmitDwarfLocDirective to be
written on the object file.
This fixes http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18270.
llvm-svn: 202752
I am really sorry for the noise, but the current state where some parts of the
code use TD (from the old name: TargetData) and other parts use DL makes it
hard to write a patch that changes where those variables come from and how
they are passed along.
llvm-svn: 201827
The crux of the issue is that LCSSA doesn't preserve stateful alias
analyses. Before r200067, LICM didn't cause LCSSA to run in the LTO pass
manager, where LICM runs essentially without any of the other loop
passes. As a consequence the globalmodref-aa pass run before that loop
pass manager was able to survive the loop pass manager and be used by
DSE to eliminate stores in the function called from the loop body in
Adobe-C++/loop_unroll (and similar patterns in other benchmarks).
When LICM was taught to preserve LCSSA it had to require it as well.
This caused it to be run in the loop pass manager and because it did not
preserve AA, the stateful AA was lost. Most of LLVM's AA isn't stateful
and so this didn't manifest in most cases. Also, in most cases LCSSA was
already running, and so there was no interesting change.
The real kicker is that LCSSA by its definition (injecting PHI nodes
only) trivially preserves AA! All we need to do is mark it, and then
everything goes back to working as intended. It probably was blocking
some other weird cases of stateful AA but the only one I have is
a 1000-line IR test case from loop_unroll, so I don't really have a good
test case here.
Hopefully this fixes the regressions on performance that have been seen
since that revision.
llvm-svn: 201104
Add the missing transformation strchr(p, 0) -> p + strlen(p) to SimplifyLibCalls
and remove the ToDo comment.
Reviewer: Duncan P.N. Exan Smith
llvm-svn: 200736
LowerExpectIntrinsic previously only understood the idiom of an expect
intrinsic followed by a comparison with zero. For llvm.expect.i1, the
comparison would be stripped by the early-cse pass.
Patch by Daniel Micay.
llvm-svn: 200664
preserve loop simplify of enclosing loops.
The problem here starts with LoopRotation which ends up cloning code out
of the latch into the new preheader it is buidling. This can create
a new edge from the preheader into the exit block of the loop which
breaks LoopSimplify form. The code tries to fix this by splitting the
critical edge between the latch and the exit block to get a new exit
block that only the latch dominates. This sadly isn't sufficient.
The exit block may be an exit block for multiple nested loops. When we
clone an edge from the latch of the inner loop to the new preheader
being built in the outer loop, we create an exiting edge from the outer
loop to this exit block. Despite breaking the LoopSimplify form for the
inner loop, this is fine for the outer loop. However, when we split the
edge from the inner loop to the exit block, we create a new block which
is in neither the inner nor outer loop as the new exit block. This is
a predecessor to the old exit block, and so the split itself takes the
outer loop out of LoopSimplify form. We need to split every edge
entering the exit block from inside a loop nested more deeply than the
exit block in order to preserve all of the loop simplify constraints.
Once we try to do that, a problem with splitting critical edges
surfaces. Previously, we tried a very brute force to update LoopSimplify
form by re-computing it for all exit blocks. We don't need to do this,
and doing this much will sometimes but not always overlap with the
LoopRotate bug fix. Instead, the code needs to specifically handle the
cases which can start to violate LoopSimplify -- they aren't that
common. We need to see if the destination of the split edge was a loop
exit block in simplified form for the loop of the source of the edge.
For this to be true, all the predecessors need to be in the exact same
loop as the source of the edge being split. If the dest block was
originally in this form, we have to split all of the deges back into
this loop to recover it. The old mechanism of doing this was
conservatively correct because at least *one* of the exiting blocks it
rewrote was the DestBB and so the DestBB's predecessors were fixed. But
this is a much more targeted way of doing it. Making it targeted is
important, because ballooning the set of edges touched prevents
LoopRotate from being able to split edges *it* needs to split to
preserve loop simplify in a coherent way -- the critical edge splitting
would sometimes find the other edges in need of splitting but not
others.
Many, *many* thanks for help from Nick reducing these test cases
mightily. And helping lots with the analysis here as this one was quite
tricky to track down.
llvm-svn: 200393
When simplifycfg moves an instruction, it must drop metadata it doesn't know
is still valid with the preconditions changes. In particular, it must drop
the range and tbaa metadata.
The patch implements this with an utility function to drop all metadata not
in a white list.
llvm-svn: 200322
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
Matt Arsenault