This reverts commit ea1a0d7c9a.
While this is strictly more powerful, it is also strictly slower.
InstSimplify intentionally does not perform many folds that it
is allowed to perform, if doing so requires a KnownBits calculation
that will be repeated in InstCombine.
Maybe it's worthwhile to do this here, but that needs a more
explicitly stated motivation, evaluated in a review.
It used to be that all of our intrinsics were call instructions, but over time, we've added more and more invokable intrinsics. According to the verifier, we're up to 8 right now. As IntrinsicInst is a sub-class of CallInst, this puts us in an awkward spot where the idiomatic means to check for intrinsic has a false negative if the intrinsic is invoked.
This change switches IntrinsicInst from being a sub-class of CallInst to being a subclass of CallBase. This allows invoked intrinsics to be instances of IntrinsicInst, at the cost of requiring a few more casts to CallInst in places where the intrinsic really is known to be a call, not an invoke.
After this lands and has baked for a couple days, planned cleanups:
Make GCStatepointInst a IntrinsicInst subclass.
Merge intrinsic handling in InstCombine and use idiomatic visitIntrinsicInst entry point for InstVisitor.
Do the same in SelectionDAG.
Do the same in FastISEL.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99976
We already special-cased a few interesting patterns,
but that is strictly less powerful than using KnownBits.
So instead get the known bits for the operand of `and`,
and iff all the unset bits of the `and`-mask are known to be zeros
in the operand, we can omit said `and`.
I'd reverted this in commit 3b6acb1797 due to buildbot failures. This patch contains the fix for said issue. I'd forgotten to handle the case where two phis in the same block have different operand order. We canonicalize away from this, but it's still valid IR. The tests included in this change (as opposed to simply having test output changed), crashed without the fix.
Original commit message follows...
This extends the phi handling in isKnownNonEqual with a special case based on invertible recurrences. If we can prove the recurrence is invertible (which many common ones are), we can recurse through the start operands of the recurrence skipping the phi cycle.
(Side note: Instcombine currently does not push back through these cases. I will implement that in a follow up change w/separate review.)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99912
Adding the switches to reduce diffs. I'm about to split that into an lshr part and an ashr part, doing the NFC part first makes it easier to maintain both diffs.
This extends the phi handling in isKnownNonEqual with a special case based on invertible recurrences. If we can prove the recurrence is invertible (which many common ones are), we can recurse through the start operands of the recurrence skipping the phi cycle.
(Side note: Instcombine currently does not push back through these cases. I will implement that in a follow up change w/separate review.)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99912
Previously we would use the type of the pointee to determine what to
cast the result of constant folding a load. To aid with opaque pointer
types, we should explicitly pass the type of the load rather than
looking at pointee types.
ConstantFoldLoadThroughBitcast() converts the const prop'd value to the
proper load type (e.g. [1 x i32] -> i32). Instead of calling this in
every intermediate step like bitcasts, we only call this when we
actually see the global initializer value.
In some existing uses of this API, we don't know the exact type we're
loading from immediately (e.g. first we visit a bitcast, then we visit
the load using the bitcast). In those cases we have to manually call
ConstantFoldLoadThroughBitcast() when simplifying the load to make sure
that we cast to the proper type.
Reviewed By: dblaikie
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100718
Move <string> include to ImportedFunctionsInliningStatistics.cpp and add missing <memory> include as we have explicit uses of std::unique_ptr in the header.
As being discussed in https://reviews.llvm.org/D100721,
this modelling is lossy, we can't reconstruct `ash`/`ashr exact`
from it, which means that whenever we actually expand the IR,
we've just pessimized the code..
It would be good to model this pattern, after all it comes up every time
you want to compute a distance between two pointers, but not at this cost.
This reverts commit ec54867df5.
Such attributes can either be unset, or set to "true" or "false" (as string).
throughout the codebase, this led to inelegant checks ranging from
if (Fn->getFnAttribute("no-jump-tables").getValueAsString() == "true")
to
if (Fn->hasAttribute("no-jump-tables") && Fn->getFnAttribute("no-jump-tables").getValueAsString() == "true")
Introduce a getValueAsBool that normalize the check, with the following
behavior:
no attributes or attribute set to "false" => return false
attribute set to "true" => return true
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99299
Use the target-independent @llvm.fptosi and @llvm.fptoui intrinsics instead.
