llvm.vp.select extends the regular select instruction with an explicit
vector length (%evl).
All lanes with indexes at and above %evl are
undefined. Lanes below %evl are taken from the first input where the
mask is true and from the second input otherwise.
Reviewed By: rogfer01
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105351
Added opt option -print-pipeline-passes to print a -passes compatible
string describing the built pass pipeline.
As an example:
$ opt -enable-new-pm=1 -adce -licm -simplifycfg -o /dev/null /dev/null -print-pipeline-passes
verify,function(adce),function(loop-mssa(licm)),function(simplifycfg<bonus-inst-threshold=1;no-forward-switch-cond;no-switch-to-lookup;keep-loops;no-hoist-common-insts;no-sink-common-insts>),verify,BitcodeWriterPass
At the moment this is best-effort only and there are some known
limitations:
- Not all passes accepting parameters will print their parameters
(currently only implemented for simplifycfg).
- Some ClassName to pass-name mappings are not unique.
- Some ClassName to pass-name mappings are missing (e.g.
BitcodeWriterPass).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108298
Added opt option -print-pipeline-passes to print a -passes compatible
string describing the built pass pipeline.
As an example:
$ opt -enable-new-pm=1 -adce -licm -simplifycfg -o /dev/null /dev/null -print-pipeline-passes
verify,function(adce),function(loop-mssa(licm)),function(simplifycfg<bonus-inst-threshold=1;no-forward-switch-cond;no-switch-to-lookup;keep-loops;no-hoist-common-insts;no-sink-common-insts>),verify,BitcodeWriterPass
At the moment this is best-effort only and there are some known
limitations:
- Not all passes accepting parameters will print their parameters
(currently only implemented for simplifycfg).
- Some ClassName to pass-name mappings are not unique.
- Some ClassName to pass-name mappings are missing (e.g.
BitcodeWriterPass).
This is part one of a couple of patches to fully rename these methods.
I've made the mistake of assuming that these indexes are for parameters
multiple times, but actually they're based off of a weird indexing
scheme AttributeList::AttrIndex where 0 is the return value and ~0 is
the function. Hopefully renaming these methods will make this clearer.
Ideally users should use more specific methods like
AttributeList::getFnAttr().
This patch simply adds the name that we want in the end. This is so the
removal of the methods with the original names happens in a separate
change to make it easier for downstream users.
This touches all relevant methods in AttributeList, CallBase, and Function.
Reviewed By: rnk
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108788
We have a large compile showing occasional non-deterministic behavior
that is due to DIArgList not being properly uniqued in some cases. I
tracked this down to handleChangedOperands, for which there is a custom
implementation for DIArgList, that does not take care of re-uniquing
after updating the DIArgList Args, unlike the default version of
handleChangedOperands for MDNode.
Since the Args in the DIArgList form the key for the store, this seems
to be occasionally breaking the lookup in that DenseSet. Specifically,
when invoking DIArgList::get() from replaceVariableLocationOp, very
occasionally it returns a new DIArgList object, when one already exists
having the same exact Args pointers. This in turn causes a subsequent
call to Instruction::isIdenticalToWhenDefined on those two otherwise
identical DIArgList objects during a later pass to return false, leading
to different IR in those rare cases.
I modified DIArgList::handleChangedOperands to perform similar
re-uniquing as the MDNode version used by other metadata node types.
This also necessitated a change to the context destructor, since in some
cases we end up with DIArgList as distinct nodes: DIArgList is the only
metadata node type to have a custom dropAllReferences, so we need to
invoke that version on DIArgList in the DistinctMDNodes store to clean
it up properly.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108968
In D87099, the mangler learned to quote export directives that contain
special characters. Only alhpanumerical characters as well as
'_', '$', '.' and '@' were exmpt from this quoting. However, at least
binutils considers an unquoted '.' to be syntax and object files
containing such symbols will cause errors during linking. Fix that
by removing '.' from the list of allowed exemptions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100359
It looks like this array was missed in 4276d4a8d0
Fixed tests that expected `elements` to be empty or depeneded on the order of the empty DINode.
Reviewed By: aprantl
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D107024
This patch emits DW_TAG_namelist and DW_TAG_namelist_item for fortran
namelist variables. DICompositeType is extended to support this fortran
feature.
