As discussed in D86843, -earlycse-debug-hash should be used in more regression
tests to catch inconsistency between the hashing and the equivalence check.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86863
This patch adds NoUndef to Intrinsics.td.
The attribute is attached to llvm.assume's operand, because llvm.assume(undef)
is UB.
It is attached to pointer operands of several memory accessing intrinsics
as well.
This change makes ValueTracking::getGuaranteedNonPoisonOps' intrinsic check
unnecessary, so it is removed.
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86576
This is D77454, except for stores. All the infrastructure work was done
for loads, so the remaining changes necessary are relatively small.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79968
For IR generated by a compiler, this is really simple: you just take the
datalayout from the beginning of the file, and apply it to all the IR
later in the file. For optimization testcases that don't care about the
datalayout, this is also really simple: we just use the default
datalayout.
The complexity here comes from the fact that some LLVM tools allow
overriding the datalayout: some tools have an explicit flag for this,
some tools will infer a datalayout based on the code generation target.
Supporting this properly required plumbing through a bunch of new
machinery: we want to allow overriding the datalayout after the
datalayout is parsed from the file, but before we use any information
from it. Therefore, IR/bitcode parsing now has a callback to allow tools
to compute the datalayout at the appropriate time.
Not sure if I covered all the LLVM tools that want to use the callback.
(clang? lli? Misc IR manipulation tools like llvm-link?). But this is at
least enough for all the LLVM regression tests, and IR without a
datalayout is not something frontends should generate.
This change had some sort of weird effects for certain CodeGen
regression tests: if the datalayout is overridden with a datalayout with
a different program or stack address space, we now parse IR based on the
overridden datalayout, instead of the one written in the file (or the
default one, if none is specified). This broke a few AVR tests, and one
AMDGPU test.
Outside the CodeGen tests I mentioned, the test changes are all just
fixing CHECK lines and moving around datalayout lines in weird places.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78403
Summary: this patch preserve information from various places in EarlyCSE into assume bundles.
Reviewers: jdoerfert
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D76769
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).
This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.
llvm-svn: 358546
If we've already established an invariant scope with an earlier generation, we don't want to hide it in the scoped hash table with one with a later generation. I noticed this when working on the invariant-load handling, but it also applies to the invariant.start case as well.
Without this change, my previous patch for invariant-load regresses some cases, so I'm pushing this without waiting for review. This is why you don't make last minute tweaks to patches to catch "obvious cases" after it's already been reviewed. Bad Philip!
llvm-svn: 327655
If we have an invariant.start with no corresponding invariant.end, then the memory location becomes invariant indefinitely after the invariant.start. As a result, anything dominated by the start is guaranteed to see the value the memory location had when the invariant.start executed.
This patch adds an AvailableInvariants table which tracks the generation a particular memory location became invariant and then uses that information to allow value forwarding that would otherwise be disallowed by potentially aliasing stores. (Reminder: In EarlyCSE everything clobbers everything by default.)
This should be compatible with the MemorySSA variant, but design is generational. We can and should add first class support for invariant.start within MemorySSA at a later time. I took a quick look at doing so, but probably need some input from a MemorySSA expert.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D43716
llvm-svn: 327577
Bryan Chan