Since D129288, callbr is allowed to have duplicate successors. This
patch removes a limitation which prevents optimizations from actually
producing such callbrs.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129997
Following some recent discussions, this changes the representation
of callbrs in IR. The current blockaddress arguments are replaced
with `!` label constraints that refer directly to callbr indirect
destinations:
; Before:
%res = callbr i8* asm "", "=r,r,i"(i8* %x, i8* blockaddress(@test8, %foo))
to label %asm.fallthrough [label %foo]
; After:
%res = callbr i8* asm "", "=r,r,!i"(i8* %x)
to label %asm.fallthrough [label %foo]
The benefit of this is that we can easily update the successors of
a callbr, without having to worry about also updating blockaddress
references. This should allow us to remove some limitations:
* Allow unrolling/peeling/rotation of callbr, or any other
clone-based optimizations
(https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/41834)
* Allow duplicate successors
(https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/45248)
This is just the IR representation change though, I will follow up
with patches to remove limtations in various transformation passes
that are no longer needed.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129288
Since we can't change the destination of indirectbr, so when
encounter indirectbr as PredPredBB terminator, we should pass it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129193
SplitBlockPredecessors currently asserts if one of the predecessor
terminators is a callbr. This limitation was originally necessary,
because just like with indirectbr, it was not possible to replace
successors of a callbr. However, this is no longer the case since
D67252. As the requirement nowadays is that callbr must reference
all blockaddrs directly in the call arguments, and these get
automatically updated when setSuccessor() is called, we no longer
need this limitation.
The only thing we need to do here is use replaceSuccessorWith()
instead of replaceUsesOfWith(), because only the former does the
necessary blockaddr updating magic.
I believe there's other similar limitations that can be removed,
e.g. related to critical edge splitting.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129205
All callers pass true.
select-unfold-freeze.ll is now a subset of select.ll so delete it.
Reviewed By: nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126501
JumpThreading may convert selects into branch instructions,
in which case the condition needs to be frozen (as branch on
poison is immediate undefined behavior, unlike select on poison).
The necessary code for this is already in place, this just enables
the option.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D125869
This code is valid for any icmp, so we can safely look through a
freeze when trying to find one.
A caveat here is that replaceFoldableUses() may not end up replacing
any uses in this case. It might make sense to use the freeze as the
context instruction (rather than the terminator) if there is a
freeze, to ensure that it always gets folded. This would require
some changes to how replaceFoldedUses() works though, as it
currently assumes that the value is valid at the end of the block.
This patch makes JumpThreading's ProcessImpliedCondition deal with frozen
conditions.
Reviewed By: nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84941
The test was a part of the revision D81499 and should have been
added with commit 707836ed4e.
Reviewed By: yamauchi, wenlei
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81499
After e734e8286b, it is possible to end up in
a situation where an `indirectbr` is fed by a cast, which is in turn fed by
an operation which only produces integers.
`indirectbr` expects a block address, however these operations can't produce
that.
There were several asserts in `computeValueKnownInPredecessorsImpl` which check
that we're not looking for a block address if we're walking through something
which can never produce one.
Since it's now possible to hit these asserts, this changes them into actual
checks which return false if `Preference` is not `WantInteger`.
This adds a testcase which verifies that we don't crash anymore in these
situations.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99814
In D115311, we're looking to modify clang to emit i constraints rather
than X constraints for callbr's indirect destinations. Prior to doing
so, update all of the existing tests in llvm/ to match.
Reviewed By: void, jyknight
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115410
This solves a problem with non-deterministic output from opt due
to not performing dominator tree updates in a deterministic order.
The problem that was analysed indicated that JumpThreading was using
the DomTreeUpdater via llvm::MergeBasicBlockIntoOnlyPred. When
preparing the list of updates to send to DomTreeUpdater::applyUpdates
we iterated over a SmallPtrSet, which didn't give a well-defined
order of updates to perform.
The added domtree-updates.ll test case is an example that would
result in non-deterministic printouts of the domtree. Semantically
those domtree:s are equivalent, but it show the fact that when we
use the domtree iterator the order in which nodes are visited depend
on the order in which dominator tree updates are performed.
Since some passes (at least EarlyCSE) are iterating over nodes in the
dominator tree in a similar fashion as the domtree printer, then the
order in which transforms are applied by such passes, transitively,
also depend on the order in which dominator tree updates are
performed. And taking EarlyCSE as an example the end result could be
different depending on in which order the transforms are applied.
