We used a SCEV to detect that A[X] is consecutive. We assumed that X was
the induction variable. But X can be any expression that uses the induction
for example: X = i + 2;
llvm-svn: 166388
This is important for nested-loop reductions such as :
In the innermost loop, the induction variable does not start with zero:
for (i = 0 .. n)
for (j = 0 .. m)
sum += ...
llvm-svn: 166387
If the pointer is consecutive then it is safe to read and write. If the pointer is non-loop-consecutive then
it is unsafe to vectorize it because we may hit an ordering issue.
llvm-svn: 166371
This patch migrates the strcpy optimizations from the simplify-libcalls pass
into the instcombine library call simplifier. Note also that StrCpyChkOpt
has been updated with a few simplifications that were being done in the
simplify-libcalls version of StrCpyOpt, but not in the migrated implementation
of StrCpyOpt. There is no reason to overload StrCpyOpt with fortified and
regular simplifications in the new model since there is already a dedicated
simplifier for __strcpy_chk.
llvm-svn: 166198
operate purely on values. Sink the alloca loading and storing logic into
the rewrite routines that are specific to alloca-integer-rewrite
driving. This is just a refactoring here, but the subsequent step will
be to reuse the insertion and extraction logic when rewriting integer
loads and stores that have been split and decomposed into narrower loads
and stores.
No functionality changed other than different names for instructions.
llvm-svn: 166176
over the implicitly-formed-and-nesting CGSCC pass manager and function
pass managers, especially when using them on the opt commandline or
using extension points in the module builder. The '-barrier' opt flag
(or the pass itself) will create a no-op module pass in the pipeline,
resetting the pass manager stack, and allowing the creation of a new
pipeline of function passes or CGSCC passes to be created that is
independent from any previous pipelines.
For example, this can be used to test running two CGSCC passes in
independent CGSCC pass managers as opposed to in the same CGSCC pass
manager. It also allows us to introduce a further hack into the
PassManagerBuilder to separate the O0 pipeline extension passes from the
always-inliner's CGSCC pass manager, which they likely do not want to
participate in... At the very least none of the Sanitizer passes want
this behavior.
This fixes a bug with ASan at O0 currently, and I'll commit the ASan
test which covers this pass. I'm happy to add a test case that this pass
exists and works, but not sure how much time folks would like me to
spend adding test cases for the details of its behavior of partition
pass managers.... The whole thing is just vile, and mostly intended to
unblock ASan, so I'm hoping to rip this all out in a brave new pass
manager world.
llvm-svn: 166172
The TargetTransform changes are breaking LTO bootstraps of clang. I am
working with Nadav to figure out the problem, but I am reverting it for now
to get our buildbots working.
This reverts svn commits: 165665 165669 165670 165786 165787 165997
and I have also reverted clang svn 165741
llvm-svn: 166168
a pointer. A very bad idea. Let's not do that. Fixes PR14105.
Note that this wasn't *that* glaring of an oversight. Originally, these
routines were only called on offsets within an alloca, which are
intrinsically positive. But over the evolution of the pass, they ended
up being called for arbitrary offsets, and things went downhill...
llvm-svn: 166095
revision makes no sense. We cannot use the address space of the *post
indexed* type to conclude anything about a *pre indexed* pointer type's
size. More importantly, this index can never be over a pointer. We are
indexing over arrays and vectors here.
Of course, I have no test case here. Neither did the original patch. =/
llvm-svn: 166091
An obfuscated splat is where the frontend poorly generates code for a splat
using several different shuffles to create the splat, i.e.,
%A = load <4 x float>* %in_ptr, align 16
%B = shufflevector <4 x float> %A, <4 x float> undef, <4 x i32> <i32 0, i32 0, i32 undef, i32 undef>
%C = shufflevector <4 x float> %B, <4 x float> %A, <4 x i32> <i32 0, i32 1, i32 4, i32 undef>
%D = shufflevector <4 x float> %C, <4 x float> %A, <4 x i32> <i32 0, i32 1, i32 2, i32 4>
llvm-svn: 166061
includes extracting ints for copying elsewhere and inserting ints when
copying into the alloca. This should fix the CanSROA assertion coming
out of Clang's regression test suite.
llvm-svn: 165931
cases where we have partial integer loads and stores to an otherwise
promotable alloca to widen[1] those loads and stores to cover the entire
alloca and bitcast them into the appropriate type such that promotion
can proceed.
