Commit Graph

222 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Teresa Johnson 8482e56920 Use profile summary to disable peeling for huge working sets
Summary:
Detect when the working set size of a profiled application is huge,
by comparing the number of counts required to reach the hot percentile
in the profile summary to a large threshold*.

When the working set size is determined to be huge, disable peeling
to avoid bloating the working set further.

*Note that the selected threshold (15K) is significantly larger than the
largest working set value in SPEC cpu2006 (which is gcc at around 11K).

Reviewers: davidxl

Subscribers: mehdi_amini, mzolotukhin, eraman, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36288

llvm-svn: 310005
2017-08-03 23:42:58 +00:00
Teresa Johnson 9a18a6f08b Disable loop peeling during full unrolling pass.
Summary:
Peeling should not occur during the full unrolling invocation early
in the pipeline, but rather later with partial and runtime loop
unrolling. The later loop unrolling invocation will also eventually
utilize profile summary and branch frequency information, which
we would like to use to control peeling. And for ThinLTO we want
to delay peeling until the backend (post thin link) phase, just as
we do for most types of unrolling.

Ensure peeling doesn't occur during the full unrolling invocation
by adding a parameter to the shared implementation function, similar
to the way partial and runtime loop unrolling are disabled.

Performance results for ThinLTO suggest this has a neutral to positive
effect on some internal benchmarks.

Reviewers: chandlerc, davidxl

Subscribers: mzolotukhin, llvm-commits, mehdi_amini

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36258

llvm-svn: 309966
2017-08-03 17:52:38 +00:00
Teresa Johnson ecd901314d [PM] Split LoopUnrollPass and make partial unroller a function pass
Summary:
This is largely NFC*, in preparation for utilizing ProfileSummaryInfo
and BranchFrequencyInfo analyses. In this patch I am only doing the
splitting for the New PM, but I can do the same for the legacy PM as
a follow-on if this looks good.

*Not NFC since for partial unrolling we lose the updates done to the
loop traversal (adding new sibling and child loops) - according to
Chandler this is not very useful for partial unrolling, but it also
means that the debugging flag -unroll-revisit-child-loops no longer
works for partial unrolling.

Reviewers: chandlerc

Subscribers: mehdi_amini, mzolotukhin, eraman, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36157

llvm-svn: 309886
2017-08-02 20:35:29 +00:00
Sam Parker 19a08e42a8 [ARM] Enable partial and runtime unrolling
Enable runtime and partial loop unrolling of simple loops without
calls on M-class cores. The thresholds are calculated based on
whether the target is Thumb or Thumb-2.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34619

llvm-svn: 308956
2017-07-25 08:51:30 +00:00
Balaram Makam b05a55787a [SimplifyCFG] Defer folding unconditional branches to LateSimplifyCFG if it can destroy canonical loop structure.
Summary:
When simplifying unconditional branches from empty blocks, we pre-test if the
BB belongs to a set of loop headers and keep the block to prevent passes from
destroying canonical loop structure. However, the current algorithm fails if
the destination of the branch is a loop header. Especially when such a loop's
latch block is folded into loop header it results in additional backedges and
LoopSimplify turns it into a nested loop which prevent later optimizations
from being applied (e.g., loop  unrolling and loop interleaving).

This patch augments the existing algorithm by further checking if the
destination of the branch belongs to a set of loop headers and defer
eliminating it if yes to LateSimplifyCFG.

Fixes PR33605: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33605

Reviewers: efriedma, mcrosier, pacxx, hsung, davidxl

Reviewed By: efriedma

Subscribers: ashutosh.nema, gberry, javed.absar, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35411

llvm-svn: 308422
2017-07-19 08:53:34 +00:00
Anna Thomas ec9b326569 [RuntimeUnrolling] Update DomTree correctly when exit blocks have successors
Summary:
When we runtime unroll with multiple exit blocks, we also need to update the
immediate dominators of the immediate successors of the exit blocks.

