This optimization tries to reuse the generated compare instruction, if there is a comparison against the default value after the switch.
Example:
if (idx < tablesize)
r = table[idx]; // table does not contain default_value
else
r = default_value;
if (r != default_value)
...
Is optimized to:
cond = idx < tablesize;
if (cond)
r = table[idx];
else
r = default_value;
if (cond)
...
\endcode
Jump threading will then eliminate the second if(cond).
llvm-svn: 222872
Code seems cleaner and easier to understand this way
This is basically r222416, after fixes for MSVC lack of standard
support, and a few cleaning (got rid of a warning).
Thanks Nakamura Takumi and Nico Weber for the MSVC fixes.
llvm-svn: 222472
This is to be consistent with StringSet and ultimately with the standard
library's associative container insert function.
This lead to updating SmallSet::insert to return pair<iterator, bool>,
and then to update SmallPtrSet::insert to return pair<iterator, bool>,
and then to update all the existing users of those functions...
llvm-svn: 222334
When converting a switch to a lookup table we might have to generate a bitmaks
to encode and check for holes in the original switch statement.
The type of this mask depends on the number of switch statements, which can
result in illegal types for pretty much all architectures.
To avoid unnecessary type legalization and help FastISel this commit increases
the size of the bitmask to next power-of-2 value when necessary.
This fixes rdar://problem/18984639.
llvm-svn: 222168
This is a simple optimization for switch table lookup:
It computes the output value directly with an (optional) mul and add if there is a linear mapping between index and output.
Example:
int f1(int x) {
switch (x) {
case 0: return 10;
case 1: return 11;
case 2: return 12;
case 3: return 13;
}
return 0;
}
generates:
define i32 @f1(i32 %x) #0 {
entry:
%0 = icmp ult i32 %x, 4
br i1 %0, label %switch.lookup, label %return
switch.lookup:
%switch.offset = add i32 %x, 10
ret i32 %switch.offset
return:
ret i32 0
}
llvm-svn: 222121
Instead, we're going to separate metadata from the Value hierarchy. See
PR21532.
This reverts commit r221375.
This reverts commit r221373.
This reverts commit r221359.
This reverts commit r221167.
This reverts commit r221027.
This reverts commit r221024.
This reverts commit r221023.
This reverts commit r220995.
This reverts commit r220994.
llvm-svn: 221711
Change `Instruction::getMetadata()` to return `Value` as part of
PR21433.
Update most callers to use `Instruction::getMDNode()`, which wraps the
result in a `cast_or_null<MDNode>`.
llvm-svn: 221024
When we hoist two loads above an if, we can preserve the nonnull metadata. We could also do the same for sinking them, but we appear to not handle metadata at all in that case.
Thanks to Hal for the review.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5910
llvm-svn: 220392
This is the same optimization of r219233 with modifications to support PHIs with multiple incoming edges from the same block
and a test to check that this condition is handled.
llvm-svn: 219656
instead
We used to transform this:
define void @test6(i1 %cond, i8* %ptr) {
entry:
br i1 %cond, label %bb1, label %bb2
bb1:
br label %bb2
bb2:
%ptr.2 = phi i8* [ %ptr, %entry ], [ null, %bb1 ]
store i8 2, i8* %ptr.2, align 8
ret void
}
into this:
define void @test6(i1 %cond, i8* %ptr) {
%ptr.2 = select i1 %cond, i8* null, i8* %ptr
store i8 2, i8* %ptr.2, align 8
ret void
}
because the simplifycfg transformation into selects would happen to happen
before the simplifycfg transformation that removes unreachable control flow
(We have 'unreachable control flow' due to the store to null which is undefined
behavior).