Reviewed By: nikic, kuhar
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110292
It seems the crashes we saw wasn't caused by this (see comments on the review).
> This is basically D108837 but for jump threading. Free instructions
> should be ignored for the threading decision. JumpThreading already
> skips some free instructions (like pointer bitcasts), but does not
> skip various free intrinsics -- in fact, it currently gives them a
> fairly large cost of 2.
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110290
This reverts commit 4604695d7c.
It caused compiler crashes, see comment on the code review for repro.
> This is basically D108837 but for jump threading. Free instructions
> should be ignored for the threading decision. JumpThreading already
> skips some free instructions (like pointer bitcasts), but does not
> skip various free intrinsics -- in fact, it currently gives them a
> fairly large cost of 2.
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110290
This reverts commit 1e3c6fc7cb.
This is basically D108837 but for jump threading. Free instructions
should be ignored for the threading decision. JumpThreading already
skips some free instructions (like pointer bitcasts), but does not
skip various free intrinsics -- in fact, it currently gives them a
fairly large cost of 2.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110290
There's a potential change in dereferenceability attribute semantics in the nearish future. See llvm-dev thread "RFC: Decomposing deref(N) into deref(N) + nofree" and D99100 for context.
This change simply adds appropriate attributes to tests to keep transform logic exercised under both old and new/proposed semantics. Note that for many of these cases, O3 would infer exactly these attributes on the test IR.
This change handles the idiomatic pattern of a dereferenceable object being passed to a call which can not free that memory. There's a couple other tests which need more one-off attention, they'll be handled in another change.
Fix a bug introduced by f6f6f6375d.
Now for empty PHIs, instead of crashing on assert(hasVal()) in
Optional's internals, we'll return NoAlias, as we did before that patch.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103831
getValueFromCondition() uses a Visited set to record the intermediate value.
However, it uses a postorder way to compute the value first and update the
Visited set later. Thus it will be trapped into an infinite recursion if there
exists IRs that use no dominated by its def as in this example:
%tmp3 = or i1 undef, %tmp4
%tmp4 = or i1 undef, %tmp3
To prevent this, we can insert an Overdefined placeholder into the set
before computing the actual value.
Reviewed by: nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D101273
Jump threading can replace select then unconditional branch with
conditional branch, but when doing so loses debug info.
This destructive transform is eventually leading to a failed Verifier
run during full LTO builds of the Linux kernel with CFI and KCOV
enabled, as reported in PR39531.
ModuleSanitizerCoveragePass will insert calls to
__sanitizer_cov_trace_pc, and sometimes split critical edges,
using whatever debug info may or may not exist for the branch for
the added libcall. Since we can inline calls to
__sanitizer_cov_trace_pc due to LTO, this can lead to the error
observed in PR39531 when the debug info isn't propagated to
the libcall, because of prior destructive transforms that failed to
retain debug info.
Reviewed By: dblaikie
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100137
In LazyValueInfoImpl::isNonNullAtEndOfBlock we populate a set of
pointers, known to be non-null at the end of a block (e.g. because we
did a load through them). We then infer that any pointer, based on an
element of this set is non-null as well ("based" here meaning a
non-null pointer is the underlying object). This is incorrect, even if
the base pointer was non-null, the value of a GEP, that lacks the
inbounds` attribute, may be null.
This issue appeared as miscompilation of the following test case:
int puts(const char *);
typedef struct iter {
int *val;
} iter_t;
static long distance(iter_t first, iter_t last) {
long r = 0;
for (; first.val != last.val; first.val++)
++r;
return r;
}
int main() {
int arr[2] = {0};
iter_t i, j;
i.val = arr;
j.val = arr + 1;
if (distance(i, j) >= 2)
puts("failed");
else
puts("passed");
}
This fixes PR49662.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99642
BasicAA stores a reference to LoopInfo inside. This imposes an implicit
requirement of keeping it up to date whenever we modify the IR (in particular,
whenever we modify terminators of blocks that belong to loops). Failing
to do so leads to incorrect state of the LoopInfo.
Because general AA does not require loop info updates and provides to API to
update it properly, the users of AA reasonably assume that there is no need to
update the loop info. It may be a reason of bugs, as example in PR43276 shows.
This patch drops dependence of BasicAA on LoopInfo to avoid this problem.