Reviewers: reames, mkuper, mzolotukhin, apilipenko

Reviewed by: mzolotukhin

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35304

llvm-svn: 307909
2017-07-13 13:21:23 +00:00
Anna Thomas 8e431a9851 [LoopUnrollRuntime] NFC: Refactored safety checks of unrolling multi-exit loop
Refactored the code and separated out a function
`canSafelyUnrollMultiExitLoop` to reduce redundant checks and make it
easier to add profitability heuristics later.
Added tests to runtime unrolling to make sure that unrolling for
multi-exit loops is not done unless the option
-unroll-runtime-multi-exit is true.

llvm-svn: 307843
2017-07-12 20:55:43 +00:00
Anna Thomas 5526a33f4f [LoopUnrollRuntime] Avoid multi-exit nested loop with epilog generation
The loop structure for the outer loop does not contain the epilog
preheader when we try to unroll inner loop with multiple exits and
epilog code is generated. For now, we just bail out in such cases.
Added a test case that shows the problem. Without this bailout, we would
trip on assert saying LCSSA form is incorrect for outer loop.

llvm-svn: 307676
2017-07-11 17:16:33 +00:00
Anna Thomas 70ffd65ca9 [LoopUnrollRuntime] Remove strict assert about VMap requirement
When unrolling under multiple exits which is under off-by-default option,
the assert that checks for VMap entry in loop exit values is too strong.
(assert if VMap entry did not exist, the value should be a
constant). However, values derived from
constants or from values outside loop, does not have a VMap entry too.

Removed the assert and added a testcase showcasing the property for
non-constant values.

llvm-svn: 307542
2017-07-10 15:29:38 +00:00
Anna Thomas e3872003d0 [LoopUnrollRuntime] Support multiple exit blocks unrolling when prolog remainder generated
With the NFC refactoring in rL307417 (git SHA 987dd01), all the logic
is in place to support multiple exit/exiting blocks when prolog
remainder is generated.
This patch removed the assert that multiple exit blocks unrolling is only
supported when epilog remainder is generated.

Also, added test runs and checks with PROLOG prefix in
runtime-loop-multiple-exits.ll test cases.

llvm-svn: 307435
2017-07-07 20:12:32 +00:00
Anna Thomas eb6d5d1950 [LoopUnrollRuntime] Bailout when multiple exiting blocks to the unique latch exit block
Currently, we do not support multiple exiting blocks to the
latch exit block. However, this bailout wasn't triggered when we had a
unique exit block (which is the latch exit), with multiple exiting
blocks to that unique exit.

Moved the bailout so that it's triggered in both cases and added
testcase.

llvm-svn: 307291
2017-07-06 18:39:26 +00:00
Anna Thomas e5e5e59d8b [RuntimeUnrolling] Add logic for loops with multiple exit blocks
Summary:
Runtime unrolling is done for loops with a single exit block and a
single exiting block (and this exiting block should be the latch block).
This patch adds logic to support unrolling in the presence of multiple exit
blocks (which also means multiple exiting blocks).
Currently this is under an off-by-default option and is supported when
epilog code is generated. Support in presence of prolog code will be in
a future patch (we just need to add more tests, and update comments).

This patch is essentially an implementation patch. I have not added any
heuristic (in terms of branches added or code size) to decide when
this should be enabled.

Reviewers: mkuper, sanjoy, reames, evstupac

Reviewed by: reames

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33001

llvm-svn: 306846
2017-06-30 17:57:07 +00:00
Geoff Berry 378374d457 [AArch64][Falkor] Try to avoid exhausting HW prefetcher resources when unrolling.
Reviewers: t.p.northover, mcrosier

Subscribers: aemerson, rengolin, javed.absar, kristof.beyls, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34533

llvm-svn: 306584
2017-06-28 18:53:09 +00:00
Geoff Berry b0573547f6 [LoopUnroll] Fix bug in computeUnrollCount causing it to not honor MaxCount
Reviewers: sanjoy, anna, reames, apilipenko, igor-laevsky, mkuper