The existing transformation that removes unreachable control flow in simplifycfg
is:
/// If BB has an incoming value that will always trigger undefined behavior
/// (eg. null pointer dereference), remove the branch leading here.
static bool removeUndefIntroducingPredecessor(BasicBlock *BB)
Now we generate:
define void @test6(i1 %cond, i8* %ptr) {
store i8 2, i8* %ptr.2, align 8
ret void
}
I did not see any impact on the test-suite + externals.
rdar://18596215
llvm-svn: 219462
This optimization tries to convert switch instructions that are used to select a value with only 2 unique cases + default block
to a select or a couple of selects (depending if the default block is reachable or not).
The typical case this optimization wants to be able to optimize is this one:
Example:
switch (a) {
case 10: %0 = icmp eq i32 %a, 10
return 10; %1 = select i1 %0, i32 10, i32 4
case 20: ----> %2 = icmp eq i32 %a, 20
return 2; %3 = select i1 %2, i32 2, i32 %1
default:
return 4;
}
It also sets the base for further optimizations that are planned and being reviewed.
llvm-svn: 219223
Summary:
This patch adds a threshold that controls the number of bonus instructions
allowed for folding branches with common destination. The original code allows
at most one bonus instruction. With this patch, users can customize the
threshold to allow multiple bonus instructions. The default threshold is still
1, so that the code behaves the same as before when users do not specify this
threshold.
The motivation of this change is that tuning this threshold significantly (up
to 25%) improves the performance of some CUDA programs in our internal code
base. In general, branch instructions are very expensive for GPU programs.
Therefore, it is sometimes worth trading more arithmetic computation for a more
straightened control flow. Here's a reduced example:
__global__ void foo(int a, int b, int c, int d, int e, int n,
const int *input, int *output) {
int sum = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
sum += (((i ^ a) > b) && (((i | c ) ^ d) > e)) ? 0 : input[i];
*output = sum;
}
The select statement in the loop body translates to two branch instructions "if
((i ^ a) > b)" and "if (((i | c) ^ d) > e)" which share a common destination.
With the default threshold, SimplifyCFG is unable to fold them, because
computing the condition of the second branch "(i | c) ^ d > e" requires two
bonus instructions. With the threshold increased, SimplifyCFG can fold the two
branches so that the loop body contains only one branch, making the code
conceptually look like:
sum += (((i ^ a) > b) & (((i | c ) ^ d) > e)) ? 0 : input[i];
Increasing the threshold significantly improves the performance of this
particular example. In the configuration where both conditions are guaranteed
to be true, increasing the threshold from 1 to 2 improves the performance by
18.24%. Even in the configuration where the first condition is false and the
second condition is true, which favors shortcuts, increasing the threshold from
1 to 2 still improves the performance by 4.35%.
We are still looking for a good threshold and maybe a better cost model than
just counting the number of bonus instructions. However, according to the above
numbers, we think it is at least worth adding a threshold to enable more
experiments and tuning. Let me know what you think. Thanks!
Test Plan: Added one test case to check the threshold is in effect
Reviewers: nadav, eliben, meheff, resistor, hfinkel
Reviewed By: hfinkel
Subscribers: hfinkel, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5529
llvm-svn: 218711
Summary: UsedByBranch is always true according to how BonusInst is defined.
Test Plan:
Passes check-all, and also verified
if (BonusInst && !UsedByBranch) {
...
}
is never entered during check-all.
Reviewers: resistor, nadav, jingyue
Reviewed By: jingyue
Subscribers: llvm-commits, eliben, meheff
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5324
llvm-svn: 217824
This change, which allows @llvm.assume to be used from within computeKnownBits
(and other associated functions in ValueTracking), adds some (optional)
parameters to computeKnownBits and friends. These functions now (optionally)
take a "context" instruction pointer, an AssumptionTracker pointer, and also a
DomTree pointer, and most of the changes are just to pass this new information
when it is easily available from InstSimplify, InstCombine, etc.
As explained below, the significant conceptual change is that known properties
of a value might depend on the control-flow location of the use (because we
care that the @llvm.assume dominates the use because assumptions have
control-flow dependencies). This means that, when we ask if bits are known in a
value, we might get different answers for different uses.