This may potentially pessimize the result of queries to BasicAA.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98627
Reviewed By: nikic
I noticed that we were not folding expressions like this:
icmp ult (constexpr), null
in https://llvm.org/PR49355, so we end up with extremely large
icmp instructions as the constant expressions pile up on each other.
There is no potential to mis-fold an unsigned boundary condition
with a zero/null, so this is just falling through a crack in the
pattern matching.
The more general case of comparisons of non-zero constants and
constexpr are more tricky and may require the datalayout to know
how to cast to different types, etc. Negative tests verify that
we are only changing a subset of potential patterns.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98150
When cloning instructions during jump threading, also clone and
adapt any declared scopes. This is primarily important when
threading loop exits, because we'll end up with two dominating
scope declarations in that case (at least after additional loop
rotation). This addresses a loose thread from
https://reviews.llvm.org/rG2556b413a7b8#975012.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D97154
This is similar to D94106, but for the
isGuaranteedToTransferExecutionToSuccessor() helper. We should not
assume that readonly functions will return, as this is only true for
mustprogress functions (in which case we already infer willreturn).
As with the DCE change, for now continue assuming that readonly
intrinsics will return, as not all target intrinsics have been
annotated yet.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D95288
Current approach doesn't work well in cases when multiple paths are predicted to be "cold". By "cold" paths I mean those containing "unreachable" instruction, call marked with 'cold' attribute and 'unwind' handler of 'invoke' instruction. The issue is that heuristics are applied one by one until the first match and essentially ignores relative hotness/coldness
of other paths.
New approach unifies processing of "cold" paths by assigning predefined absolute weight to each block estimated to be "cold". Then we propagate these weights up/down IR similarly to existing approach. And finally set up edge probabilities based on estimated block weights.
One important difference is how we propagate weight up. Existing approach propagates the same weight to all blocks that are post-dominated by a block with some "known" weight. This is useless at least because it always gives 50\50 distribution which is assumed by default anyway. Worse, it causes the algorithm to skip further heuristics and can miss setting more accurate probability. New algorithm propagates the weight up only to the blocks that dominates and post-dominated by a block with some "known" weight. In other words, those blocks that are either always executed or not executed together.
In addition new approach processes loops in an uniform way as well. Essentially loop exit edges are estimated as "cold" paths relative to back edges and should be considered uniformly with other coldness/hotness markers.
Reviewed By: yrouban
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79485
... so just ensure that we pass DomTreeUpdater it into it.
Fixes DomTree preservation for a large number of tests,
all of which are marked as such so that they do not regress.
Details: Jump Threading does not make sense for the targets with divergent CF
since they do not use branch prediction for speculative execution.
Also in the high level IR there is no enough information to conclude that the branch is divergent or uniform.
This may cause errors in further CF lowering.
Reviewed By: rampitec
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93302
... so just ensure that we pass DomTreeUpdater it into it.
Fixes DomTree preservation for a large number of tests,
all of which are marked as such so that they do not regress.
... so just ensure that we pass DomTreeUpdater it into it.
Fixes DomTree preservation for a large number of tests,
all of which are marked as such so that they do not regress.
First step after e113317958,
in these tests, DomTree is valid afterwards, so mark them as such,
so that they don't regress.
In further steps, SimplifyCFG transforms shall taught to preserve DomTree,
in as small steps as possible.
This patch teaches the jump threading pass to call BPI->eraseBlock
when it folds a conditional branch.
Without this patch, BranchProbabilityInfo could end up with stale edge
probabilities for the basic block containing the conditional branch --
one edge probability with less than 1.0 and the other for a removed
edge.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92608
https://llvm.org/PR48362
It's possible that we could stub this out sooner somewhere
within JumpThreading, but I'm not sure how to do that, and
then we would still have potential danger in other callers.
I can't find a way to trigger this using 'instsimplify',
however, because that already has a bailout on unreachable
blocks.
When instructions are cloned from block BB to PredBB in the method
DuplicateCondBranchOnPHIIntoPred() number of successors of PredBB
changes from 1 to number of successors of BB. So we have to copy
branch probabilities from BB to PredBB.
Reviewed By: Kazu Hirata
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90841
This patch teaches the jump threading pass to call BPI->eraseBlock
when it folds a conditional branch.
Without this patch, BranchProbabilityInfo could end up with stale edge
probabilities for the basic block containing the conditional branch --
one edge probability with less than 1.0 and the other for a removed
edge.
This patch is one of the steps before we can safely re-apply D91017.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D91511
Nick Desaulniers