Subscribers: mcrosier, llvm-commits, mzolotukhin

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34532

llvm-svn: 306564
2017-06-28 17:01:15 +00:00
Davide Italiano cc7257c200 [LoopUnroll] Fix a test. REQUIRE should be REQUIRES.
Found by inspection.

llvm-svn: 302909
2017-05-12 15:30:58 +00:00
Davide Italiano 0f62eea7ff [LoopUnroll] Don't try to unroll non canonical loops.
The current Loop Unroll implementation works with loops having a
single latch that contains a conditional branch to a block outside
the loop (the other successor is, by defition of latch, the header).
If this precondition doesn't hold, avoid unrolling the loop as
the code is not ready to handle such circumstances.

Differential Revision:  https://reviews.llvm.org/D32261

llvm-svn: 301239
2017-04-24 20:14:11 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 751579cac0 [LoopPeeling] Get rid of Phis that become invariant after N steps
This patch is a generalization of the improvement introduced in rL296898.
Previously, we were able to peel one iteration of a loop to get rid of a Phi that becomes
an invariant on the 2nd iteration. In more general case, if a Phi becomes invariant after
N iterations, we can peel N times and turn it into invariant.
In order to do this, we for every Phi in loop's header we define the Invariant Depth value
which is calculated as follows:

Given %x = phi <Inputs from above the loop>, ..., [%y, %back.edge].

If %y is a loop invariant, then Depth(%x) = 1.
If %y is a Phi from the loop header, Depth(%x) = Depth(%y) + 1.
Otherwise, Depth(%x) is infinite.
Notice that if we peel a loop, all Phis with Depth = 1 become invariants,
and all other Phis with finite depth decrease the depth by 1.
Thus, peeling N first iterations allows us to turn all Phis with Depth <= N
into invariants.

Reviewers: reames, apilipenko, mkuper, skatkov, anna, sanjoy

Reviewed By: sanjoy

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31613

llvm-svn: 300446
2017-04-17 09:52:02 +00:00
Max Kazantsev 8ed6b66d85 [LoopPeeling] Fix condition for phi-eliminating peeling
When peeling loops basing on phis becoming invariants, we make a wrong loop size check.
UP.Threshold should be compared against the total numbers of instructions after the transformation,
which is equal to 2 * LoopSize in case of peeling one iteration.
We should also check that the maximum allowed number of peeled iterations is not zero.

Reviewers: sanjoy, anna, reames, mkuper

Reviewed By: mkuper

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31753

llvm-svn: 300441
2017-04-17 05:38:28 +00:00
Serge Pavlov b71bb80c2d [LoopUnroll] Remap references in peeled iteration
References in cloned blocks must be remapped prior to dominator
calculation.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31281

llvm-svn: 298811
2017-03-26 16:46:53 +00:00
Matt Arsenault 3dbeefa978 AMDGPU: Mark all unspecified CC functions in tests as amdgpu_kernel
Currently the default C calling convention functions are treated
the same as compute kernels. Make this explicit so the default
calling convention can be changed to a non-kernel.

Converted with perl -pi -e 's/define void/define amdgpu_kernel void/'
on the relevant test directories (and undoing in one place that actually
wanted a non-kernel).

llvm-svn: 298444
2017-03-21 21:39:51 +00:00
Michael Kuperstein 2da2bfa088 [LoopUnroll] Don't peel loops where the latch isn't the exiting block
Peeling assumed this doesn't happen, but didn't check it.
This fixes PR32178.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30757

llvm-svn: 297993
2017-03-16 21:07:48 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 30c3538e2e [LoopUnrolling] Fix loop size check for peeling
Summary:
We should check if loop size allows us to peel at least one iteration
before we do so.

Patch by Max Kazantsev!

