Commit Graph

50 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Chandler Carruth
dbaacccc31 [PM/CGSCC] Teach the CGSCC pass manager components to gracefully handle
invalidated SCCs even when we do not have an updated SCC to redirect
towards.

This comes up in a fairly subtle and surprising circumstance: we need to
have a connected but internal node in the call graph which later becomes
a disconnected island, and then gets deleted. All of this needs to
happen mid-CGSCC walk. Because it is disconnected, we have no way of
computing a new "current" SCC when it gets deleted. Instead, we need to
explicitly check for a deleted "current" SCC and bail out of the current
CGSCC step. This will bubble all the way up to the post-order walk and
then resume correctly.

I've included minimal tests for this bug. The specific behavior
matches something we've seen in the wild with the new PM combined with
ThinLTO and sample PGO, but I've not yet confirmed whether this is the
only issue there.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@313242 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2017-09-14 08:33:57 +00:00
Eugene Zelenko
046ca04445 [Analysis] Fix some Clang-tidy modernize-use-using and Include What You Use warnings; other minor fixes. Also affected in files (NFC).
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@312289 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2017-08-31 21:56:16 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
83bfb55f3b [PM] Switch the CGSCC debug messages to use the standard LLVM debug
printing techniques with a DEBUG_TYPE controlling them.

It was a mistake to start re-purposing the pass manager `DebugLogging`
variable for generic debug printing -- those logs are intended to be
very minimal and primarily used for testing. More detailed and
comprehensive logging doesn't make sense there (it would only make for
brittle tests).

Moreover, we kept forgetting to propagate the `DebugLogging` variable to
various places making it also ineffective and/or unavailable. Switching
to `DEBUG_TYPE` makes this a non-issue.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@310695 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2017-08-11 05:47:13 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
759393be2d [PM] Fix a bug where through CGSCC iteration we can get
infinite-inlining across multiple runs of the inliner by keeping a tiny
history of internal-to-SCC inlining decisions.

This is still a bit gross, but I don't yet have any fundamentally better
ideas and numerous people are blocked on this to use new PM and ThinLTO
together.

The core of the idea is to detect when we are about to do an inline that
has a chance of re-splitting an SCC which we have split before with
a similar inlining step. That is a critical component in the inlining
forming a cycle and so far detects all of the various cyclic patterns
I can come up with as well as the original real-world test case (which
comes from a ThinLTO build of libunwind).

I've added some tests that I think really demonstrate what is going on
here. They are essentially state machines that march the inliner through
various steps of a cycle and check that we stop when the cycle is closed
and that we actually did do inlining to form that cycle.

A lot of thanks go to Eric Christopher and Sanjoy Das for the help
understanding this issue and improving the test cases.

The biggest "yuck" here is the layering issue -- the CGSCC pass manager
is providing somewhat magical state to the inliner for it to use to make
itself converge. This isn't great, but I don't honestly have a lot of
better ideas yet and at least seems nicely isolated.

I have tested this patch, and it doesn't block *any* inlining on the
entire LLVM test suite and SPEC, so it seems sufficiently narrowly
targeted to the issue at hand.

We have come up with hypothetical issues that this patch doesn't cover,
but so far none of them are practical and we don't have a viable
solution yet that covers the hypothetical stuff, so proceeding here in
the interim. Definitely an area that we will be back and revisiting in
the future.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36188

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@309784 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2017-08-02 02:09:22 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
b86a95f1b6 [PM] Add unittesting of the call graph update logic with complex
dependencies between analyses.

This uncovers even more issues with the proxies and the splitting apart
of SCCs which are fixed in this patch. I discovered this while trying to
add more rigorous testing for a change I'm making to the call graph
update invalidation logic.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@307497 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2017-07-09 13:16:55 +00:00
Sanjoy Das
399b4d037d Rename WeakVH to WeakTrackingVH; NFC
This relands r301424.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@301812 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2017-05-01 17:07:49 +00:00
Sanjoy Das
263da12ab2 Reverts commit r301424, r301425 and r301426
Commits were:

"Use WeakVH instead of WeakTrackingVH in AliasSetTracker's UnkownInsts"
"Add a new WeakVH value handle; NFC"
"Rename WeakVH to WeakTrackingVH; NFC"

The changes assumed pointers are 8 byte aligned on all architectures.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@301429 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2017-04-26 16:37:05 +00:00
Sanjoy Das
d0cf26e443 Rename WeakVH to WeakTrackingVH; NFC
Summary:
I plan to use WeakVH to mean "nulls itself out on deletion, but does
not track RAUW" in a subsequent commit.

