Summary:
The code for generating a name for loops for various reporting scenarios
created a name by serializing the loop into a string. This may result in
a very large name for a loop containing many blocks. Use the getName()
function on the loop instead.
Author: Jamie Schmeiser <schmeise@ca.ibm.com>
Reviewed By: Whitney (Whitney Tsang), aeubanks (Arthur Eubanks)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133587
It is confusing to have two ways of specifying the same pass
('simple-loop-unswitch' and 'unswitch'). This patch replaces
'unswitch' by 'simple-loop-unswitch' to get a unique identifier.
Using 'simple-loop-unswitch' instead of 'unswitch' also has the
advantage of matching how the pass is named in DEBUG_TYPE etc. So
this makes it a bit more consistent how we refer to the pass in
options such as -passes, -print-after and -debug-only.
Reviewed By: aeubanks
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105628
To support options like -print-before=<pass> and -print-after=<pass>
the PassBuilder will register PassInstrumentation callbacks as well
as a mapping between internal pass class names and the pass names
used in those options (and other cmd line interfaces). But for
some reason all the passes that takes options where missing in those
maps, so for example "-print-after=loop-vectorize" didn't work.
This patch will add the missing entries by also taking care of
function and loop passes with params when setting up the class to
pass name maps.
One might notice that even with this patch it might be tricky to
know what pass name to use in options such as -print-after. This
because there only is a single mapping from class name to pass name,
while the PassRegistry currently is a bit messy as it sometimes
reuses the same class for different pass names (without using the
"pass with params" scheme, or the pass-name<variant> syntax).
It gets extra messy in some situations. For example the
MemorySanitizerPass can run like this (with debug and print-after)
opt -passes='kmsan' -print-after=msan-module -debug-only=msan
The 'kmsan' alias for 'msan<kernel>' is just confusing as one might
think that 'kmsan' is a separate pass (but the DEBUG_TYPE is still
just 'msan'). And since the module pass version of the pass adds
a mapping from 'MemorySanitizerPass' to 'msan-module' one need to
use 'msan-module' in the print-before and print-after options.
Reviewed By: ychen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105006
This currently blocks --print-before/after with a legacy PM pass, for
example when we use the new PM for the optimization pipeline but the
legacy PM for the codegen pipeline. Also in the future when the codegen
pipeline works with the new PM there will be multiple places to specify
passes, so even when everything is using the new PM, there will still be
multiple places that can accept different pass names.
Reviewed By: hoy, ychen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94283
This changes --print-before/after to be a list of strings rather than
legacy passes. (this also has the effect of not showing the entire list
of passes in --help-hidden after --print-before/after, which IMO is
great for making it less verbose).
Currently PrintIRInstrumentation passes the class name rather than pass
name to llvm::shouldPrintBeforePass(), meaning
llvm::shouldPrintBeforePass() never functions as intended in the NPM.
There is no easy way of converting class names to pass names outside of
within an instance of PassBuilder.
This adds a map of pass class names to their short names in
PassRegistry.def within PassInstrumentationCallbacks. It is populated
inside the constructor of PassBuilder, which takes a
PassInstrumentationCallbacks.
Add a pointer to PassInstrumentationCallbacks inside
PrintIRInstrumentation and use the newly created map.
This is a bit hacky, but I can't think of a better way since the short
id to class name only exists within PassRegistry.def. This also doesn't
handle passes not in PassRegistry.def but rather added via
PassBuilder::registerPipelineParsingCallback().
llvm/test/CodeGen/Generic/print-after.ll doesn't seem very useful now
with this change.
Reviewed By: ychen, jamieschmeiser
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87216
Jamie Schmeiser