These partial loads and stores stem from an annoying confluence of ARM's
calling convention and ABI lowering and the FCA pre-splitting which
takes place in SROA. Clang lowers a { double, double } in-register
function argument as a [4 x i32] function argument to ensure it is
placed into integer 32-bit registers (a really unnerving implicit
contract between Clang and the ARM backend I would add). This results in
a FCA load of [4 x i32]* from the { double, double } alloca, and SROA
decomposes this into a sequence of i32 loads and stores. Inlining
proceeds, code gets folded, but at the end of the day, we still have i32
stores to the low and high halves of a double alloca. Widening these to
be i64 operations, and bitcasting them to double prior to loading or
storing allows promotion to proceed for these allocas.
I looked quite a bit changing the IR which Clang produces for this case
to be more friendly, but small changes seem unlikely to help. I think
the best representation we could use currently would be to pass 4 i32
arguments thereby avoiding any FCAs, but that would still require this
fix. It seems like it might eventually be nice to somehow encode the ABI
register selection choices outside of the parameter type system so that
the parameter can be a { double, double }, but the CC register
annotations indicate that this should be passed via 4 integer registers.
This patch does not address the second problem in PR14059, which is the
reverse: when a struct alloca is loaded as a *larger* single integer.
This patch also does not address some of the code quality issues with
the FCA-splitting. Those don't actually impede any optimizations really,
but they're on my list to clean up.
[1]: Pedantic footnote: for those concerned about memory model issues
here, this is safe. For the alloca to be promotable, it cannot escape or
have any use of its address that could allow these loads or stores to be
racing. Thus, widening is always safe.
llvm-svn: 165928
Convert the internal representation of the Attributes class into a pointer to an
opaque object that's uniqued by and stored in the LLVMContext object. The
Attributes class then becomes a thin wrapper around this opaque
object. Eventually, the internal representation will be expanded to include
attributes that represent code generation options, etc.
llvm-svn: 165917
This patch migrates the strcmp and strncmp optimizations from the
simplify-libcalls pass into the instcombine library call simplifier.
llvm-svn: 165915
Erasing from the beginning or middle of the vector is expensive, remove_if can
do it in linear time even though it's a bit ugly without lambdas.
No functionality change.
llvm-svn: 165903
This patch migrates the strchr and strrchr optimizations from the
simplify-libcalls pass into the instcombine library call simplifier.
llvm-svn: 165875
This patch migrates the strcat and strncat optimizations from the
simplify-libcalls pass into the instcombine library call simplifier.
llvm-svn: 165874
This patch implements the new LibCallSimplifier class as outlined in [1].
In addition to providing the new base library simplification infrastructure,
all the fortified library call simplifications were moved over to the new
infrastructure. The rest of the library simplification optimizations will
be moved over with follow up patches.
NOTE: The original fortified library call simplifier located in the
SimplifyFortifiedLibCalls class was not removed because it is still
used by CodeGenPrepare. This class will eventually go away too.
[1] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2012-August/052283.html
llvm-svn: 165873
type coercion code, especially when targetting ARM. Things like [1
x i32] instead of i32 are very common there.
The goal of this logic is to ensure that when we are picking an alloca
type, we look through such wrapper aggregates and across any zero-length
aggregate elements to find the simplest type possible to form a type
partition.
This logic should (generally speaking) rarely fire. It only ends up
kicking in when an alloca is accessed using two different types (for
instance, i32 and float), and the underlying alloca type has wrapper
aggregates around it. I noticed a significant amount of this occurring
looking at stepanov_abstraction generated code for arm, and suspect it
happens elsewhere as well.
Note that this doesn't yet address truly heinous IR productions such as
PR14059 is concerning. Those result in mismatched *sizes* of types in
addition to mismatched access and alloca types.
llvm-svn: 165870
help the dragonegg builders, and no test case at this point, but this
was one dimly plausible case I spotted by inspection. Hopefully will get
a testcase from those bots soon-ish, and will tidy this up with proper
testing.
llvm-svn: 165869
are single value types, the load and store should be directly based upon
the alloca and then bitcasting can fix the type as needed afterward.