Reviewed By: aprantl
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108553
Generate btf_tag annotations for function parameters.
A field "annotations" is introduced to DILocalVariable, and
annotations are represented as an DINodeArray, similar to
DIComposite elements. The following example illustrates how
annotations are encoded in IR:
distinct !DILocalVariable(name: "info",, arg: 1, ..., annotations: !10)
!10 = !{!11, !12}
!11 = !{!"btf_tag", !"a"}
!12 = !{!"btf_tag", !"b"}
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106620
Generate btf_tag annotations for DIGlobalVariable.
A field "annotations" is introduced to DIGlobalVariable, and
annotations are represented as an DINodeArray, similar to
DIComposite elements. The following example illustrates how
annotations are encoded in IR:
distinct !DIGlobalVariable(..., annotations: !10)
!10 = !{!11, !12}
!11 = !{!"btf_tag", !"a"}
!12 = !{!"btf_tag", !"b"}
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106619
Generate btf_tag annotations for DISubprogram types.
A field "annotations" is introduced to DISubprogram, and
annotations are represented as an DINodeArray, similar to
DIComposite elements. The following example illustrates how
annotations are encoded in IR:
distinct !DISubprogram(..., annotations: !10)
!10 = !{!11, !12}
!11 = !{!"btf_tag", !"a"}
!12 = !{!"btf_tag", !"b"}
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106618
Add support for the GNU C style __attribute__((error(""))) and
__attribute__((warning(""))). These attributes are meant to be put on
declarations of functions whom should not be called.
They are frequently used to provide compile time diagnostics similar to
_Static_assert, but which may rely on non-ICE conditions (ie. relying on
compiler optimizations). This is also similar to diagnose_if function
attribute, but can diagnose after optimizations have been run.
While users may instead simply call undefined functions in such cases to
get a linkage failure from the linker, these provide a much more
ergonomic and actionable diagnostic to users and do so at compile time
rather than at link time. Users instead may be able use inline asm .err
directives.
These are used throughout the Linux kernel in its implementation of
BUILD_BUG and BUILD_BUG_ON macros. These macros generally cannot be
converted to use _Static_assert because many of the parameters are not
ICEs. The Linux kernel still needs to be modified to make use of these
when building with Clang; I have a patch that does so I will send once
this feature is landed.
To do so, we create a new IR level Function attribute, "dontcall" (both
error and warning boil down to one IR Fn Attr). Then, similar to calls
to inline asm, we attach a !srcloc Metadata node to call sites of such
attributed callees.
The backend diagnoses these during instruction selection, while we still
know that a call is a call (vs say a JMP that's a tail call) in an arch
agnostic manner.
The frontend then reconstructs the SourceLocation from that Metadata,
and determines whether to emit an error or warning based on the callee's
attribute.
Link: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16428
Link: https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/1173
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106030
Generate btf_tag annotations for DIDrived types. More specifically,
clang frontend generates the btf_tag annotations for record
fields. The annotations are represented as an DINodeArray
in DebugInfo. The following example illustrate how
annotations are encoded in IR:
distinct !DIDerivedType(tag: DW_TAG_member, ..., annotations: !10)
!10 = !{!11, !12}
!11 = !{!"btf_tag", !"a"}
!12 = !{!"btf_tag", !"b"}
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106616
Clang patch D106614 added attribute btf_tag support. This patch
generates btf_tag annotations for DIComposite types.
A field "annotations" is introduced to DIComposite, and the
annotations are represented as an DINodeArray, similar to
DIComposite elements. The following example illustrates
how annotations are encoded in IR:
distinct !DICompositeType(..., annotations: !10)
!10 = !{!11, !12}
!11 = !{!"btf_tag", !"a"}
!12 = !{!"btf_tag", !"b"}
Each btf_tag annotation is represented as a 2D array of
meta strings. Each record may have more than one
btf_tag annotations, as in the above example.
Reland with additional fixes for llvm/unittests/IR/DebugTypeODRUniquingTest.cpp.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106615
The COFF specific `DataReferencedByCode` complexity (D103372 D103717) is due to
a link.exe limitation: an external symbol in IMAGE_COMDAT_SELECT_ASSOCIATIVE is
not really dropped, so it can cause duplicate definition error.
