The verification inside loop passes should be done under the
VerifyMemorySSA flag (enabled by EXPESIVE_CHECKS or explicitly with
opt), in order to not add to compile time during regular builds.
We may end up with a case where we have a widenable branch above the loop, but not all widenable branches within the loop have been removed. Since a widenable branch inhibit SCEVs ability to reason about exit counts (by design), we have a tradeoff between effectiveness of this optimization and allowing future widening of the branches within the loop. LoopPred is thought to be one of the most important optimizations for range check elimination, so let's pay the cost.
Bit-Tracking Dead Code Elimination (bdce) do not mark dbg.value as undef after
deleting instruction. which shows invalid state of variable in debugger. This
patches fixes this by marking the dbg.value as undef which depends on dead
instruction.
This fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41925
Patch by kamlesh kumar!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70040
Summary:
This patch moves various checks from ThreadEdge to new function
TryThreadEdge The rational behind this is that I'd like to use
ThreadEdge without its checks in my upcoming patch.
This patch preserves lightweight checks as assertions in ThreadEdge.
ThreadEdge does not repeat the cost check, however.
Reviewers: wmi
Subscribers: hiraditya, jfb, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70338
Summary:
Most libraries are defined in the lib/ directory but there are also a
few libraries defined in tools/ e.g. libLLVM, libLTO. I'm defining
"Component Libraries" as libraries defined in lib/ that may be included in
libLLVM.so. Explicitly marking the libraries in lib/ as component
libraries allows us to remove some fragile checks that attempt to
differentiate between lib/ libraries and tools/ libraires:
1. In tools/llvm-shlib, because
llvm_map_components_to_libnames(LIB_NAMES "all") returned a list of
all libraries defined in the whole project, there was custom code
needed to filter out libraries defined in tools/, none of which should
be included in libLLVM.so. This code assumed that any library
defined as static was from lib/ and everything else should be
excluded.
With this change, llvm_map_components_to_libnames(LIB_NAMES, "all")
only returns libraries that have been added to the LLVM_COMPONENT_LIBS
global cmake property, so this custom filtering logic can be removed.
Doing this also fixes the build with BUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON
and LLVM_BUILD_LLVM_DYLIB=ON.
2. There was some code in llvm_add_library that assumed that
libraries defined in lib/ would not have LLVM_LINK_COMPONENTS or
ARG_LINK_COMPONENTS set. This is only true because libraries
defined lib lib/ use LLVMBuild.txt and don't set these values.
This code has been fixed now to check if the library has been
explicitly marked as a component library, which should now make it
easier to remove LLVMBuild at some point in the future.
I have tested this patch on Windows, MacOS and Linux with release builds
and the following combinations of CMake options:
- "" (No options)
- -DLLVM_BUILD_LLVM_DYLIB=ON
- -DLLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB=ON
- -DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON
- -DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON -DLLVM_BUILD_LLVM_DYLIB=ON
- -DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON -DLLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB=ON
Reviewers: beanz, smeenai, compnerd, phosek
Reviewed By: beanz
Subscribers: wuzish, jholewinski, arsenm, dschuff, jyknight, dylanmckay, sdardis, nemanjai, jvesely, nhaehnle, mgorny, mehdi_amini, sbc100, jgravelle-google, hiraditya, aheejin, fedor.sergeev, asb, rbar, johnrusso, simoncook, apazos, sabuasal, niosHD, jrtc27, MaskRay, zzheng, edward-jones, atanasyan, steven_wu, rogfer01, MartinMosbeck, brucehoult, the_o, dexonsmith, PkmX, jocewei, jsji, dang, Jim, lenary, s.egerton, pzheng, sameer.abuasal, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70179
As a reminder, a "widenable branch" is the pattern "br i1 (and i1 X, WC()), label %taken, label %untaken" where "WC" is the widenable condition intrinsics. The semantics of such a branch (derived from the semantics of WC) is that a new condition can be added into the condition arbitrarily without violating legality.
Broaden the definition in two ways:
Allow swapped operands to the br (and X, WC()) form
Allow widenable branch w/trivial condition (i.e. true) which takes form of br i1 WC()
The former is just general robustness (e.g. for X = non-instruction this is what instcombine produces). The later is specifically important as partial unswitching of a widenable range check produces exactly this form above the loop.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70502
Moving accesses in MemorySSA at InsertionPlace::End, when an instruction is
moved into a block, almost always means insert at the end of the block, but
before the block terminator. This matters when the block terminator is a
MemoryAccess itself (an invoke), and the insertion must be done before
the terminator for the update to be correct.
Insert an additional position: InsertionPlace:BeforeTerminator and update
current usages where this applies.
Resolves PR44027.
This is mostly NFC, but I removed the setting of the guard's calling convention onto the WC call. Why? Because it was untested, and was producing an ill defined output as the declaration's convention wasn't been changed leaving a mismatch which is UB.
This code has never been enabled. While it is tested, it's complicating some refactoring. If we decide to re-implement this, doing it in SimplifyCFG would probably make more sense anyways.
