Commit Graph

10 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Fangrui Song f31811f2dc [BasicAA] Rename deprecated -basicaa to -basic-aa
Follow-up to D82607
Revert an accidental change (empty.ll) of D82683
2020-06-26 20:41:37 -07:00
Eli Friedman 11aa3707e3 StoreInst should store Align, not MaybeAlign
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
2020-05-15 12:26:58 -07:00
Eli Friedman 4532a50899 Infer alignment of unmarked loads in IR/bitcode parsing.
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
2020-05-14 13:03:50 -07:00
Sam Parker 60d6fb2a63 [SCEV] Use NoWrapFlags when expanding a simple mul
Second functional change following on from rL362687. Pass the
NoWrapFlags from the MulExpr to InsertBinop when we're generating a
shl or mul.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61934

llvm-svn: 363540
2019-06-17 10:05:18 +00:00
Benjamin Kramer f1249442cf Revert "[SCEV] Use wrap flags in InsertBinop"
This reverts commit r362687. Miscompiles llvm-profdata during selfhost.

llvm-svn: 362699
2019-06-06 12:35:46 +00:00
Sam Parker 7cc580f5e9 [SCEV] Use wrap flags in InsertBinop
If the given SCEVExpr has no (un)signed flags attached to it, transfer
these to the resulting instruction or use them to find an existing
instruction.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61934

llvm-svn: 362687
2019-06-06 08:56:26 +00:00
Eric Christopher cee313d288 Revert "Temporarily Revert "Add basic loop fusion pass.""
The reversion apparently deleted the test/Transforms directory.

Will be re-reverting again.

llvm-svn: 358552
2019-04-17 04:52:47 +00:00
Eric Christopher a863435128 Temporarily Revert "Add basic loop fusion pass."
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).

This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.

llvm-svn: 358546
2019-04-17 02:12:23 +00:00
Daniel Neilson 3faabbbe85 [Atomics] Rename and change prototype for atomic memcpy intrinsic
Summary:

Background: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-May/112779.html

This change is to alter the prototype for the atomic memcpy intrinsic. The prototype itself is being changed to more closely resemble the semantics and parameters of the llvm.memcpy intrinsic -- to ease later combination of the llvm.memcpy and atomic memcpy intrinsics. Furthermore, the name of the atomic memcpy intrinsic is being changed to make it clear that it is not a generic atomic memcpy, but specifically a memcpy is unordered atomic.

Reviewers: reames, sanjoy, efriedma

Reviewed By: reames

Subscribers: mzolotukhin, anna, llvm-commits, skatkov

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33240

llvm-svn: 305558
2017-06-16 14:43:59 +00:00
Anna Thomas 2f1556726c [LoopIdiom] Move X86 specific atomic memcpy test to the X86 directory
Patch https://reviews.llvm.org/rL304806 was causing failures in Aarch64
and multiple other targets since the test should be run on X86 only.

Specifying the target triple is not enough. Moving the testcase to the
X86 target directory in LoopIdiom.

llvm-svn: 304809
2017-06-06 17:46:41 +00:00