Reviewers: dblaikie, davide

Reviewed By: davide

Subscribers: arsenm, mehdi_amini, mcrosier, mzolotukhin, jfb, llvm-commits, nhaehnle

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32266

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@301424 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2017-04-26 16:20:52 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
d53dbed1b0 Revert r293017 and fix the actual underlying issue.
The patch committed in r293017, as discussed on the list, doesn't really
make sense but was causing an actual issue to go away.

The issue turns out to be that in one place the extra template arguments
were dropped from the OuterAnalysisManagerProxy. This in turn caused the
types used in one set of places to access the key to be completely
different from the types used in another set of places for both Loop and
CGSCC cases where there are extra arguments.

I have literally no idea how anything seemed to work with this bug in
place. It blows my mind. But it did except for mingw64 in a DLL build.

I've added a really handy static assert that helps ensure we don't break
this in the future. It immediately diagnoses the issue with a compile
failure and a very clear error message. Much better that staring at
backtraces on a build bot. =]

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@294267 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2017-02-07 01:50:48 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
3a190c34ce [PM/LCG] Remove the lazy RefSCC formation from the LazyCallGraph during
iteration.

The lazy formation of RefSCCs isn't really the most important part of
the laziness here -- that has to do with walking the functions
themselves -- and isn't essential to maintain. Originally, there were
incremental update algorithms that relied on updates happening
predominantly near the most recent RefSCC formed, but those have been
replaced with ones that have much tighter general case bounds at this
point. We do still perform asserts that only scale well due to this
incrementality, but those are easy to place behind EXPENSIVE_CHECKS.

Removing this simplifies the entire analysis by having a single up-front
step that builds all of the RefSCCs in a direct Tarjan walk. We can even
easily replace this with other or better algorithms at will and with
much less confusion now that there is no iterator-based incremental
logic involved. This removes a lot of complexity from LCG.

Another advantage of moving in this direction is that it simplifies
testing the system substantially as we no longer have to worry about
observing and mutating the graph half-way through the RefSCC formation.

We still need a somewhat special iterator for RefSCCs because we want
the iterator to remain stable in the face of graph updates. However,
this now merely involves relative indexing to the current RefSCC's
position in the sequence which isn't too hard.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29381

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@294227 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2017-02-06 19:38:06 +00:00
NAKAMURA Takumi
fe49b7173b Rewind instantiations of OuterAnalysisManagerProxy in r289317, r291651, and r291662.
I found root class should be instantiated for variadic tempate to instantiate static member explicitly.

This will fix failures in mingw DLL build.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@293017 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2017-01-25 04:26:29 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
4125a9aec7 [PM] Fix a typo in a comment that Davide spotted in another code review.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@291066 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2017-01-05 03:10:26 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
86d536565b [PM] Introduce a devirtualization iteration layer for the new PM.
This is an orthogonal and separated layer instead of being embedded
inside the pass manager. While it adds a small amount of complexity, it
is fairly minimal and the composability and control seems worth the
cost.

The logic for this ends up being nicely isolated and targeted. It should
be easy to experiment with different iteration strategies wrapped around
the CGSCC bottom-up walk using this kind of facility.

The mechanism used to track devirtualization is the simplest one I came
up with. I think it handles most of the cases the existing iteration
machinery handles, but I haven't done a *very* in depth analysis. It
does however match the basic intended semantics, and we can tweak or
tune its exact behavior incrementally as necessary. One thing that we
may want to revisit is freshly building the value handle set on each
iteration. While I don't think this will be a significant cost (it is
strictly fewer value handles but more churn of value handes than the old
call graph), it is conceivable that we'll want a somewhat more clever
tracking mechanism. My hope is to layer that on as a follow up patch
with data supporting any implementation complexity it adds.