Reviewers: sanjoy, mkuper, efriedma

Reviewed By: mkuper

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30632

llvm-svn: 297122
2017-03-07 06:03:15 +00:00
Evgeny Stupachenko e4b0813d62 Add test missed in r296770.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D27004

From: Evgeny Stupachenko <evstupac@gmail.com>
llvm-svn: 296962
2017-03-04 05:20:02 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 664c925a57 [LoopUnrolling] Peel loops with invariant backedge Phi input
Summary:
If a loop contains a Phi node which has an invariant input from back
edge, it is profitable to peel such loops (rather than unroll them) to
use the advantage that this Phi is always invariant starting from 2nd
iteration. After the 1st iteration is peeled, other optimizations can
potentially simplify calculations with this invariant.

Patch by Max Kazantsev!

Reviewers: sanjoy, apilipenko, igor-laevsky, anna, mkuper, reames

Reviewed By: mkuper

Subscribers: mkuper, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30161

llvm-svn: 296898
2017-03-03 18:19:15 +00:00
Evgeny Stupachenko d655ec56c3 The patch fixes r296770
Summary:

Extend -unroll-partial-threshold to 200 for runtime-loop3.ll test
as epilogue unroll initially add 1 more IV to the loop.

From: Evgeny Stupachenko <evstupac@gmail.com>
llvm-svn: 296803
2017-03-02 19:41:38 +00:00
Evgeny Stupachenko 21bef2cb3c The patch turns on epilogue unroll for loops with constant recurency start.
Summary:

Set unroll remainder to epilog if a loop contains a phi with constant parameter:

  loop:
  pn = phi [Const, PreHeader], [pn.next, Latch]
  ...

Reviewer: hfinkel

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D27004

From: Evgeny Stupachenko <evstupac@gmail.com>
llvm-svn: 296770
2017-03-02 17:38:46 +00:00
Michael Kuperstein c2af82b4b7 [LoopUnroll] Enable PGO-based loop peeling by default.
This enables peeling of loops with low dynamic iteration count by default,
when profile information is available.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27734

llvm-svn: 295796
2017-02-22 00:27:34 +00:00
Matt Arsenault d9cd736585 AMDGPU: Don't unroll for private with dynamic allocas
This won't be elimnated, so this will just bloat code
if/when these are ever used/supported.

llvm-svn: 294030
2017-02-03 19:36:00 +00:00
Stanislav Mekhanoshin f29602df65 [AMDGPU] Unroll preferences improvements
Exit loop analysis early if suitable private access found.
Do not account for GEPs which are invariant to loop induction variable.
Do not account for Allocas which are too big to fit into register file anyway.
Add option for tuning: -amdgpu-unroll-threshold-private.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29473

llvm-svn: 293991
2017-02-03 02:20:05 +00:00
Chandler Carruth eab3b90a14 [PM] Simplify the new PM interface to the loop unroller and expose two
factory functions for the two modes the loop unroller is actually used
in in-tree: simplified full-unrolling and the entire thing including
partial unrolling.

I've also wired these up to nice names so you can express both of these
being in a pipeline easily. This is a precursor to actually enabling
these parts of the O2 pipeline.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28897

llvm-svn: 293136
2017-01-26 02:13:50 +00:00
Michael Kuperstein 5dd55e8405 [LoopUnroll] Properly update loopinfo for runtime unrolling by 2
Even when we don't create a remainder loop (that is, when we unroll by 2), we
may duplicate nested loops into the remainder. This is complicated by the fact
the remainder may itself be either inserted into an outer loop, or at the top
level. In the latter case, we may need to create new top-level loops.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29156

llvm-svn: 293124
2017-01-26 01:04:11 +00:00
Chandler Carruth ce40fa13ce [PM] Teach LoopUnroll to update the LPM infrastructure as it unrolls
loops.

We do this by reconstructing the newly added loops after the unroll
completes to avoid threading pass manager details through all the mess
of the unrolling infrastructure.

I've enabled some extra assertions in the LPM to try and catch issues
here and enabled a bunch of unroller tests to try and make sure this is
sane.

