This allows the user/front-end to specify a model that is better
than what LLVM would choose by default. For example, a variable
might be declared as
@x = thread_local(initialexec) global i32 42
if it will not be used in a shared library that is dlopen'ed.
If the specified model isn't supported by the target, or if LLVM can
make a better choice, a different model may be used.
llvm-svn: 159077
Original message:
Performance optimizations:
- SwitchInst: case values stored separately from Operands List. It allows to make faster access to individual case value numbers or ranges.
- Optimized IntItem, added APInt value caching.
- Optimized IntegersSubsetGeneric: added optimizations for cases when subset is single number or when subset consists from single numbers only.
llvm-svn: 158997
- provide more extensive set of functions to detect library allocation functions (e.g., malloc, calloc, strdup, etc)
- provide an API to compute the size and offset of an object pointed by
Move a few clients (GVN, AA, instcombine, ...) to the new API.
This implementation is a lot more aggressive than each of the custom implementations being replaced.
Patch reviewed by Nick Lewycky and Chandler Carruth, thanks.
llvm-svn: 158919
I'll admit I'm not entirely satisfied with this change, but it seemed
the cleanest option. Other suggestions quite welcome
The issue is that the traits specializations have static methods which
return the typedef'ed PHI_iterator type. In both the IR and MI layers
this is typedef'ed to a custom iterator class defined in an anonymous
namespace giving the types and the functions returning them internal
linkage. However, because the traits specialization is defined in the
'llvm' namespace (where it has to be, specialized template lives there),
and is in turn used in the templated implementation of the SSAUpdater.
This led to the linkage conflict that Clang now warns about.
The simplest solution to me was just to define the PHI_iterator as
a nested class inside the trait specialization. That way it still
doesn't get scoped widely, it can't be accidentally reused somewhere,
etc. This is a little gross just because nested class definitions are
a little gross, but the alternatives seem more ad-hoc.
llvm-svn: 158799
This patch extends FoldBranchToCommonDest to fold unconditional branches.
For unconditional branches, we fold them if it is easy to update the phi nodes
in the common successors.
rdar://10554090
llvm-svn: 158392
There are some that I didn't remove this round because they looked like
obvious stubs. There are dead variables in gtest too, they should be
fixed upstream.
llvm-svn: 158090
Implemented IntItem - the wrapper around APInt. Why not to use APInt item directly right now?
1. It will very difficult to implement case ranges as series of small patches. We got several large and heavy patches. Each patch will about 90-120 kb. If you replace ConstantInt with APInt in SwitchInst you will need to changes at the same time all Readers,Writers and absolutely all passes that uses SwitchInst.
2. We can implement APInt pool inside and save memory space. E.g. we use several switches that works with 256 bit items (switch on signatures, or strings). We can avoid value duplicates in this case.
3. IntItem can be easyly easily replaced with APInt.
4. Currenly we can interpret IntItem both as ConstantInt and as APInt. It allows to provide SwitchInst methods that works with ConstantInt for non-updated passes.
Why I need it right now? Currently I need to update SimplifyCFG pass (EqualityComparisons). I need to work with APInts directly a lot, so peaces of code
ConstantInt *V = ...;
if (V->getValue().ugt(AnotherV->getValue()) {
...
}
will look awful. Much more better this way:
IntItem V = ConstantIntVal->getValue();
if (AnotherV < V) {
}
Of course any reviews are welcome.
P.S.: I'm also going to rename ConstantRangesSet to IntegersSubset, and CRSBuilder to IntegersSubsetMapping (allows to map individual subsets of integers to the BasicBlocks).
Since in future these classes will founded on APInt, it will possible to use them in more generic ways.
llvm-svn: 157576
LowerSwitch::Clusterify : main functinality was replaced with CRSBuilder::optimize, so big part of Clusterify's code was reduced.
test/Transform/LowerSwitch/feature.ll - this test was refactored: grep + count was replaced with FileCheck usage.
llvm-svn: 157384
of the CodeExtractor utility. This allows speculatively computing input
and output sets to measure the likely size impact of the code
extraction.