This code also provides for a basic count heuristic: if the number of
indirect calls decreases and the number of direct calls increases for
a given function in the SCC, we assume devirtualization is responsible.
This matches the heuristics currently used in the legacy pass manager.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23114

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@290665 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-12-28 11:07:33 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
0fc446723e [PM] Introduce the facilities for registering cross-IR-unit dependencies
that require deferred invalidation.

This handles the other real-world invalidation scenario that we have
cases of: a function analysis which caches references to a module
analysis. We currently do this in the AA aggregation layer and might
well do this in other places as well.

Since this is relative rare, the technique is somewhat more cumbersome.
Analyses need to register themselves when accessing the outer analysis
manager's proxy. This proxy is already necessarily present to allow
access to the outer IR unit's analyses. By registering here we can track
and trigger invalidation when that outer analysis goes away.

To make this work we need to enhance the PreservedAnalyses
infrastructure to support a (slightly) more explicit model for "sets" of
analyses, and allow abandoning a single specific analyses even when
a set covering that analysis is preserved. That allows us to describe
the scenario of preserving all Function analyses *except* for the one
where deferred invalidation has triggered.

We also need to teach the invalidator API to support direct ID calls
instead of always going through a template to dispatch so that we can
just record the ID mapping.

I've introduced testing of all of this both for simple module<->function
cases as well as for more complex cases involving a CGSCC layer.

Much like the previous patch I've not tried to fully update the loop
pass management layer because that layer is due to be heavily reworked
to use similar techniques to the CGSCC to handle updates. As that
happens, we'll have a better testing basis for adding support like this.

Many thanks to both Justin and Sean for the extensive reviews on this to
help bring the API design and documentation into a better state.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27198

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@290594 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-12-27 08:40:39 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
4ed09f06aa [PM] Remove now-dead extern template and explicit instantiation
declarations.

We're using a custom class here instead of the helper template, these
bits just didn't get deleted when the other bits did get deleted. This
was found by a really nice MSVC warning about explicitly instantiating
a template where some member functions aren't defined and thus can't be
instantiatied.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@290327 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-12-22 07:14:33 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
54cffa1811 [PM] Provide an initial, minimal port of the inliner to the new pass manager.
This doesn't implement *every* feature of the existing inliner, but
tries to implement the most important ones for building a functional
optimization pipeline and beginning to sort out bugs, regressions, and
other problems.

Notable, but intentional omissions:
- No alloca merging support. Why? Because it isn't clear we want to do
  this at all. Active discussion and investigation is going on to remove
  it, so for simplicity I omitted it.
- No support for trying to iterate on "internally" devirtualized calls.
  Why? Because it adds what I suspect is inappropriate coupling for
  little or no benefit. We will have an outer iteration system that
  tracks devirtualization including that from function passes and
  iterates already. We should improve that rather than approximate it
  here.
- Optimization remarks. Why? Purely to make the patch smaller, no other
  reason at all.

The last one I'll probably work on almost immediately. But I wanted to
skip it in the initial patch to try to focus the change as much as
possible as there is already a lot of code moving around and both of
these *could* be skipped without really disrupting the core logic.

A summary of the different things happening here:

1) Adding the usual new PM class and rigging.

2) Fixing minor underlying assumptions in the inline cost analysis or
   inline logic that don't generally hold in the new PM world.

3) Adding the core pass logic which is in essence a loop over the calls
   in the nodes in the call graph. This is a bit duplicated from the old
   inliner, but only a handful of lines could realistically be shared.
   (I tried at first, and it really didn't help anything.) All told,
   this is only about 100 lines of code, and most of that is the
   mechanics of wiring up analyses from the new PM world.

4) Updating the LazyCallGraph (in the new PM) based on the *newly
   inlined* calls and references. This is very minimal because we cannot
   form cycles.

5) When inlining removes the last use of a function, eagerly nuking the
   body of the function so that any "one use remaining" inline cost
   heuristics are immediately refined, and queuing these functions to be
   completely deleted once inlining is complete and the call graph
   updated to reflect that they have become dead.