The significant changes are all in ValueTracking. Two main changes: First, as
with the rest of the code, new parameters need to be passed around. To make
this easier, I grouped them into a structure, and I made internal static
versions of the relevant functions that take this structure as a parameter. The
new code does as you might expect, it looks for @llvm.assume calls that make
use of the value we're trying to learn something about (often indirectly),
attempts to pattern match that expression, and uses the result if successful.
By making use of the AssumptionTracker, the process of finding @llvm.assume
calls is not expensive.
Part of the structure being passed around inside ValueTracking is a set of
already-considered @llvm.assume calls. This is to prevent a query using, for
example, the assume(a == b), to recurse on itself. The context and DT params
are used to find applicable assumptions. An assumption needs to dominate the
context instruction, or come after it deterministically. In this latter case we
only handle the specific case where both the assumption and the context
instruction are in the same block, and we need to exclude assumptions from
being used to simplify their own ephemeral values (those which contribute only
to the assumption) because otherwise the assumption would prove its feeding
comparison trivial and would be removed.
This commit adds the plumbing and the logic for a simple masked-bit propagation
(just enough to write a regression test). Future commits add more patterns
(and, correspondingly, more regression tests).
llvm-svn: 217342
The lifetime intrinsics need some work in order to make it clear which
optimizations are or are not valid.
For now dropping this optimization avoids a miscompilation.
Patch by Björn Steinbrink.
llvm-svn: 214336
We use gep to access the global array "switch.table", and the table index
should be treated as unsigned. When the highest bit is 1, this commit
zero-extends the index to an integer type with larger size.
For a switch on i2, we used to generate:
%switch.tableidx = sub i2 %0, -2
getelementptr inbounds [4 x i64]* @switch.table, i32 0, i2 %switch.tableidx
It is incorrect when %switch.tableidx is 2 or 3. The fix is to generate
%switch.tableidx = sub i2 %0, -2
%switch.tableidx.zext = zext i2 %switch.tableidx to i3
getelementptr inbounds [4 x i64]* @switch.table, i32 0, i3 %switch.tableidx.zext
rdar://17735071
llvm-svn: 213815
Summary: This patch introduces two new iterator ranges and updates existing code to use it. No functional change intended.
Test Plan: All tests (make check-all) still pass.
Reviewers: dblaikie
Reviewed By: dblaikie
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4481
llvm-svn: 213474
isSafeToSpeculativelyExecute can optionally take a DataLayout pointer. In the
past, this was mainly used to make better decisions regarding divisions known
not to trap, and so was not all that important for users concerned with "cheap"
instructions. However, now it also helps look through bitcasts for
dereferencable loads, and will also be important if/when we add a
dereferencable pointer attribute.
This is some initial work to feed a DataLayout pointer through to callers of
isSafeToSpeculativelyExecute, generally where one was already available.
llvm-svn: 212720
This patch adds to an existing loop over phi nodes in SimplifyCondBranchToCondBranch() to check for trapping ops and bails out of the optimization if we find one of those.
The test cases verify that trapping ops are not hoisted and non-trapping ops are still optimized as expected.
llvm-svn: 212490
We would previously put dllimport variables in switch lookup tables, which
doesn't work because the address cannot be used in a constant initializer.
This is basically the same problem that we have in PR19955.
Putting TLS variables in switch tables also desn't work, because the
address of such a variable is not constant.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4220
llvm-svn: 211331
Since ExtractValue is not included in ComputeSpeculationCost CFGs containing
ExtractValueInsts cannot be simplified. In particular this interacts with
InstCombineCompare's tendency to insert add.with.overflow intrinsics for
certain idiomatic math operations, preventing optimization.
This patch adds ExtractValue to the ComputeSpeculationCost. Test case included
rdar://14853450
llvm-svn: 208434
definition below all of the header #include lines, lib/Transforms/...
edition.