This might in theory improve some of the IR coming out of SROA, but
I don't expect big changes yet and don't have any test cases on hand.
This is really just a cleanup/refactoring patch. The next patch will
cause this code path to be hit a lot more, actually get SROA to promote
more allocas and include several more test cases.
llvm-svn: 165864
When all cases of a switch statement are dead, the weights vector only has one
element, and we will get an ssertion failure when calling createBranchWeights.
llvm-svn: 165759
DeadArgumentElimination pass can replace one LLVM function with another,
invalidating a pointer stored in debug info metadata entry for this function.
To fix this, we collect debug info descriptors for functions before
running a DeadArgumentElimination pass and "patch" pointers in metadata nodes
if we replace a function.
llvm-svn: 165490
We use the enums to query whether an Attributes object has that attribute. The
opaque layer is responsible for knowing where that specific attribute is stored.
llvm-svn: 165488
This class is used by LSR and a number of places in the codegen.
This is the first step in de-coupling LSR from TLI, and creating
a new interface in between them.
llvm-svn: 165455
have an alloca or a parameter, since then the alloca test should make sense
to readers, while before it probably appears too specific. No functionality
change.
llvm-svn: 165306
are in fact identity operations. We detect these and kill their
partitions so that even splitting is unaffected by them. This is
particularly important because Clang relies on emitting identity memcpy
operations for struct copies, and these fold away to constants very
often after inlining.
Fixes the last big performance FIXME I have on my plate.
llvm-svn: 165285
the rewrite visitor to make the fact that the speculation is completely
independent a bit more clear.
I promise that this is just a cut/paste of the one visitor and adding
the annonymous namespace wrappings. The diff may look completely
preposterous, it does in git for some reason.
llvm-svn: 165284
We conservatively only check the first use to avoid walking long use chains.
This catches the common case of having both a load and a store to a pointer
supplied by a PHI node.
llvm-svn: 165232
cpyDest can be mutated in some cases, which would then cause a crash later if
indeed the memory was underaligned. This brought down several buildbots, so
I guess the underaligned case is much more common than I thought!
llvm-svn: 165228
Currently, we re-visit allocas when something changes about the way they
might be *split* to allow better scalarization to take place. However,
we weren't handling the case when the *promotion* is what would change
the behavior of SROA. When an address derived from an alloca is stored
into another alloca, we consider the first to have escaped. If the
second is ever promoted to an SSA value, we will suddenly be able to run
the SROA pass on the first alloca.
This patch adds explicit support for this form if iteration. When we
detect a store of a pointer derived from an alloca, we flag the
underlying alloca for reprocessing after promotion. The logic works hard
to only do this when there is definitely going to be promotion and it
might remove impediments to the analysis of the alloca.
Thanks to Nick for the great test case and Benjamin for some sanity
check review.
llvm-svn: 165223
was less aligned than the old. In the testcase this results in an overaligned
memset: the memset alignment was correct for the original memory but is too much
for the new memory. Fix this by either increasing the alignment of the new
memory or bailing out if that isn't possible. Should fix the gcc-4.7 self-host
buildbot failure.
llvm-svn: 165220
Sorry for this being broken so long. =/
As part of this, switch all of the existing tests to be Little Endian,
which is the behavior I was asserting in them anyways! Add in a new
big-endian test that checks the interesting behavior there.
Another part of this is to tighten the rules abotu when we perform the
full-integer promotion. This logic now rejects cases where there fully
promoted integer is a non-multiple-of-8 bitwidth or cases where the
loads or stores touch bits which are in the allocated space of the
alloca but are not loaded or stored when accessing the integer. Sadly,
these aren't really observable today as the rest of the pass will
already ensure the invariants hold. However, the latter situation is
likely to become a potential concern in the future.
Thanks to Benjamin and Duncan for early review of this patch. I'm still
looking into whether there are further endianness issues, please let me
know if anyone sees BE failures persisting past this.
llvm-svn: 165219
instruction (for Intel Atom) was not being done by Clang, because
the type context used by Clang is not the default context.
It fixes the problem by getting the global context types for each div/rem
instruction in order to compare them against the types in the BypassTypeMap.
Tests for this will be done as a separate patch to Clang.