6) After all the inlining for a particular function, updating the
   LazyCallGraph and the CGSCC pass manager to reflect the
   function-local simplifications that are done immediately and
   internally by the inline utilties. These are the exact same
   fundamental set of CG updates done by arbitrary function passes.

7) Adding a bunch of test cases to specifically target CGSCC and other
   subtle aspects in the new PM world.

Many thanks to the careful review from Easwaran and Sanjoy and others!

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24226

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@290161 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-12-20 03:15:32 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
8bf2780092 [PM] Support invalidation of inner analysis managers from a pass over the outer IR unit.
Summary:
This never really got implemented, and was very hard to test before
a lot of the refactoring changes to make things more robust. But now we
can test it thoroughly and cleanly, especially at the CGSCC level.

The core idea is that when an inner analysis manager proxy receives the
invalidation event for the outer IR unit, it needs to walk the inner IR
units and propagate it to the inner analysis manager for each of those
units. For example, each function in the SCC needs to get an
invalidation event when the SCC gets one.

The function / module interaction is somewhat boring here. This really
becomes interesting in the face of analysis-backed IR units. This patch
effectively handles all of the CGSCC layer's needs -- both invalidating
SCC analysis and invalidating function analysis when an SCC gets
invalidated.

However, this second aspect doesn't really handle the
LoopAnalysisManager well at this point. That one will need some change
of design in order to fully integrate, because unlike the call graph,
the entire function behind a LoopAnalysis's results can vanish out from
under us, and we won't even have a cached API to access. I'd like to try
to separate solving the loop problems into a subsequent patch though in
order to keep this more focused so I've adapted them to the API and
updated the tests that immediately fail, but I've not added the level of
testing and validation at that layer that I have at the CGSCC layer.

An important aspect of this change is that the proxy for the
FunctionAnalysisManager at the SCC pass layer doesn't work like the
other proxies for an inner IR unit as it doesn't directly manage the
FunctionAnalysisManager and invalidation or clearing of it. This would
create an ever worsening problem of dual ownership of this
responsibility, split between the module-level FAM proxy and this
SCC-level FAM proxy. Instead, this patch changes the SCC-level FAM proxy
to work in terms of the module-level proxy and defer to it to handle
much of the updates. It only does SCC-specific invalidation. This will
become more important in subsequent patches that support more complex
invalidaiton scenarios.

Reviewers: jlebar

Subscribers: mehdi_amini, mcrosier, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27197

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@289317 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-12-10 06:34:44 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
9a9268b704 [PM] Add some more logging to make it more clear when the CGSCC
infrastrucutre is skipping SCCs and RefSCCs.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@288894 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-12-07 10:33:15 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
78a68061a3 [PM] Extend the explicit 'invalidate' method API on analysis results to
accept an Invalidator that allows them to invalidate themselves if their
dependencies are in turn invalidated.

Rather than recording the dependency graph ahead of time when analysis
get results from other analyses, this simply lets each result trigger
the immediate invalidation of any analyses they actually depend on. They
do this in a way that has three nice properties:

1) They don't have to handle transitive dependencies because the
   infrastructure will recurse for them.
2) The invalidate methods are still called only once. We just
   dynamically discover the necessary topological ordering, everything
   is memoized nicely.
3) The infrastructure still provides a default implementation and can
   access it so that only analyses which have dependencies need to do
   anything custom.

To make this work at all, the invalidation logic also has to defer the
deletion of the result objects themselves so that they can remain alive
until we have collected the complete set of results to invalidate.

A unittest is added here that has exactly the dependency pattern we are
concerned with. It hit the use-after-free described by Sean in much
detail in the long thread about analysis invalidation before this
change, and even in an intermediate form of this change where we failed
to defer the deletion of the result objects.

There is an important problem with doing dependency invalidation that
*isn't* solved here: we don't *enforce* that results correctly
invalidate all the analyses whose results they depend on.