With the widenable condition construct, we have the ability to reason about branches which can be 'widened' (i.e. made to fail more often). We've got a couple o transforms which leverage this. This patch just cleans up the API a bit.
This is prep work for generalizing our definition of a widenable branch slightly. At the moment "br i1 (and A, wc()), ..." is considered widenable, but oddly, neither "br i1 (and wc(), B), ..." or "br i1 wc(), ..." is. That clearly needs addressed, so first, let's centralize the code in one place.
Unswitch (and other loop transforms) like to generate loop exit blocks with unconditional successors, and phi nodes (LCSSA, or simple multiple exiting blocks sharing an exit). Generalize the "likely very rare exit" check slightly to handle this form.
This implements a version of the predicateLoopExits transform from IndVarSimplify extended to exploit widenable conditions - and thus be much wider in scope of legality. The code structure ends up being almost entirely different, so I chose to duplicate this into the LoopPredication pass instead of trying to reuse the code in the IndVars.
The core notions of the transform are as follows:
If we have a widenable condition which controls entry into the loop, we're allowed to widen it arbitrarily. Given that, it's simply a *profitability* question as to what conditions to fold into the widenable branch.
To avoid pass ordering issues, we want to avoid widening cases that would otherwise be dischargeable. Or... widen in a form which can still be discharged. Thus, we phrase the transform as selecting one analyzeable exit from the set of analyzeable exits to keep. This avoids creating pass ordering complexities.
Since none of the above proves that we actually exit through our analyzeable exits - we might exit through something else entirely - we limit ourselves to cases where a) the latch is analyzeable and b) the latch is predicted taken, and c) the exit being removed is statically cold.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69830
It was added in 2014 in 732e0aa9fb with one use in Scalarizer.cpp.
That one use was then removed when porting to the new pass manager in
2018 in b6f76002d9.
While the RFC and the desire to get off of static initializers for
cl::opt all still stand, this code is now dead, and I think we should
delete this code until someone is ready to do the migration.
There were many clients of CommandLine.h that were it transitively
through LLVMContext.h, so I cleaned that up in 4c1a1d3cf9.
Reviewers: beanz
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70280
Summary:
When scalarizing PHI nodes we might try to examine/rewrite
InsertElement nodes in predecessors. If those predecessors
are unreachable from entry, then the IR in those blocks could
have unexpected properties resulting in infinite loops in
Scatterer::operator[].
By simply treating values originating from instructions in
unreachable blocks as undef we do not need to analyse them
further.
This fixes PR41723.
Reviewers: bjope
Reviewed By: bjope
Subscribers: bjope, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70171
This file lists every pass in LLVM, and is included by Pass.h, which is
very popular. Every time we add, remove, or rename a pass in LLVM, it
caused lots of recompilation.
I found this fact by looking at this table, which is sorted by the
number of times a file was changed over the last 100,000 git commits
multiplied by the number of object files that depend on it in the
current checkout:
recompiles touches affected_files header
342380 95 3604 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/STLExtras.h
314730 234 1345 llvm/include/llvm/InitializePasses.h
307036 118 2602 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/APInt.h
213049 59 3611 llvm/include/llvm/Support/MathExtras.h
170422 47 3626 llvm/include/llvm/Support/Compiler.h
162225 45 3605 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/Optional.h
158319 63 2513 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/Triple.h
140322 39 3598 llvm/include/llvm/ADT/StringRef.h
137647 59 2333 llvm/include/llvm/Support/Error.h
131619 73 1803 llvm/include/llvm/Support/FileSystem.h
Before this change, touching InitializePasses.h would cause 1345 files
to recompile. After this change, touching it only causes 550 compiles in
an incremental rebuild.
Reviewers: bkramer, asbirlea, bollu, jdoerfert
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70211
Currently we have limited support for outer loops with multiple basic
blocks after the inner loop exit. But the current checks for creating
PHIs for loop exit values only assumes the header and latches of the
outer loop. It is better to just skip incoming values defined in the
original inner loops. Those are handled earlier.
Reviewers: efriedma, mcrosier
Reviewed By: efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70059
This patch implements a correct, but not terribly useful, transform. In particular, if we have a dynamic alloca in a loop which is guaranteed to execute, and provably not captured, we hoist the alloca out of the loop. The capture tracking is needed so that we can prove that each previous stack region dies before the next one is allocated. The transform decreases the amount of stack allocation needed by a linear factor (e.g. the iteration count of the loop).
Now, I really hope no one is actually using dynamic allocas. As such, why this patch?
Well, the actual problem I'm hoping to make progress on is allocation hoisting. There's a large draft patch out for review (https://reviews.llvm.org/D60056), and this patch was the smallest chunk of testable functionality I could come up with which takes a step vaguely in that direction.