This one is tricky for two reasons. We again have a couple of passes
that define something else before the includes as well. I've sunk their
name macros with the DEBUG_TYPE.
Also, InstCombine contains headers that need DEBUG_TYPE, so now those
headers #define and #undef DEBUG_TYPE around their code, leaving them
well formed modular headers. Fixing these headers was a large motivation
for all of these changes, as "leaky" macros of this form are hard on the
modules implementation.
llvm-svn: 206844
This allows us to generate table lookups for code such as:
unsigned test(unsigned x) {
switch (x) {
case 100: return 0;
case 101: return 1;
case 103: return 2;
case 105: return 3;
case 107: return 4;
case 109: return 5;
case 110: return 6;
default: return f(x);
}
}
Since cases 102, 104, etc. are not constants, the lookup table has holes
in those positions. We therefore guard the table lookup with a bitmask check.
Patch by Jasper Neumann!
llvm-svn: 203694
This requires a number of steps.
1) Move value_use_iterator into the Value class as an implementation
detail
2) Change it to actually be a *Use* iterator rather than a *User*
iterator.
3) Add an adaptor which is a User iterator that always looks through the
Use to the User.
4) Wrap these in Value::use_iterator and Value::user_iterator typedefs.
5) Add the range adaptors as Value::uses() and Value::users().
6) Update *all* of the callers to correctly distinguish between whether
they wanted a use_iterator (and to explicitly dig out the User when
needed), or a user_iterator which makes the Use itself totally
opaque.
Because #6 requires churning essentially everything that walked the
Use-Def chains, I went ahead and added all of the range adaptors and
switched them to range-based loops where appropriate. Also because the
renaming requires at least churning every line of code, it didn't make
any sense to split these up into multiple commits -- all of which would
touch all of the same lies of code.
The result is still not quite optimal. The Value::use_iterator is a nice
regular iterator, but Value::user_iterator is an iterator over User*s
rather than over the User objects themselves. As a consequence, it fits
a bit awkwardly into the range-based world and it has the weird
extra-dereferencing 'operator->' that so many of our iterators have.
I think this could be fixed by providing something which transforms
a range of T&s into a range of T*s, but that *can* be separated into
another patch, and it isn't yet 100% clear whether this is the right
move.
However, this change gets us most of the benefit and cleans up
a substantial amount of code around Use and User. =]
llvm-svn: 203364
a bit surprising, as the class is almost entirely abstracted away from
any particular IR, however it encodes the comparsion predicates which
mutate ranges as ICmp predicate codes. This is reasonable as they're
used for both instructions and constants. Thus, it belongs in the IR
library with instructions and constants.
llvm-svn: 202838
I am really sorry for the noise, but the current state where some parts of the
code use TD (from the old name: TargetData) and other parts use DL makes it
hard to write a patch that changes where those variables come from and how
they are passed along.
llvm-svn: 201827
When simplifycfg moves an instruction, it must drop metadata it doesn't know
is still valid with the preconditions changes. In particular, it must drop
the range and tbaa metadata.
The patch implements this with an utility function to drop all metadata not
in a white list.
llvm-svn: 200322
uint32.
When folding branches to common destination, the updated branch weights
can exceed uint32 by more than factor of 2. We should keep halving the
weights until they can fit into uint32.
llvm-svn: 200262
There has been an old FIXME to find the right cut-off for when it's worth
analyzing and potentially transforming a switch to a lookup table.
The switches always have two or more cases. I could not measure any speed-up
by transforming a switch with two cases. A switch with three cases gets a nice
speed-up, and I couldn't measure any compile-time regression, so I think this
is the right threshold.
In a Clang self-host, this causes 480 new switches to be transformed,
and reduces the final binary size with 8 KB.
llvm-svn: 199294
case when the lookup table doesn't have any holes.
This means we can build a lookup table for switches like this:
switch (x) {
case 0: return 1;
case 1: return 2;
case 2: return 3;
case 3: return 4;
default: exit(1);
}
The default case doesn't yield a constant result here, but that doesn't matter,
since a default result is only necessary for filling holes in the lookup table,
and this table doesn't have any holes.