I actually looked at what it would take to do that, and it isn't as hard
as I had thought but the complexity it introduces seems very likely to
outweigh the benefit. The technique would be to provide a base class for
an analysis result that would be populated with other results, and
automatically provide the invalidate method which immediately does the
correct thing. This approach has some nice pros IMO:
- Handles the case we care about and nothing else: only *results*
  that depend on other analyses trigger extra invalidation.
- Localized to the result rather than centralized in the analysis
  manager.
- Ties the storage of the reference to another result to the triggering
  of the invalidation of that analysis.
- Still supports extending invalidation in customized ways.

But the down sides here are:
- Very heavy-weight meta-programming is needed to provide this base
  class.
- Requires a pretty awful API for accessing the dependencies.

Ultimately, I fear it will not pull its weight. But we can re-evaluate
this at any point if we start discovering consistent problems where the
invalidation and dependencies get out of sync. It will fit as a clean
layer on top of the facilities in this patch that we can add if and when
we need it.

Note that I'm not really thrilled with the names for these APIs... The
name "Invalidator" seems ok but not great. The method name "invalidate"
also. In review some improvements were suggested, but they really need
*other* uses of these terms to be updated as well so I'm going to do
that in a follow-up commit.

I'm working on the actual fixes to various analyses that need to use
these, but I want to try to get tests for each of them so we don't
regress. And those changes are seperable and obvious so once this goes
in I should be able to roll them out throughout LLVM.

Many thanks to Sean, Justin, and others for help reviewing here.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23738

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@288077 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-11-28 22:04:31 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
0afff634e7 [PM] Remove weird marking of invalidated analyses as "preserved".
This never made a lot of sense. They've been invalidated for one IR unit
but they aren't really preserved in any normal sense. It seemed like it
would be an elegant way of communicating to outer IR units that pass
managers and adaptors had already handled invalidation, but we've since
ended up adding sets that model this more clearly: we're now using
the 'AllAnalysesOn<IRUnitT>' set to handle cases where the trick of
"preserving" invalidated analyses didn't work.

This patch moves to rely on that technique exclusively and removes the
cumbersome API aspect of updating the preserved set when doing
invalidation. This in turn will simplify a *number* of upcoming patches.

This has a side benefit of exposing a number of places where we were
failing to mark the 'AllAnalysesOn<IRUnitT>' set as preserved. This
patch fixes those, and with those fixes shouldn't change any observable
behavior.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@288023 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-11-28 10:42:21 +00:00
NAKAMURA Takumi
788dfe597c Fixup r279618, instantiate *AnalysisManagerProxy<*AnalysisManager,LazyCallGraph::SCC>, instead of *AnalysisManagerProxy<*AnalysisManager,LazyCallGraph::SCC,LazyCallGraph&>, for PassID.
Or they were not instantiated as expected;

  llvm::InnerAnalysisManagerProxy<llvm::AnalysisManager<llvm::Function>, llvm::LazyCallGraph::SCC>::PassID
  llvm::InnerAnalysisManagerProxy<llvm::AnalysisManager<llvm::Function>, llvm::LazyCallGraph::SCC>::PassID

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@280105 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-08-30 15:47:13 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
377af8df2b [PM] Introduce basic update capabilities to the new PM's CGSCC pass
manager, including both plumbing and logic to handle function pass
updates.

There are three fundamentally tied changes here:
1) Plumbing *some* mechanism for updating the CGSCC pass manager as the
   CG changes while passes are running.
2) Changing the CGSCC pass manager infrastructure to have support for
   the underlying graph to mutate mid-pass run.
3) Actually updating the CG after function passes run.

I can separate them if necessary, but I think its really useful to have
them together as the needs of #3 drove #2, and that in turn drove #1.

The plumbing technique is to extend the "run" method signature with
extra arguments. We provide the call graph that intrinsically is
available as it is the basis of the pass manager's IR units, and an
output parameter that records the results of updating the call graph
during an SCC passes's run. Note that "...UpdateResult" isn't a *great*
name here... suggestions very welcome.