Patch by Tyler Nowicki.
llvm-svn: 165126
a memcpy to reflect that '0' has a different meaning when applied to
a load or store. Now we correctly use underaligned loads and stores for
the test case added.
llvm-svn: 165101
necessary during rewriting. As part of this, fix a real think-o here
where we might have left off an alignment specification when the address
is in fact underaligned. I haven't come up with any way to trigger this,
as there is always some other factor that reduces the alignment, but it
certainly might have been an observable bug in some way I can't think
of. This also slightly changes the strategy for placing explicit
alignments on loads and stores to only do so when the alignment does not
match that required by the ABI. This causes a few redundant alignments
to go away from test cases.
I've also added a couple of tests that really push on the alignment that
we end up with on loads and stores. More to come here as I try to fix an
underlying bug I have conjectured and produced test cases for, although
it's not clear if this bug is the one currently hitting dragonegg's
gcc47 bootstrap.
llvm-svn: 165100
preserves the values of the relocated entries, unlikely remove_if. This
allows walking them and erasing them.
Also flesh out the predicate we are using for this to support the
various constraints actually imposed on a UnaryPredicate -- without this
we can't compose it with std::not1.
Thanks to Sean Silva for the review here and noticing the issue with
std::remove_if.
llvm-svn: 165073
scheduled for processing on the worklist eventually gets deleted while
we are processing another alloca, fixing the original test case in
PR13990.
To facilitate this, add a remove_if helper to the SetVector abstraction.
It's not easy to use the standard abstractions for this because of the
specifics of SetVectors types and implementation.
Finally, a nice small test case is included. Thanks to Benjamin for the
fantastic reduced test case here! All I had to do was delete some empty
basic blocks!
llvm-svn: 165065
We require that the indices into the use lists are stable in order to
build fast lookup tables to locate a particular partition use from an
operand of a PHI or select. This is (obviously in hind sight)
incompatible with erasing elements from the array. Really, we don't want
to erase anyways. It is expensive, and a rare operation. Instead, simply
weaken the contract of the PartitionUse structure to allow null Use
pointers to represent dead uses. Now we can clear out the pointer to
mark things as dead, and all it requires is adding some 'continue'
checks to the various loops.
I'm still reducing a test case for this, as the test case I have is
huge. I think this one I can get a nice test case for though, as it was
much more deterministic.
llvm-svn: 165032
being separate was that it can grow the use list. As a consequence, we
can't use the iterator-pair interface, we need an index based interface.
Expose such an interface from the AllocaPartitioning, and use it in the
speculator.
This should at least fix a use-after-free bug found by Duncan, and may
fix some of the other crashers.
I don't have a nice deterministic test case yet, but if I get a good
one, I'll add it.
llvm-svn: 165027
alignment requirements of the new alloca. As one consequence which was
reported as a bug by Duncan, we overaligned memcpy calls to ranges of
allocas after they were rewritten to types with lower alignment
requirements. Other consquences are possible, but I don't have any test
cases for them.
llvm-svn: 164937
could probably be factored still further to hoist this logic into
a generic helper, but currently I don't have particularly clean ideas
about how to handle that.
This at least allows us to drop custom load rewriting from the
speculation logic, which in turn allows the existing load rewriting
logic to fire. In theory, this could enable vector promotion or other
tricks after speculation occurs, but I've not dug into such issues. This
is primarily just cleaning up the factoring of the code and the
resulting logic.
llvm-svn: 164933
a pair of instructions, one for the used pointer and the second for the
user. This simplifies the representation and also makes it more dense.
This was noticed because of the miscompile in PR13926. In that case, we
were running up against a fundamental "bad idea" in the speculation of
PHI and select instructions: the speculation and rewriting are
interleaved, which requires phi speculation to also perform load
rewriting! This is bad, and causes us to miss opportunities to do (for
example) vector rewriting only exposed after PHI speculation, etc etc.
It also, in the old system, required us to insert *new* load uses into
the current partition's use list, which would then be ignored during
rewriting because we had already extracted an end iterator for the use
list. The appending behavior (and much of the other oddities) stem from
the strange de-duplication strategy in the PartitionUse builder.
Amusingly, all this went without notice for so long because it could
only be triggered by having *different* GEPs into the same partition of
the same alloca, where both different GEPs were operands of a single
PHI, and where the GEP which was not encountered first also had multiple
uses within that same PHI node... Hence the insane steps required to
reproduce.