This makes us transform 505 more switches in a clang bootstrap, and shaves 164 KB
off the resulting clang binary.
llvm-svn: 199025
If we happen to eliminate every case in a switch that has branch
weights, we currently try to create metadata for the one remaining
branch, triggering an assert. Instead, we need to check that the
metadata we're trying to create is sensible.
llvm-svn: 197791
One optimization simplify-cfg performs is the converting of switches to
lookup tables if the switch has > 4 cases. This is done by:
1. Finding the max/min case value and calculating the switch case range.
2. Create a lookup table basic block.
3. Perform a check in the switch's BB to see if the input value is in
the switch's case range. If the input value satisfies said predicate
branch to the lookup table BB, otherwise branch to the switch's default
destination BB using the default value as the result.
The conditional check consists of subtracting the min case value of the
table from any input iN value and then ensuring that said value is
unsigned less than the size of the lookup table represented as an iN
value.
If the lookup table is a covered lookup table, the size of the table will be N
which is 0 as an iN value. Thus the comparison will be an `icmp ult` of an iN
value against 0 which is always false yielding the incorrect result.
This patch fixes this problem by recognizing if we have a covered lookup table
and if we do, unconditionally jumps to the lookup table BB since the covering
property of the lookup table implies no input values could not be handled by
said BB.
rdar://15268442
llvm-svn: 193045
This makes using array_pod_sort significantly safer. The implementation relies
on function pointer casting but that should be safe as we're dealing with void*
here.
llvm-svn: 191175
Merge consecutive if-regions if they contain identical statements.
Both transformations reduce number of branches. The transformation
is guarded by a target-hook, and is currently enabled only for +R600,
but the correctness has been tested on X86 target using a variety of
CPU benchmarks.
Patch by: Mei Ye
llvm-svn: 187278
This allows us to create switches even if instcombine has munged two of the
incombing compares into one and some bit twiddling. This was motivated by enum
compares that are common in clang.
llvm-svn: 185632
The problem this time seems to be a thinko. We were assuming that in the CFG
A
| \
| B
| /
C
speculating the basic block B would cause only the phi value for the B->C edge
to be speculated. That is not true, the phi's are semantically in the edges, so
if the A->B->C path is taken, any code needed for A->C is not executed and we
have to consider it too when deciding to speculate B.
llvm-svn: 183226
PR16069 is an interesting case where an incoming value to a PHI is a
trap value while also being a 'ConstantExpr'.
We do not consider this case when performing the 'HoistThenElseCodeToIf'
optimization.
Instead, make our modifications more conservative if we detect that we
cannot transform the PHI to a select.
llvm-svn: 183152
This resurrects r179957, but adds code that makes sure we don't touch
atomic/volatile stores:
This transformation will transform a conditional store with a preceeding
uncondtional store to the same location:
a[i] =
may-alias with a[i] load
if (cond)
a[i] = Y
into an unconditional store.
a[i] = X
may-alias with a[i] load
tmp = cond ? Y : X;
a[i] = tmp
We assume that on average the cost of a mispredicted branch is going to be
higher than the cost of a second store to the same location, and that the
secondary benefits of creating a bigger basic block for other optimizations to
work on outway the potential case where the branch would be correctly predicted
and the cost of the executing the second store would be noticably reflected in
performance.
hmmer's execution time improves by 30% on an imac12,2 on ref data sets. With
this change we are on par with gcc's performance (gcc also performs this
transformation). There was a 1.2 % performance improvement on a ARM swift chip.
Other tests in the test-suite+external seem to be mostly uninfluenced in my
experiments:
This optimization was triggered on 41 tests such that the executable was
different before/after the patch. Only 1 out of the 40 tests (dealII) was
reproducable below 100% (by about .4%). Given that hmmer benefits so much I
believe this to be a fair trade off.
llvm-svn: 180731
There is the temptation to make this tranform dependent on target information as
it is not going to be beneficial on all (sub)targets. Therefore, we should
probably do this in MI Early-Ifconversion.