This includes removing the instrinsics for i32x4.trunc_sat_zero_f64x2_{s,u},
which are now represented in IR as a saturating truncation to a v2i32 followed by
a concatenation with a zero vector.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100596
This is an alternative to D99759 to avoid the compile-time explosion seen in:
https://llvm.org/PR49785
Another potential solution would make the exclusion logic stronger to avoid
blowing up, but note that we reduced the complexity of the exclusion mechanism
in D16204 because it was too costly.
So I'm questioning the need for recursion/exclusion entirely - what is the
optimization value vs. cost of recursively computing known bits based on
assumptions?
This was built into the implementation from the start with 60db058,
and we have kept adding code/cost to deal with that capability.
By clearing the query's AssumptionCache inside computeKnownBitsFromAssume(),
this patch retains all existing assume functionality except refining known
bits based on even more assumptions.
We have 1 regression test that shows a difference in optimization power.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100573
Being lazy with printing the banner seems hard to reason with, we should print it
unconditionally first (it could also lead to duplicate banners if we
have multiple functions in -filter-print-funcs).
The printIR() functions were doing too many things. I separated out the
call from PrintPassInstrumentation since we were essentially doing two
completely separate things in printIR() from different callers.
There were multiple ways to generate the name of some IR. That's all
been moved to getIRName(). The printing of the IR name was also
inconsistent, now it's always "IR Dump on $foo" where "$foo" is the
name. For a function, it's the function name. For a loop, it's what's
printed by Loop::print(), which is more detailed. For an SCC, it's the
list of functions in parentheses. For a module it's "[module]", to
differentiate between a possible SCC with a function called "module".
To preserve D74814, we have to check if we're going to print anything at
all first. This is unfortunate, but I would consider this a special
case that shouldn't be handled in the core logic.
Reviewed By: jamieschmeiser
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100231
SROA shifts TBAA nodes in a way that may present a problem for !tbaa but not !tbaa.struct nodes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99851
Just like in the mul nuw case, it's sufficient that the step is
non-zero. If the step is negative, then the values will jump
between positive and negative, "crossing" zero, but the value of
the recurrence is never actually zero.
It's okay if the step is zero, we'll just stay at the same non-zero
value in that case. The valuable part of this is that the step
doesn't even need to be a constant anymore.
Stepping through callstacks in the example from D99759 reveals
this potential compile-time improvement.
The savings come from avoiding ValueTracking's computing known
bits if we have already dealt with special-case patterns.
Further improvements in this direction seem possible.
This makes a degenerate test based on PR49785 about 40x faster
(25 sec -> 0.6 sec), but it does not address the larger question
of how to limit computeKnownBitsFromAssume(). Ie, the original
test there is still infinite-time for all practical purposes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100408
The start value can't be null for something to be a non-zero
recurrence, so hoist that common check out of the switch.
Subsequent checks may be incomplete or over-specified as noted in:
D100408
I've run into some cases where a large fraction of compile-time is
spent invalidating SCEV. One of the causes is forgetLoop(), which
walks all values that are def-use reachable from the loop header
phis. When invalidating a topmost loop, that might be close to all
values in a function. Additionally, it's fairly common for there to
not actually be anything to invalidate, but we'll still be performing
this walk again and again.
My first thought was that we don't need to continue walking the uses
if the current value doesn't have a SCEV expression. However, this
isn't quite right, because SCEV construction can skip over values
(e.g. for a chain of adds, we might only create a SCEV expression
for the final value).
What this patch does instead is to only walk the (full) def-use chain
of loop phis that have a SCEV expression. If there's no expression
for a phi, then we also don't have any dependent expressions to
invalidate.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100264
Lookup tables generate non PIC-friendly code, which requires dynamic relocation as described in:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45244
This patch adds a new pass that converts lookup tables to relative lookup tables to make them PIC-friendly.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94355
SROA can handle invariant group intrinsics, let the inliner know that
for better heuristics when the intrinsics are present.
This fixes size issues in a couple files when turning on
-fstrict-vtable-pointers in Chrome.
Reviewed By: rnk, mtrofin
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100249
Yang Fan