I tried a pretty frustrating number of different data structures and such
for the innards of the update result. Every other one failed for one
reason or another. Sometimes I just couldn't keep the layers of
complexity right in my head. The thing that really worked was to just
directly provide access to the underlying structures used to walk the
call graph so that their updates could be informed by the *particular*
nature of the change to the graph.

The technique for how to make the pass management infrastructure cope
with mutating graphs was also something that took a really, really large
number of iterations to get to a place where I was happy. Here are some
of the considerations that drove the design:

- We operate at three levels within the infrastructure: RefSCC, SCC, and
  Node. In each case, we are working bottom up and so we want to
  continue to iterate on the "lowest" node as the graph changes. Look at
  how we iterate over nodes in an SCC running function passes as those
  function passes mutate the CG. We continue to iterate on the "lowest"
  SCC, which is the one that continues to contain the function just
  processed.

- The call graph structure re-uses SCCs (and RefSCCs) during mutation
  events for the *highest* entry in the resulting new subgraph, not the
  lowest. This means that it is necessary to continually update the
  current SCC or RefSCC as it shifts. This is really surprising and
  subtle, and took a long time for me to work out. I actually tried
  changing the call graph to provide the opposite behavior, and it
  breaks *EVERYTHING*. The graph update algorithms are really deeply
  tied to this particualr pattern.

- When SCCs or RefSCCs are split apart and refined and we continually
  re-pin our processing to the bottom one in the subgraph, we need to
  enqueue the newly formed SCCs and RefSCCs for subsequent processing.
  Queuing them presents a few challenges:
  1) SCCs and RefSCCs use wildly different iteration strategies at
     a high level. We end up needing to converge them on worklist
     approaches that can be extended in order to be able to handle the
     mutations.
  2) The order of the enqueuing need to remain bottom-up post-order so
     that we don't get surprising order of visitation for things like
     the inliner.
  3) We need the worklists to have set semantics so we don't duplicate
     things endlessly. We don't need a *persistent* set though because
     we always keep processing the bottom node!!!! This is super, super
     surprising to me and took a long time to convince myself this is
     correct, but I'm pretty sure it is... Once we sink down to the
     bottom node, we can't re-split out the same node in any way, and
     the postorder of the current queue is fixed and unchanging.
  4) We need to make sure that the "current" SCC or RefSCC actually gets
     enqueued here such that we re-visit it because we continue
     processing a *new*, *bottom* SCC/RefSCC.

- We also need the ability to *skip* SCCs and RefSCCs that get merged
  into a larger component. We even need the ability to skip *nodes* from
  an SCC that are no longer part of that SCC.

This led to the design you see in the patch which uses SetVector-based
worklists. The RefSCC worklist is always empty until an update occurs
and is just used to handle those RefSCCs created by updates as the
others don't even exist yet and are formed on-demand during the
bottom-up walk. The SCC worklist is pre-populated from the RefSCC, and
we push new SCCs onto it and blacklist existing SCCs on it to get the
desired processing.

We then *directly* update these when updating the call graph as I was
never able to find a satisfactory abstraction around the update
strategy.

Finally, we need to compute the updates for function passes. This is
mostly used as an initial customer of all the update mechanisms to drive
their design to at least cover some real set of use cases. There are
a bunch of interesting things that came out of doing this:

- It is really nice to do this a function at a time because that
  function is likely hot in the cache. This means we want even the
  function pass adaptor to support online updates to the call graph!

- To update the call graph after arbitrary function pass mutations is
  quite hard. We have to build a fairly comprehensive set of
  data structures and then process them. Fortunately, some of this code
  is related to the code for building the cal graph in the first place.
  Unfortunately, very little of it makes any sense to share because the
  nature of what we're doing is so very different. I've factored out the
  one part that made sense at least.

- We need to transfer these updates into the various structures for the
  CGSCC pass manager. Once those were more sanely worked out, this
  became relatively easier. But some of those needs necessitated changes
  to the LazyCallGraph interface to make it significantly easier to
  extract the changed SCCs from an update operation.

- We also need to update the CGSCC analysis manager as the shape of the
  graph changes. When an SCC is merged away we need to clear analyses
  associated with it from the analysis manager which we didn't have
  support for in the analysis manager infrsatructure. New SCCs are easy!
  But then we have the case that the original SCC has its shape changed
  but remains in the call graph. There we need to *invalidate* the
  analyses associated with it.