This reverts commit r179957. Original commit message:
"SimplifyCFG: If convert single conditional stores
This transformation will transform a conditional store with a preceeding
uncondtional store to the same location:
a[i] =
may-alias with a[i] load
if (cond)
a[i] = Y
into an unconditional store.
a[i] = X
may-alias with a[i] load
tmp = cond ? Y : X;
a[i] = tmp
We assume that on average the cost of a mispredicted branch is going to be
higher than the cost of a second store to the same location, and that the
secondary benefits of creating a bigger basic block for other optimizations to
work on outway the potential case were the branch would be correctly predicted
and the cost of the executing the second store would be noticably reflected in
performance.
hmmer's execution time improves by 30% on an imac12,2 on ref data sets. With
this change we are on par with gcc's performance (gcc also performs this
transformation). There was a 1.2 % performance improvement on a ARM swift chip.
Other tests in the test-suite+external seem to be mostly uninfluenced in my
experiments:
This optimization was triggered on 41 tests such that the executable was
different before/after the patch. Only 1 out of the 40 tests (dealII) was
reproducable below 100% (by about .4%). Given that hmmer benefits so much I
believe this to be a fair trade off.
I am going to watch performance numbers across the builtbots and will revert
this if anything unexpected comes up."
llvm-svn: 179980
This transformation will transform a conditional store with a preceeding
uncondtional store to the same location:
a[i] =
may-alias with a[i] load
if (cond)
a[i] = Y
into an unconditional store.
a[i] = X
may-alias with a[i] load
tmp = cond ? Y : X;
a[i] = tmp
We assume that on average the cost of a mispredicted branch is going to be
higher than the cost of a second store to the same location, and that the
secondary benefits of creating a bigger basic block for other optimizations to
work on outway the potential case were the branch would be correctly predicted
and the cost of the executing the second store would be noticably reflected in
performance.
hmmer's execution time improves by 30% on an imac12,2 on ref data sets. With
this change we are on par with gcc's performance (gcc also performs this
transformation). There was a 1.2 % performance improvement on a ARM swift chip.
Other tests in the test-suite+external seem to be mostly uninfluenced in my
experiments:
This optimization was triggered on 41 tests such that the executable was
different before/after the patch. Only 1 out of the 40 tests (dealII) was
reproducable below 100% (by about .4%). Given that hmmer benefits so much I
believe this to be a fair trade off.
I am going to watch performance numbers across the builtbots and will revert
this if anything unexpected comes up.
llvm-svn: 179957
If a switch instruction has a case for every possible value of its type,
with the same successor, SimplifyCFG would replace it with an icmp ult,
but the computation of the bound overflows in that case, which inverts
the test.
Patch by Jed Davis!
llvm-svn: 179587
Fixes rdar:13349374.
Volatile loads and stores need to be preserved even if the language
standard says they are undefined. "volatile" in this context means "get
out of the way compiler, let my platform handle it".
Additionally, this is the only way I know of with llvm to write to the
first page (when hardware allows) without dropping to assembly.
llvm-svn: 176599
loops over instructions in the basic block or the use-def list of the
value, neither of which are really efficient when repeatedly querying
about values in the same basic block.
What's more, we already know that the CondBB is small, and so we can do
a much more efficient test by counting the uses in CondBB, and seeing if
those account for all of the uses.
Finally, we shouldn't blanket fail on any such instruction, instead we
should conservatively assume that those instructions are part of the
cost.
Note that this actually fixes a bug in the pass because
isUsedInBasicBlock has a really terrible bug in it. I'll fix that in my
next commit, but the fix for it would make this code suddenly take the
compile time hit I thought it already was taking, so I wanted to go
ahead and migrate this code to a faster & better pattern.