These sets cannot be reused sadly -- we mutate the function prior to
forming the final sets used by the actual extraction.
The interface has been revamped slightly to make it easier to use
correctly by making the interface const and sinking the computation of
the number of exit blocks into the full extraction function and away
from the rest of this logic which just computed two output parameters.
llvm-svn: 156168
and expose it as a utility class rather than as free function wrappers.
The simple free-function interface works well for the bugpoint-specific
pass's uses of code extraction, but in an upcoming patch for more
advanced code extraction, they simply don't expose a rich enough
interface. I need to expose various stages of the process of doing the
code extraction and query information to decide whether or not to
actually complete the extraction or give up.
Rather than build up a new predicate model and pass that into these
functions, just take the class that was actually implementing the
functions and lift it up into a proper interface that can be used to
perform code extraction. The interface is cleaned up and re-documented
to work better in a header. It also is now setup to accept the blocks to
be extracted in the constructor rather than in a method.
In passing this essentially reverts my previous commit here exposing
a block-level query for eligibility of extraction. That is no longer
necessary with the more rich interface as clients can query the
extraction object for eligibility directly. This will reduce the number
of walks of the input basic block sequence by quite a bit which is
useful if this enters the normal optimization pipeline.
llvm-svn: 156163
extraction into a public interface. Also clean it up and apply it more
consistently such that we check for landing pads *anywhere* in the
extracted code, not just in single-block extraction.
This will be used to guide decisions in passes that are planning to
eventually perform a round of code extraction.
llvm-svn: 156114
Allow the "SplitCriticalEdge" function to split the edge to a landing pad. If
the pass is *sure* that it thinks it knows what it's doing, then it may go ahead
and specify that the landing pad can have its critical edge split. The loop
unswitch pass is one of these passes. It will split the critical edges of all
edges coming from a loop to a landing pad not within the loop. Doing so will
retain important loop analysis information, such as loop simplify.
llvm-svn: 155817
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
simplification has been performed. This is a bit less efficient
(requires another ilist walk of the basic blocks) but shouldn't matter
in practice. More importantly, it's just too much work to keep track of
all the various ways the return instructions can be mutated while
simplifying them. This fixes yet another crasher, reported by Daniel
Dunbar.
llvm-svn: 154179
dead code, including dead return instructions in some cases. Otherwise,
we end up having a bogus poniter to a return instruction that blows up
much further down the road.
It turns out that this pattern is both simpler to code, easier to update
in the face of enhancements to the inliner cleanup, and likely cheaper
given that it won't add dead instructions to the list.
Thanks to John Regehr's numerous test cases for teasing this out.
llvm-svn: 154157
This allows us to keep passing reduced masks to SimplifyDemandedBits, but
know about all the bits if SimplifyDemandedBits fails. This allows instcombine
to simplify cases like the one in the included testcase.
llvm-svn: 154011
blocks in the function cloner. This removes the last case of trivially
dead code that I've been seeing in the wild getting inlined, analyzed,
re-inlined, optimized, only to be deleted. Nukes a FIXME from the
cleanup tests.
llvm-svn: 153572
aggressively. There are lots of dire warnings about this being expensive
that seem to predate switching to the TrackingVH-based value remapper
that is automatically updated on RAUW. This makes it easy to not just
prune single-entry PHIs, but to fully simplify PHIs, and to recursively
simplify the newly inlined code to propagate PHINode simplifications.