- We also need to invalidate analyses after we *finish* processing an
  SCC. But the analyses we need to invalidate here are *only those for
  the newly updated SCC*!!! Because we only continue processing the
  bottom SCC, if we split SCCs apart the original one gets invalidated
  once when its shape changes and is not processed farther so its
  analyses will be correct. It is the bottom SCC which continues being
  processed and needs to have the "normal" invalidation done based on
  the preserved analyses set.

All of this is mostly background and context for the changes here.

Many thanks to all the reviewers who helped here. Especially Sanjoy who
caught several interesting bugs in the graph algorithms, David, Sean,
and others who all helped with feedback.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21464

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@279618 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-08-24 09:37:14 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
77e165569e [PM] Improve the debugging and logging facilities of the CGSCC bits of
the new pass manager.

This adds operator<< overloads for the various bits of the
LazyCallGraph, dump methods for use from the debugger, and debug logging
using them to the CGSCC pass manager.

Having this was essential for debugging the call graph update patch, and
I've extracted what I could from that patch here to minimize the delta.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@273961 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-06-27 23:26:08 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
8e27cb2f34 [PM] Make the AnalysisManager parameter to run methods a reference.
This was originally a pointer to support pass managers which didn't use
AnalysisManagers. However, that doesn't realistically come up much and
the complexity of supporting it doesn't really make sense.

In fact, *many* parts of the pass manager were just assuming the pointer
was never null already. This at least makes it much more explicit and
clear.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@263219 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-03-11 11:05:24 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
18e9a2b623 [PM] Rename the CRTP mixin base classes for the new pass manager to
clarify their purpose.

Firstly, call them "...Mixin" types so it is clear that there is no
type hierarchy being formed here. Secondly, use the term 'Info' to
clarify that they aren't adding any interesting *semantics* to the
passes or analyses, just exposing APIs used by the management layer to
get information about the pass or analysis.

Thanks to Manuel for helping pin down the naming confusion here and come
up with effective names to address it.

In case you already have some out-of-tree stuff, the following should be
roughly what you want to update:

  perl -pi -e 's/\b(Pass|Analysis)Base\b/\1InfoMixin/g'

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@263217 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-03-11 10:33:22 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
e95015f4c9 [PM] Implement the final conclusion as to how the analysis IDs should
work in the face of the limitations of DLLs and templated static
variables.

This requires passes that use the AnalysisBase mixin provide a static
variable themselves. So as to keep their APIs clean, I've made these
private and befriended the CRTP base class (which is the common
practice).

I've added documentation to AnalysisBase for why this is necessary and
at what point we can go back to the much simpler system.

This is clearly a better pattern than the extern template as it caught
*numerous* places where the template magic hadn't been applied and
things were "just working" but would eventually have broken
mysteriously.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@263216 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-03-11 10:22:49 +00:00
NAKAMURA Takumi
d9b6afb249 [PM] Appease mingw32's auto-import DLL build with minimal tweaks, with fix for clang.
char AnalysisBase::ID should be declared as extern and defined in one module.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@262188 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-02-28 17:17:00 +00:00
NAKAMURA Takumi
bebf4a6f9d Revert r262185, "[PM] Appease mingw32's auto-import DLL build with minimal tweaks."
I'll rework soon.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@262186 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-02-28 16:54:06 +00:00
NAKAMURA Takumi
fd32a56bfa [PM] Appease mingw32's auto-import DLL build with minimal tweaks.
char AnalysisBase::ID should be declared as extern and defined in one module.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@262185 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-02-28 16:38:46 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
a36b27d584 [PM] Provide explicit instantiation declarations and definitions for the
PassManager and AnalysisManager template specializations as well.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@262128 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-02-27 10:45:35 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
500af85bd1 [PM] Provide two templates for the two directionalities of analysis
manager proxies and use those rather than repeating their definition
four times.

