A large number of loop utility functions take a `Pass *` and reach
into it to find out which analyses to preserve. There are a number of
problems with this:
- The APIs have access to pretty well any Pass state they want, so
it's hard to tell what they may or may not do.
- Other APIs have copied these and pass around a `Pass *` even though
they don't even use it. Some of these just hand a nullptr to the API
since the callers don't even have a pass available.
- Passes in the new pass manager don't work like the current ones, so
the APIs can't be used as is there.
Instead, we should explicitly thread the analysis results that we
actually care about through these APIs. This is both simpler and more
reusable.
llvm-svn: 255669
We should remove noalias along with dereference and dereference_or_null attributes
because statepoint could potentially touch the entire heap including noalias objects.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D14032
llvm-svn: 251333
`normalizeForInvokeSafepoint` in RewriteStatepointsForGC.cpp, as it is
written today, deals with `gc.relocate` and `gc.result` uses of a
statepoint equally well. This change documents this fact and adds a
test case.
There is no functional change here -- only documentation of existing
functionality.
llvm-svn: 250784
The `"statepoint-id"` and `"statepoint-num-patch-bytes"` attributes are
used solely to determine properties of the `gc.statepoint` being
created. Once the `gc.statepoint` is in place, these should be removed.
llvm-svn: 250491
Summary:
This is a step towards using operand bundles to carry deopt state till
RewriteStatepointsForGC. The change adds a flag to
RewriteStatepointsForGC that teaches it to pick up deopt state from a
`"deopt"` operand bundle attached to the `call` or `invoke` it is
wrapping.
The command line flag added, `-rs4gc-use-deopt-bundles`, will only exist
for a short while. Once we are able to pipe deopt bundle state through
the full optimization pipeline without problems, we will "constant fold"
`-rs4gc-use-deopt-bundles` to `true`.
Reviewers: swaroop.sridhar, reames
Subscribers: llvm-commits, sanjoy
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13372
llvm-svn: 250489
Remove remaining `ilist_iterator` implicit conversions from
LLVMScalarOpts.
This change exposed some scary behaviour in
lib/Transforms/Scalar/SCCP.cpp around line 1770. This patch changes a
call from `Function::begin()` to `&Function::front()`, since the return
was immediately being passed into another function that takes a
`Function*`. `Function::front()` started to assert, since the function
was empty. Note that `Function::end()` does not point at a legal
`Function*` -- it points at an `ilist_half_node` -- so the other
function was getting garbage before. (I added the missing check for
`Function::isDeclaration()`.)
Otherwise, no functionality change intended.
llvm-svn: 250211
Summary:
These non-semantic changes will help make a later change adding
support for deopt operand bundles more streamlined.
Reviewers: reames, swaroop.sridhar
Subscribers: sanjoy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13491
llvm-svn: 249779
Summary: Use `const auto &` instead of `auto` in `makeStatepointExplicit`.
Reviewers: reames, swaroop.sridhar
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13454
llvm-svn: 249776
I don't think this assert adds much value, and removing it and related
variables avoids an "unused variable" warning in release builds.
llvm-svn: 249511
Summary:
A series of cosmetic cleanup changes to RewriteStatepointsForGC:
- Rename variables to LLVM style
- Remove some redundant asserts
- Remove an unsued `Pass *` parameter
- Remove unnecessary variables
- Use C++11 idioms where applicable
- Pass CallSite by value, not reference
Reviewers: reames, swaroop.sridhar
Subscribers: llvm-commits, sanjoy
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13370
llvm-svn: 249508
The assertion was weaker than it should be and gave the impression we're growing the number of base defining values being considered during the fixed point interation. That's not true. The tighter form of the assert is useful documentation.
llvm-svn: 247221
This change is simply enhancing the existing inference algorithm to handle insertelement instructions by conservatively inserting a new instruction to propagate the vector of associated base pointers. In the process, I'm ripping out the peephole optimizations which mostly helped cover the fact this hadn't been done.
Note that most of the newly inserted nodes will be nearly immediately removed by the post insertion optimization pass introduced in 246718. Arguably, we should be trying harder to avoid the malloc traffic here, but I'd rather get the code correct, then worry about compile time.
Unlike previous extensions of the algorithm to handle more case, I discovered the existing code was causing miscompiles in some cases. In particular, we had an implicit assumption that the peephole covered *all* insert element instructions, so if we had a value directly based on a insert element the peephole didn't cover, we proceeded as if it were a base anyways. Not good. I believe we had the same issue with shufflevector which is why I adjusted the predicate for them as well.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12583
llvm-svn: 247210
Previously, the base pointer algorithm wasn't deterministic. The core fixed point was (of course), but we were inserting new nodes and optimizing them in an order which was unspecified and variable. We'd somewhat hacked around this for testing by sorting by value name, but that doesn't solve the general determinism problem.
Instead, we can use the order of traversal over the def/use graph to give us a single consistent ordering. Today, this is a DFS order, but the exact order doesn't mater provided it's deterministic for a given input.
(Q: It is safe to rely on a deterministic order of operands right?)
Note that this only fixes the determinism within a single inference step. The inference step is currently invoked many times in a non-deterministic order. That's a future change in the sequence. :)
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12640
llvm-svn: 247208
As a first step towards a new implementation of the base pointer inference algorithm, introduce an abstraction for BDVs, strengthen the assertions around them, and rewrite the BDV relation code in terms of the abstraction which includes an explicit notion of whether the BDV is also a base. The later is motivated by the fact we had a bug where insertelement was always assumed to be a base pointer even though the BDV code knew it wasn't. The strengthened assertions in this patch would have caught that bug.