This introduces a bit of a thorny problem though. We may end up
simplifying a branch condition to a constant when we fold PHINodes, and
we would like to nuke any dead blocks resulting from this so that time
isn't wasted continually analyzing them, but this isn't easy. Deleting
basic blocks *after* they are fully cloned and mapped into the new
function currently requires manually updating the value map. The last
piece of the simplification-during-inlining puzzle will require either
switching to WeakVH mappings or some other piece of refactoring. I've
left a FIXME in the testcase about this.
llvm-svn: 153410
to instead rely on much more generic and powerful instruction
simplification in the function cloner (and thus inliner).
This teaches the pruning function cloner to use instsimplify rather than
just the constant folder to fold values during cloning. This can
simplify a large number of things that constant folding alone cannot
begin to touch. For example, it will realize that 'or' and 'and'
instructions with certain constant operands actually become constants
regardless of what their other operand is. It also can thread back
through the caller to perform simplifications that are only possible by
looking up a few levels. In particular, GEPs and pointer testing tend to
fold much more heavily with this change.
This should (in some cases) have a positive impact on compile times with
optimizations on because the inliner itself will simply avoid cloning
a great deal of code. It already attempted to prune proven-dead code,
but now it will be use the stronger simplifications to prove more code
dead.
llvm-svn: 153403
fire if anything ever invalidates the assumption of a terminator
instruction being unchanged throughout the routine.
I've convinced myself that the current definition of simplification
precludes such a transformation, so I think getting some asserts
coverage that we don't violate this agreement is sufficient to make this
code safe for the foreseeable future.
Comments to the contrary or other suggestions are of course welcome. =]
The bots are now happy with this code though, so it appears the bug here
has indeed been fixed.
llvm-svn: 153401
list. This is a bad idea. ;] I'm hopeful this is the bug that's showing
up with the MSVC bots, but we'll see.
It is definitely unnecessary. InstSimplify won't do anything to
a terminator instruction, we don't need to even include it in the
iteration range. We can also skip the now dead terminator check,
although I've made it an assert to help document that this is an
important invariant.
I'm still a bit queasy about this because there is an implicit
assumption that the terminator instruction cannot be RAUW'ed by the
simplification code. While that appears to be true at the moment, I see
no guarantee that would ensure it remains true in the future. I'm
looking at the cleanest way to solve that...
llvm-svn: 153399
bit simpler by handling a common case explicitly.
Also, refactor the implementation to use a worklist based walk of the
recursive users, rather than trying to use value handles to detect and
recover from RAUWs during the recursive descent. This fixes a very
subtle bug in the previous implementation where degenerate control flow
structures could cause mutually recursive instructions (PHI nodes) to
collapse in just such a way that From became equal to To after some
amount of recursion. At that point, we hit the inf-loop that the assert
at the top attempted to guard against. This problem is defined away when
not using value handles in this manner. There are lots of comments
claiming that the WeakVH will protect against just this sort of error,
but they're not accurate about the actual implementation of WeakVHs,
which do still track RAUWs.
I don't have any test case for the bug this fixes because it requires
running the recursive simplification on unreachable phi nodes. I've no
way to either run this or easily write an input that triggers it. It was
found when using instruction simplification inside the inliner when
running over the nightly test-suite.
llvm-svn: 153393
Do not call SplitBlockPredecessors on a loop preheader when one of the
predecessors is an indirectbr. Otherwise, you will hit this assert:
!isa<IndirectBrInst>(Preds[i]->getTerminator()) && "Cannot split an edge from an IndirectBrInst"
llvm-svn: 153134
Only record IVUsers that are dominated by simplified loop
headers. Otherwise SCEVExpander will crash while looking for a
preheader.
I previously tried to work around this in LSR itself, but that was
insufficient. This way, LSR can continue to run if some uses are not
in simple loops, as long as we don't attempt to analyze those users.
Fixes <rdar://problem/11049788> Segmentation fault: 11 in LoopStrengthReduce
llvm-svn: 152892
Renamed methods caseBegin, caseEnd and caseDefault with case_begin, case_end, and case_default.
Added some notes relative to case iterators.
llvm-svn: 152532
NAKAMURA Takumi