Clang patch D106614 added attribute btf_tag support. This patch
generates btf_tag annotations for DIComposite types.
A field "annotations" is introduced to DIComposite, and the
annotations are represented as an DINodeArray, similar to
DIComposite elements. The following example illustrates
how annotations are encoded in IR:
distinct !DICompositeType(..., annotations: !10)
!10 = !{!11, !12}
!11 = !{!"btf_tag", !"a"}
!12 = !{!"btf_tag", !"b"}
Each btf_tag annotation is represented as a 2D array of
meta strings. Each record may have more than one
btf_tag annotations, as in the above example.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106615
This patch adds vector-predicated ("VP") reduction intrinsics corresponding to
each of the existing unpredicated `llvm.vector.reduce.*` versions. Unlike the
unpredicated reductions, all VP reductions have a start value. This start value
is returned when the no vector element is active.
Support for expansion on targets without native vector-predication support is
included.
This patch is based on the ["reduction
slice"](https://reviews.llvm.org/D57504#1732277) of the LLVM-VP reference patch
(https://reviews.llvm.org/D57504).
Reviewed By: craig.topper
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104308
SwitchInst should have a void result type.
Add a check to the verifier to catch this error.
Reviewed By: samparker
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108084
This patch updates ConstantVector::getSplat to use poison instead
of undef when using insertelement/shufflevector to splat.
This follows on from D93793.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D107751
When LLVM is used in other projects, it may happen that global cons-
tructors will execute before the call to ParseCommandLineOptions.
Since OptBisect is initialized via a constructor, and has no ability
to be updated at a later time, passing "-opt-bisect-limit" to the
parse function may have no effect.
To avoid this problem use a cl::cb (callback) to set the bisection
limit when the option is actually processed.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104551
It's entirely possible (because it actually happened) for a bool
variable to end up with a 256-bit DW_AT_const_value. This came about
when a local bool variable was initialized from a bitfield in a
32-byte struct of bitfields, and after inlining and constant
propagation, the variable did have a constant value. The sequence of
optimizations had it carrying "i256" values around, but once the
constant made it into the llvm.dbg.value, no further IR changes could
affect it.
Technically the llvm.dbg.value did have a DIExpression to reduce it
back down to 8 bits, but the compiler is in no way ready to emit an
oversized constant *and* a DWARF expression to manipulate it.
Depending on the circumstances, we had either just the very fat bool
value, or an expression with no starting value.
The sequence of optimizations that led to this state did seem pretty
reasonable, so the solution I came up with was to invent a DWARF
constant expression folder. Currently it only does convert ops, but
there's no reason it couldn't do other ops if that became useful.
This broke three tests that depended on having convert ops survive
into the DWARF, so I added an operator that would abort the folder to
each of those tests.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106915
Constant::getSplatValue has O(N) time complexity in the worst case,
where N is the # of elements in a vector. So we call
Constant::getAggregateElement first and return earlier if possible to
avoid unnecessary getSplatValue calls.
Reviewed By: MaskRay
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D107252
This patch adds an initial ShuffleVectorInst::isInsertSubvectorMask helper to recognize 2-op shuffles where the lowest elements of one of the sources are being inserted into the "in-place" other operand, this includes "concat_vectors" patterns as can be seen in the Arm shuffle cost changes. This also helped fix a x86 issue with irregular/length-changing SK_InsertSubvector costs - I'm hoping this will help with D107188
This doesn't currently attempt to work with 1-op shuffles that could either be a "widening" shuffle or a self-insertion.
The self-insertion case is tricky, but we currently always match this with the existing SK_PermuteSingleSrc logic.
The widening case will be addressed in a follow up patch that treats the cost as 0.
Masks with a high number of undef elts will still struggle to match optimal subvector widths - its currently bounded by minimum-width possible insertion, whilst some cases would benefit from wider (pow2?) subvectors.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D107228
We might want to use info from GC strategy in middle end analysis.
The motivation for this is provided in D99135: we may want to ask
a GC if it's going to work with a given pointer (currently this code
makes naive check by the method name).
Differetial Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100559
Reviewed By: reames
Arthur Eubanks