Currently, I'm manually running loop-simplify when needed. That should
go away once it is folded into the LPM infrastructure.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28848

llvm-svn: 293011
2017-01-25 02:49:01 +00:00
Serge Pavlov 098ee2fe02 Update domtree incrementally in loop peeling.
With this change dominator tree remains in sync after each step of loop
peeling.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29029

llvm-svn: 292895
2017-01-24 06:58:39 +00:00
Michael Kuperstein 461aa57ad3 [LoopUnroll] First form LCSSA, then loop-simplify
Running non-LCSSA-preserving LoopSimplify followed by LCSSA on (roughly) the
same loop is incorrect, since LoopSimplify may break LCSSA arbitrarily higher
in the loop nest. Instead, run LCSSA first, and then run LCSSA-preserving
LoopSimplify on the result.

This fixes PR31718.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29055

llvm-svn: 292854
2017-01-23 23:45:42 +00:00
Dehao Chen c3f87f02b1 Introduce -unroll-partial-threshold to separate PartialThreshold from Threshold in loop unorller.
Summary: Partial unrolling should have separate threshold with full unrolling.

Reviewers: efriedma, mzolotukhin

Reviewed By: efriedma, mzolotukhin

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28831

llvm-svn: 292293
2017-01-17 23:39:33 +00:00
Michael Kuperstein 991c2e0e57 Add test that verifies we don't peel loops in optsize functions. NFC.
llvm-svn: 291708
2017-01-11 21:42:51 +00:00
Xin Tong 2940231ff0 Make sure total loop body weight is preserved in loop peeling
Summary:
Regardless how the loop body weight is distributed, we should preserve
total loop body weight. i.e. we should have same weight reaching the body of the loop
or its duplicates in peeled and unpeeled case.

Reviewers: mkuper, davidxl, anemet

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28179

llvm-svn: 290833
2017-01-02 20:27:23 +00:00
Dehao Chen cc76344ef5 Use continuous boosting factor for complete unroll.
Summary:
The current loop complete unroll algorithm checks if unrolling complete will reduce the runtime by a certain percentage. If yes, it will apply a fixed boosting factor to the threshold (by discounting cost). The problem for this approach is that the threshold abruptly. This patch makes the boosting factor a function of runtime reduction percentage, capped by a fixed threshold. In this way, the threshold changes continuously.

The patch also simplified the code by reducing one parameter in UP.

The patch only affects code-gen of two speccpu2006 benchmark:

445.gobmk binary size decreases 0.08%, no performance change.
464.h264ref binary size increases 0.24%, no performance change.

Reviewers: mzolotukhin, chandlerc

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26989

llvm-svn: 290737
2016-12-30 00:50:28 +00:00
Michael Kuperstein b151a641aa [LoopUnroll] Implement profile-based loop peeling
This implements PGO-driven loop peeling.

The basic idea is that when the average dynamic trip-count of a loop is known,
based on PGO, to be low, we can expect a performance win by peeling off the
first several iterations of that loop.
Unlike unrolling based on a known trip count, or a trip count multiple, this
doesn't save us the conditional check and branch on each iteration. However,
it does allow us to simplify the straight-line code we get (constant-folding,
etc.). This is important given that we know that we will usually only hit this
code, and not the actual loop.

This is currently disabled by default.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25963

llvm-svn: 288274
2016-11-30 21:13:57 +00:00
Dehao Chen 41d72a8632 Use profile info to adjust loop unroll threshold.
Summary:
For flat loop, even if it is hot, it is not a good idea to unroll in runtime, thus we set a lower partial unroll threshold.
For hot loop, we set a higher unroll threshold and allows expensive tripcount computation to allow more aggressive unrolling.

Reviewers: davidxl, mzolotukhin

Subscribers: sanjoy, mehdi_amini, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26527

llvm-svn: 287186
2016-11-17 01:17:02 +00:00
John Brawn 84b21835f1 [LoopUnroll] Keep the loop test only on the first iteration of max-or-zero loops
When we have a loop with a known upper bound on the number of iterations, and
furthermore know that either the number of iterations will be either exactly
that upper bound or zero, then we can fully unroll up to that upper bound
keeping only the first loop test to check for the zero iteration case.