Once this is in, it makes motivating the changes to capture tracking mentioned in TODOs testable. After that, I hope to extend this to trivial malloc free regions (i.e. free dominating all loop exits) and allocation functions for GCed languages.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69227
The change itself is straight forward and obvious, but ... there's an existing test checking for exactly the opposite. Both I and Artur think this is simply conservatism in the initial implementation. If anyone bisects a problem to this, a counter example will be very interesting.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69907
The basic idea of the transform is to convert variant loop exit conditions into invariant exit conditions by changing the iteration on which the exit is taken when we know that the trip count is unobservable. See the original patch which introduced the code for a more complete explanation.
The individual parts of this have been reviewed, the result has been fuzzed, and then further analyzed by hand, but despite all of that, I will not be suprised to see breakage here. If you see problems, please don't hesitate to revert - though please do provide a test case. The most likely class of issues are latent SCEV bugs and without a reduced test case, I'll be essentially stuck on reducing them.
(Note: A bunch of tests were opted out of the new transform to preserve coverage. That landed in a previous commit to simplify revert cycles if they turn out to be needed.)
Summary:
This patch factors out code to clone instructions -- partly for
readability and partly to facilitate an upcoming patch of my own.
Reviewers: wmi
Subscribers: hiraditya, jfb, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69861
We had a subtle, but nasty bug in our definition of a widenable branch, and thus in the transforms which used that utility. Specifically, we returned true for any branch which included a widenable condition within it's condition, regardless of whether that widenable condition also had other uses.
The problem is that the result of the WC() call is defined to be one particular value. As such, all users must agree as to what that value is. If we widen a branch without also updating *all other users* of the WC in the same way, we have broken the required semantics.
Most of the textual diff is updating existing transforms not to leave dead uses hanging around. They're largely NFC as the dead instructions would be immediately deleted by other passes. The reason to make these changes is so that the transforms preserve the widenable branch form.
In practice, we don't get bitten by this only because it isn't profitable to CSE WC() calls and the lowering pass from guards uses distinct WC calls per branch.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69916
This patch fixes two issues noticed by inspection when going to enable the loop predication code in IndVarSimplify.
Issue 1 - Both the LoopPredication transform, and the already on by default optimizeLoopExits transform, modify the exit count of the exits they modify. (either to 0 or Infinity) Looking at the code more closely, this was not reflected into SCEV and we were instead running later transforms with incorrect SCEVs. Fixing this requires forgetting the loop, weakening a too strong assert, and updating SCEV to not pessimize results when a loop is provable untaken. I haven't been able to find a test case to demonstrate the miscompile.
Issue 2 - For modules without a data layout, we can end up with unsized pointer typed exit counts. Just bail out of this case.
I think these are the last two issues which need addressed before we enable this by default. The code has already survived a decent amount of fuzzing without revealing either of the above.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69695
Summary:
This patch factors out code to merge a basic block with its sole
successor -- partly for readability and partly to facilitate an
upcoming patch of my own.
Reviewers: wmi
Subscribers: hiraditya, jfb, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69852
Summary:
This patch factors out common code to update the SSA form in
JumpThreading.cpp -- partly for readability and partly to facilitate
an coming patch of my own.
Reviewers: wmi
Subscribers: hiraditya, jfb, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69811
As discussed in https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43870,
this transform is missing a crucial legality check:
the old (non-countable) loop would early-return upon first mismatch,
but there is no such guarantee for bcmp/memcmp.
We'd need to ensure that [PtrA, PtrA+NBytes) and [PtrB, PtrB+NBytes)
are fully dereferenceable memory regions. But that would limit
the transform to constant loop trip counts and would further
cripple it because dereferenceability analysis is *very* partial.
Furthermore, even if all that is done, every single test
would need to be rewritten from scratch.
So let's just give up.
Since SCEV can cache information about location of an instruction, it should be invalidated when the instruction is moved.
There should be similar bug in code sinking part of LICM, it will be fixed in a follow-up change.
Patch Author: Daniil Suchkov
Reviewers: asbirlea, mkazantsev, reames
Reviewed By: asbirlea
Subscribers: hiraditya, javed.absar, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69370
This phi simplification transform was added with:
D45448
However as shown in PR43802:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43802
...we must be careful not to propagate poison when we do the substitution.
There might be some more complicated analysis possible to retain the overflow flag,
but it should always be safe and easy to drop flags (we have similar behavior in
instcombine and other passes).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69442
We were already going to all of the trouble of computing maximum constant exit counts for each loop exit, we might as well expose them through the API. The change in IndVars is mostly to demonstrate that the wired up code works, but it als very slightly strengthens the transform. The strengthened case is rather narrow though: it requires one exactly analyzeable exit, one imprecisely analyzeable exit (with the upper bound less than the precise one), and one unanalyzeable exit. I coudn't construct a reasonably stable test case.
This does increase the memory usage of the BackedgeTakenCount by a factor of 2 in the worst case.
I also noticed the loop in IndVars is O(#Exits ^ 2). This doesn't change with this patch. A future patch will cache this result inside of SCEV to avoid requering.
The static analyzer is warning about a potential null dereference, but we should be able to use cast<> directly and if not assert will fire for us.
llvm-svn: 375429
Alina Sbirlea