The next step will be to separate the DefiningValueMap into a BDV use list cache (entirely within findBasePointers) and a base pointer cache. Having the former will allow me to use a deterministic visit order when visiting BDVs in the inference algorithm and remove a bunch of ordering related hacks. Before actually doing the last step, I'm likely going to extend the lattice with a 'BaseN' (seen only base inputs) state so that I can kill the post process optimization step.
Phabricator Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12608
llvm-svn: 246809
The visit order being used in the base pointer inference algorithm is currently non-deterministic. When working on http://reviews.llvm.org/D12583, I discovered that we were relying on a peephole optimization to get deterministic ordering in one of the test cases.
This change is intented to let me test and land http://reviews.llvm.org/D12583. The current code will not be long lived. I'm starting to investigate a rewrite of the algorithm which will combine the post-process step into the initial algorithm and make the visit order determistic. Before doing that, I wanted to make sure the existing code was complete and the test were stable. Hopefully, patches should be up for review for the new algorithm this week or early next.
llvm-svn: 246801
Fix a bug in change 246133. I didn't handle the case where we had a cycle in the use graph and could add an instruction we were about to erase back on to the worklist. Oddly, I have not been able to write a small test case for this, even with the AssertingVH added. I have confirmed the basic theory for the fix on a large failing example, but all attempts to reduce that to something appropriate for a test case have failed.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12575
llvm-svn: 246718
When computing base pointers, we introduce new instructions to propagate the base of existing instructions which might not be bases. However, the algorithm doesn't make any effort to recognize when the new instruction to be inserted is the same as an existing one already in the IR. Since this is happening immediately before rewriting, we don't really have a chance to fix it after the pass runs without teaching loop passes about statepoints.
I'm really not thrilled with this patch. I've rewritten it 4 different ways now, but this is the best I've come up with. The case where the new instruction is just the original base defining value could be merged into the existing algorithm with some complexity. The problem is that we might have something like an extractelement from a phi of two vectors. It may be trivially obvious that the base of the 0th element is an existing instruction, but I can't see how to make the algorithm itself figure that out. Thus, I resort to the call to SimplifyInstruction instead.
Note that we can only adjust the instructions we've inserted ourselves. The live sets are still being tracked in side structures at this point in the code. We can't easily muck with instructions which might be in them. Long term, I'm really thinking we need to materialize the live pointer sets explicitly in the IR somehow rather than using side structures to track them.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12004
llvm-svn: 246133
To be clear: this is an *optimization* not a correctness change.
CodeGenPrep likes to duplicate icmps feeding branch instructions to take advantage of x86's ability to fuze many comparison/branch patterns into a single micro-op and to reduce the need for materializing i1s into general registers. PlaceSafepoints likes to place safepoint polls right at the end of basic blocks (immediately before terminators) when inserting entry and backedge safepoints. These two heuristics interact in a somewhat unfortunate way where the branch terminating the original block will be controlled by a condition driven by unrelocated pointers. This forces the register allocator to keep both the relocated and unrelocated values of the pointers feeding the icmp alive over the safepoint poll.
One simple fix would have been to just adjust PlaceSafepoints to move one back in the basic block, but you can reach similar cases as a result of LICM or other hoisting passes. As a result, doing a post insertion fixup seems to be more robust.
I considered doing this in CodeGenPrep itself, but having to update the live sets of already rewritten safepoints gets complicated fast. In particular, you can't just use def/use information because by moving the icmp, we're extending the live range of it's inputs potentially.
Instead, this patch teaches RewriteStatepointsForGC to make the required adjustments before making the relocations explicit in the IR. This change really highlights the fact that RSForGC is a CodeGenPrep-like pass which is performing target specific lowering. In the long run, we may even want to combine the two though this would require a lot more smarts to be integrated into RSForGC first. We currently rely on being able to run a set of cleanup passes post rewriting because the IR RSForGC generates is pretty damn ugly.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11819
llvm-svn: 244821
When rewriting the IR such that base pointers are available for every live pointer, we potentially need to duplicate instructions to propagate the base. The original code had only handled PHI and Select under the belief those were the only instructions which would need duplicated. When I added support for vector instructions, I'd added a collection of hacks for ExtractElement which caught most of the common cases. Of course, I then found the one test case my hacks couldn't cover. :)
This change removes all of the early hacks for extract element. By defining extractelement as a BDV (rather than trying to look through it), we can extend the rewriting algorithm to duplicate the extract as needed. Note that a couple of peephole optimizations were left in for the moment, because while we now handle extractelement as a first class citizen, we're not yet handling insertelement. That change will follow in the near future.
llvm-svn: 244808
The names for instructions inserted were previous dependent on iteration order. By deriving the names from the original instructions, we can avoid instability in tests without resorting to ordered traversals. It also makes the IR mildly easier to read at large scale.
llvm-svn: 243140
The new code should hopefully be equivalent to the old code; it just uses a worklist to track instructions which need to visited rather than iterating over all instructions visited each time. This should be faster, but the primary benefit is that the purpose should be more clear and the diff of adding another instruction type (forthcoming) much more obvious.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11480
llvm-svn: 243071
Deleting much of the code using trace-rewrite-statepoints and use idiomatic DEBUG statements instead. This includes adding operator<< to a helper class.
llvm-svn: 243054
We don't need to pass in the map from BDV to PhiStates; we can instead handle that externally and let the MeetPhiStates helper class just meet PhiStates.
llvm-svn: 243045
through APIs that are no longer necessary now that the update API has
been removed.
This will make changes to the AA interfaces significantly less
disruptive (I hope). Either way, it seems like a really nice cleanup.
llvm-svn: 242882
A bit more code cleanup: delete some a trivial true assertion and supporting code, remove a redundant cast, and use count in assertions where feasible.
llvm-svn: 242805
Justin Bogner