So, step one in fixing this fundamental bad idea is to make the
PartitionUse actually contain a Use*, and to make the builder do proper
deduplication instead of funky de-duplication. This is enough to remove
the appending behavior, and fix the miscompile in PR13926, but there is
more work to be done here. Subsequent commits will lift the speculation
into its own visitor. It'll be a useful step toward potentially
extracting all of the speculation logic into a generic utility
transform.
The existing PHI test case for repeated operands has been made more
extreme to catch even these issues. This test case, run through the old
pass, will exactly reproduce the miscompile from PR13926. ;] We were so
close here!
llvm-svn: 164925
alignment could lose it due to the alloca type moving down to a much
smaller alignment guarantee.
Now SROA will actively compute a proper alignment, factoring the target
data, any explicit alignment, and the offset within the struct. This
will in some cases lower the alignment requirements, but when we lower
them below those of the type, we drop the alignment entirely to give
freedom to the code generator to align it however is convenient.
Thanks to Duncan for the lovely test case that pinned this down. =]
llvm-svn: 164891
If the width is very large it gets truncated from uint64_t to uint32_t when
passed to TD->fitsInLegalInteger. The truncated value can fit in a register.
This manifested in massive memory usage or crashes (PR13946).
llvm-svn: 164784
- Put statistics in alphabetical order
- Don't use getZextValue when building TableInt, just use APInts
- Introduce Create{Z,S}ExtOrTrunc in IRBuilder.
llvm-svn: 164696
rewriter in SROA to carry a proper alignment. This involves
interrogating various sources of alignment, etc. This is a more complete
and principled fix to PR13920 as well as related bugs pointed out by Eli
in review and by inspection in the area.
Also by inspection fix the integer and vector promotion paths to create
aligned loads and stores. I still need to work up test cases for
these... Sorry for the delay, they were found purely by inspection.
llvm-svn: 164689
tables in bitmaps when they fit in a target-legal register.
This saves some space, and it also allows for building tables that would
otherwise be deemed too sparse.
One interesting case that this hits is example 7 from
http://blog.regehr.org/archives/320. We currently generate good code
for this when lowering the switch to the selection DAG: we build a
bitmask to decide whether to jump to one block or the other. My patch
will result in the same bitmask, but it removes the need for the jump,
as the return value can just be retrieved from the mask.
llvm-svn: 164684
This should really, really fix PR13916. For real this time. The
underlying bug is... a bit more subtle than I had imagined.
The setup is a code pattern that leads to an @llvm.memcpy call with two
equal pointers to an alloca in the source and dest. Now, not any pattern
will do. The alloca needs to be formed just so, and both pointers should
be wrapped in different bitcasts etc. When this precise pattern hits,
a funny sequence of events transpires. First, we correctly detect the
potential for overlap, and correctly optimize the memcpy. The first
time. However, we do simplify the set of users of the alloca, and that
causes us to run the alloca back through the SROA pass in case there are
knock-on simplifications. At this point, a curious thing has happened.
If we happen to have an i8 alloca, we have direct i8 pointer values. So
we don't bother creating a cast, we rewrite the arguments to the memcpy
to dircetly refer to the alloca.
Now, in an unrelated area of the pass, we have clever logic which
ensures that when visiting each User of a particular pointer derived
from an alloca, we only visit that User once, and directly inspect all
of its operands which refer to that particular pointer value. However,
the mechanism used to detect memcpy's with the potential to overlap
relied upon getting visited once per *Use*, not once per *User*. This is
always true *unless* the same exact value is both source and dest. It
turns out that almost nothing actually produces that pattern though.
We can hand craft test cases that more directly test this behavior of
course, and those are included. Also, note that there is a significant
missed optimization here -- we prove in many cases that there is
a non-volatile memcpy call with identical source and dest addresses. We
shouldn't prevent splitting the alloca in that case, and in fact we
should just remove such memcpy calls eagerly. I'll address that in
a subsequent commit.
llvm-svn: 164669
only a missed optimization opportunity if the store is over-aligned, but a
miscompile if the store's new type has a higher natural alignment than the
memcpy did. Fixes PR13920!
llvm-svn: 164641
Nadav Rotem