Also updated as many loops as I could find using df_begin/idf_begin -
strangely I found no uses of idf_begin. Is that just used out of tree?
Also a few places couldn't use df_begin because either they used the
member functions of the depth first iterators or had specific ordering
constraints (I added a comment in the latter case).
Based on a patch by Jim Grosbach. (Jim - you just had iterator_range<T>
where you needed iterator_range<idf_iterator<T>>)
llvm-svn: 206016
In preparation for an upcoming commit implementing unrolling preferences for
x86, this adds additional fields to the UnrollingPreferences structure:
- PartialThreshold and PartialOptSizeThreshold - Like Threshold and
OptSizeThreshold, but used when not fully unrolling. These are necessary
because we need different thresholds for full unrolling from those used when
partially unrolling (the full unrolling thresholds are generally going to be
larger).
- MaxCount - A cap on the unrolling factor when partially unrolling. This can
be used by a target to prevent the unrolled loop from exceeding some
resource limit independent of the loop size (such as number of branches).
There should be no functionality change for any in-tree targets.
llvm-svn: 205347
The generic (concatenation) loop unroller is currently placed early in the
standard optimization pipeline. This is a good place to perform full unrolling,
but not the right place to perform partial/runtime unrolling. However, most
targets don't enable partial/runtime unrolling, so this never mattered.
However, even some x86 cores benefit from partial/runtime unrolling of very
small loops, and follow-up commits will enable this. First, we need to move
partial/runtime unrolling late in the optimization pipeline (importantly, this
is after SLP and loop vectorization, as vectorization can drastically change
the size of a loop), while keeping the full unrolling where it is now. This
change does just that.
llvm-svn: 205264
This reverts commit r203553, and follow-up commits r203558 and r203574.
I will follow this up on the mailinglist to do it in a way that won't
cause subtle PRE bugs.
llvm-svn: 205009
The cleanup code that removes dead cast instructions only removed them from the
basic block, but didn't delete them. This fix erases them now too.
llvm-svn: 204538
A PHI node usually has only one value/basic block pair per incoming basic block.
In the case of a switch statement it is possible that a following PHI node may
have more than one such pair per incoming basic block. E.g.:
%0 = phi i64 [ 123456, %case2 ], [ 654321, %Entry ], [ 654321, %Entry ]
This is valid and the verfier doesn't complain, because both values are the
same.
Constant hoisting materializes the constant for each operand separately and the
value is still the same, but the variable names have changed. As a result the
verfier can't recognize anymore that they are the same value and complains.
This fix adds special update code for PHI node in constant hoisting to prevent
this corner case.
This fixes <rdar://problem/16394449>
llvm-svn: 204537
Extend the target hook to take also the operand index into account when
calculating the cost of the constant materialization.
Related to <rdar://problem/16381500>
llvm-svn: 204435
Originally the algorithm would search for expensive constants and track their
users, which could be instructions and constant expressions. This change only
tracks the constants for instructions, but constant expressions are indirectly
covered too. If an operand is an constant expression, then we look through the
expression to find anny expensive constants.
The algorithm keep now track of the instruction and the operand index where the
constant is used. This allows more precise hoisting of constant materialization
code for PHI instructions, because we only hoist to the basic block of the
incoming operand. Before we had to find the idom of all PHI operands and hoist
the materialization code there.
This also makes updating of instructions easier. Before we had to keep track of
the original constant, find it in the instructions, and then replace it. Now we
can just simply update the operand.
Related to <rdar://problem/16381500>
llvm-svn: 204433
This simplifies working with the constant candidates and removes the tight
coupling between the map and the vector.
Related to <rdar://problem/16381500>
llvm-svn: 204431
This commit extends the coverage of the constant hoisting pass, adds additonal
debug output and updates the function names according to the style guide.
Related to <rdar://problem/16381500>
llvm-svn: 204389
Summary:
The compiler does not always generate linkage names. If a function
has been inlined and its body elided, its linkage name may not be
generated.
When the binary executes, the profiler will use its unmangled name
when attributing samples. This results in unmangled names in the
input profile.
We are currently failing hard when this happens. However, in this case
all that happens is that we fail to attribute samples to the inlined
function. While this means fewer optimization opportunities, it should
not cause a compilation failure.
This patch accepts all valid function names, regardless of whether
they were mangled or not.
Reviewers: chandlerc
CC: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D3087
llvm-svn: 204142
The "noduplicate" attribute of call instructions is sometimes queried directly
and sometimes through the cannotDuplicate() predicate. This patch streamlines
all queries to use the cannotDuplicate() predicate. It also adds this predicate
to InvokeInst, to mirror what CallInst has.
llvm-svn: 204049
Summary:
The sample profiler pass emits several error messages. Instead of
just aborting the compiler with report_fatal_error, we can emit
better messages using DiagnosticInfo.
This adds a new sub-class of DiagnosticInfo to handle the sample
profiler.
Reviewers: chandlerc, qcolombet
CC: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D3086
llvm-svn: 203976
After r203553 overflow intrinsics and their non-intrinsic (normal)
instruction get hashed to the same value. This patch prevents PRE from
moving an instruction into a predecessor block, and trying to add a phi
node that gets two different types (the intrinsic result and the
non-intrinsic result), resulting in a failing assert.
llvm-svn: 203574
When an overflow intrinsic is followed by a non-overflow instruction,
replace the latter with an extract. For example:
%sadd = tail call { i32, i1 } @llvm.sadd.with.overflow.i32(i32 %a, i32 %b)
%sadd3 = add i32 %a, %b
Here the add statement will be replaced by an extract.
When an overflow intrinsic follows a non-overflow instruction, a clone
of the intrinsic is inserted before the normal instruction, which makes
it the same as the previous case. Subsequent runs of GVN can then clean
up the duplicate instructions and insert the extract.
This fixes PR8817.
llvm-svn: 203553
Summary:
When the sample profiles include discriminator information,
use the discriminator values to distinguish instruction weights
in different basic blocks.
This modifies the BodySamples mapping to map <line, discriminator> pairs
to weights. Instructions on the same line but different blocks, will
use different discriminator values. This, in turn, means that the blocks
may have different weights.
Other changes in this patch:
- Add tests for positive values of line offset, discriminator and samples.
- Change data types from uint32_t to unsigned and int and do additional
validation.
Reviewers: chandlerc
CC: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2857
llvm-svn: 203508
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
This compiles with no changes to clang/lld/lldb with MSVC and includes
overloads to various functions which are used by those projects and llvm
which have OwningPtr's as parameters. This should allow out of tree
projects some time to move. There are also no changes to libs/Target,
which should help out of tree targets have time to move, if necessary.
llvm-svn: 203083
to ensure we don't mess up any of the overrides. Necessary for cleaning
up the Value use iterators and enabling range-based traversing of use
lists.
llvm-svn: 202958
Move the test for this class into the IR unittests as well.
This uncovers that ValueMap too is in the IR library. Ironically, the
unittest for ValueMap is useless in the Support library (honestly, so
was the ValueHandle test) and so it already lives in the IR unittests.
Mmmm, tasty layering.
llvm-svn: 202821
name might indicate, it is an iterator over the types in an instruction
in the IR.... You see where this is going.
Another step of modularizing the support library.
llvm-svn: 202815
business.
This header includes Function and BasicBlock and directly uses the
interfaces of both classes. It has to do with the IR, it even has that
in the name. =] Put it in the library it belongs to.
This is one step toward making LLVM's Support library survive a C++
modules bootstrap.
llvm-svn: 202814
David Blaikie