Most of the work here is in plumbing this 'max-or-zero' information from the
part of scalar evolution where it's detected through to loop unrolling. I've
also gone for the safe default of 'false' everywhere but howManyLessThans which
could probably be improved.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25682

llvm-svn: 284818
2016-10-21 11:08:48 +00:00
Haicheng Wu 1ef17e90b2 Reapply "[LoopUnroll] Use the upper bound of the loop trip count to fullly unroll a loop"
Reappy r284044 after revert in r284051. Krzysztof fixed the error in r284049.

The original summary:

This patch tries to fully unroll loops having break statement like this

for (int i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
    if (a[i] == value) {
        found = true;
        break;
    }
}

GCC can fully unroll such loops, but currently LLVM cannot because LLVM only
supports loops having exact constant trip counts.

The upper bound of the trip count can be obtained from calling
ScalarEvolution::getMaxBackedgeTakenCount(). Part of the patch is the
refactoring work in SCEV to prevent duplicating code.

The feature of using the upper bound is enabled under the same circumstance
when runtime unrolling is enabled since both are used to unroll loops without
knowing the exact constant trip count.

llvm-svn: 284053
2016-10-12 21:29:38 +00:00
Haicheng Wu 45e4ef737d Revert "[LoopUnroll] Use the upper bound of the loop trip count to fullly unroll a loop"
This reverts commit r284044.

llvm-svn: 284051
2016-10-12 21:02:22 +00:00
Haicheng Wu 6cac34fd41 [LoopUnroll] Use the upper bound of the loop trip count to fullly unroll a loop
This patch tries to fully unroll loops having break statement like this

for (int i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
    if (a[i] == value) {
        found = true;
        break;
    }
}

GCC can fully unroll such loops, but currently LLVM cannot because LLVM only
supports loops having exact constant trip counts.

The upper bound of the trip count can be obtained from calling
ScalarEvolution::getMaxBackedgeTakenCount(). Part of the patch is the
refactoring work in SCEV to prevent duplicating code.

The feature of using the upper bound is enabled under the same circumstance
when runtime unrolling is enabled since both are used to unroll loops without
knowing the exact constant trip count.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24790

llvm-svn: 284044
2016-10-12 20:24:32 +00:00
Dehao Chen a067b0926f Revert test change in r282894 as it's broken in some platforms.
llvm-svn: 282903
2016-09-30 19:25:23 +00:00
Dehao Chen 977853b7c5 Update loop unroller cost model to make sure debug info does not affect optimization decisions.
Summary: Debug info should *not* affect optimization decisions. This patch updates loop unroller cost model to make it not affected by debug info.

Reviewers: davidxl, mzolotukhin

Subscribers: haicheng, llvm-commits, mzolotukhin

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25098

llvm-svn: 282894
2016-09-30 18:30:04 +00:00
Michael Zolotukhin 1a554be3b6 [LoopSimplify] When simplifying phis in loop-simplify, do it only if it preserves LCSSA form.
llvm-svn: 282541
2016-09-27 21:03:45 +00:00
Michael Zolotukhin e72997a524 Revert "[LoopUnroll] Properly update loop-info when cloning prologues and epilogues."
This reverts commit r280901.

This caused a bunch of failures, reverting it until I investigate them.

llvm-svn: 280905
2016-09-08 03:51:30 +00:00
Michael Zolotukhin 5e0a20697e [LoopUnroll] Properly update loop-info when cloning prologues and epilogues.
Summary:
When cloning blocks for prologue/epilogue we need to replicate the loop
structure from the original loop. It wasn't a problem for the innermost
loops, but it led to an incorrect loop info when we unrolled a loop with
a child loop - in this case created prologue-loop had a child loop, but
loop info didn't reflect that.

This fixes PR28888.

Reviewers: chandlerc, sanjoy, hfinkel

Subscribers: llvm-commits, silvas

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24203

llvm-svn: 280901
2016-09-08 01:52:26 +00:00
Michael Zolotukhin ca0d48b742 [LoopUnroll] Fix a PowerPC test broken by r277524.
llvm-svn: 277527
2016-08-02 21:43:25 +00:00