The bug in isUsedInBasicBlock was also causing other tests to test the
wrong thing entirely: for example we weren't actually disabling
speculation for floating point operations as intended (and tested), but
the test passed because we failed to speculate them due to the
isUsedInBasicBlock failure.
llvm-svn: 173417
Original commit message:
Plug TTI into the speculation logic, giving it a real cost interface
that can be specialized by targets.
The goal here is not to be more aggressive, but to just be more accurate
with very obvious cases. There are instructions which are known to be
truly free and which were not being modeled as such in this code -- see
the regression test which is distilled from an inner loop of zlib.
Everywhere the TTI cost model is insufficiently conservative I've added
explicit checks with FIXME comments to go add proper modelling of these
cost factors.
If this causes regressions, the likely solution is to make TTI even more
conservative in its cost estimates, but test cases will help here.
llvm-svn: 173357
that can be specialized by targets.
The goal here is not to be more aggressive, but to just be more accurate
with very obvious cases. There are instructions which are known to be
truly free and which were not being modeled as such in this code -- see
the regression test which is distilled from an inner loop of zlib.
Everywhere the TTI cost model is insufficiently conservative I've added
explicit checks with FIXME comments to go add proper modelling of these
cost factors.
If this causes regressions, the likely solution is to make TTI even more
conservative in its cost estimates, but test cases will help here.
llvm-svn: 173342
a cost fuction that seems both a bit ad-hoc and also poorly suited to
evaluating constant expressions.
Notably, it is missing any support for trivial expressions such as
'inttoptr'. I could fix this routine, but it isn't clear to me all of
the constraints its other users are operating under.
The core protection that seems relevant here is avoiding the formation
of a select instruction wich a further chain of select operations in
a constant expression operand. Just explicitly encode that constraint.
Also, update the comments and organization here to make it clear where
this needs to go -- this should be driven off of real cost measurements
which take into account the number of constants expressions and the
depth of the constant expression tree.
llvm-svn: 173340
terms of cost rather than hoisting a single instruction.
This does *not* change the cost model! We still set the cost threshold
at 1 here, it's just that we track it by accumulating cost rather than
by storing an instruction.
The primary advantage is that we no longer leave no-op intrinsics in the
basic block. For example, this will now move both debug info intrinsics
and a single instruction, instead of only moving the instruction and
leaving a basic block with nothing bug debug info intrinsics in it, and
those intrinsics now no longer ordered correctly with the hoisted value.
Instead, we now splice the entire conditional basic block's instruction
sequence.
This also places the code for checking the safety of hoisting next to
the code computing the cost.
Currently, the only observable side-effect of this change is that debug
info intrinsics are no longer abandoned. I'm not sure how to craft
a test case for this, and my real goal was the refactoring, but I'll
talk to Dave or Eric about how to add a test case for this.
llvm-svn: 173339
Previously, the code would scan the PHI nodes and build up a small
setvector of candidate value pairs in phi nodes to go and rewrite. Once
certain the rewrite could be performed, the code walks the set, and for
each one re-scans the entire PHI node list looking for nodes to rewrite
operands.
Instead, scan the PHI nodes once to check for hazards, and then scan it
a second time to rewrite the operands to selects. No set vector, and
a max of two scans.
The only downside is that we might form identical selects, but
instcombine or anything else should fold those easily, and it seems
unlikely to happen often.
llvm-svn: 173337
pretty in doxygen, adding some of the details actually present in
a classic example where this matters (a loop from gzip and many other
compression algorithms), and a cautionary note about the risks inherent
in the transform. This has come up on the mailing lists recently, and
I suspect folks reading this code could benefit from going and looking
at the MI pass that can really deal with these issues.
llvm-svn: 173329
used uninitialized, since it fails to understand that Array is only used when
SingleValue is not, and outputs a warning. It also seems generally safer given
that the constructor is non-trivial and has plenty of early exits.
llvm-svn: 173242
Erik Eckstein