There are real differences between the two directions: outer AMs are
const and don't need to have invalidation tracked. But every proxy in
a particular direction is identical except for the analysis manager type
and the IR unit they proxy into. This makes them prime candidates for
nice templates.

I've started introducing explicit template instantiation declarations
and definitions as well because we really shouldn't be emitting all this
everywhere. I'm going to go back and add the same for the other
templates like this in a follow-up patch.

I've left the analysis manager as an opaque type rather than using two
IR units and requiring it to be an AnalysisManager template
specialization. I think its important that users retain the ability to
provide their own custom analysis management layer and provided it has
the appropriate API everything should Just Work.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@262127 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-02-27 10:38:10 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
adb60a3a11 [PM] Introduce CRTP mixin base classes to help define passes and
analyses in the new pass manager.

These just handle really basic stuff: turning a type name into a string
statically that is nice to print in logs, and getting a static unique ID
for each analysis.

Sadly, the format of passes in anonymous namespaces makes using their
names in tests really annoying so I've customized the names of the no-op
passes to keep tests sane to read.

This is the first of a few simplifying refactorings for the new pass
manager that should reduce boilerplate and confusion.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@262004 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-02-26 11:44:45 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
73ba9bfc2e [PM] Improve the API and comments around the analysis manager proxies.
These are really handles that ensure the analyses get cleared at
appropriate places, and as such copying doesn't really make sense.
Instead, they should look more like unique ownership objects. Make that
the case.

Relatedly, if you create a temporary of one and move out of it
its destructor shouldn't actually clear anything. I don't think there is
any code that can trigger this currently, but it seems like a more
robust implementation.

If folks want, I can add a unittest that forces this to be exercised,
but that seems somewhat pointless -- whether a temporary is ever created
in the innards of AnalysisManager is not really something we should be
adding a reliance on, but I didn't want to leave a timebomb in the code
here.

If anyone has a cleaner way to represent this, I'm all ears, but
I wanted to assure myself that this wasn't in fact responsible for
another bug I'm chasing down (it wasn't) and figured I'd commit that.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@261594 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-02-23 00:05:00 +00:00
Chad Rosier
45f4118982 Typo.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@261093 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-02-17 14:45:36 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
a59e5882a0 [LCG] Construct an actual call graph with call-edge SCCs nested inside
reference-edge SCCs.

This essentially builds a more normal call graph as a subgraph of the
"reference graph" that was the old model. This allows both to exist and
the different use cases to use the aspect which addresses their needs.
Specifically, the pass manager and other *ordering* constrained logic
can use the reference graph to achieve conservative order of visit,
while analyses reasoning about attributes and other properties derived
from reachability can reason about the direct call graph.

Note that this isn't necessarily complete: it doesn't model edges to
declarations or indirect calls. Those can be found by scanning the
instructions of the function if desirable, and in fact every user
currently does this in order to handle things like calls to instrinsics.
If useful, we could consider caching this information in the call graph
to save the instruction scans, but currently that doesn't seem to be
important.

An important realization for why the representation chosen here works is
that the call graph is a formal subset of the reference graph and thus
both can live within the same data structure. All SCCs of the call graph
are necessarily contained within an SCC of the reference graph, etc.

The design is to build 'RefSCC's to model SCCs of the reference graph,
and then within them more literal SCCs for the call graph.

The formation of actual call edge SCCs is not done lazily, unlike
reference edge 'RefSCC's. Instead, once a reference SCC is formed, it
directly builds the call SCCs within it and stores them in a post-order
sequence. This is used to provide a consistent platform for mutation and
update of the graph. The post-order also allows for very efficient
updates in common cases by bounding the number of nodes (and thus edges)
considered.

There is considerable common code that I'm still looking for the best
way to factor out between the various DFS implementations here. So far,
my attempts have made the code harder to read and understand despite
reducing the duplication, which seems a poor tradeoff. I've not given up
on figuring out the right way to do this, but I wanted to wait until
I at least had the system working and tested to continue attempting to
factor it differently.

This also requires introducing several new algorithms in order to handle
all of the incremental update scenarios for the more complex structure
involving two edge colorings. I've tried to comment the algorithms
sufficiently to make it clear how this is expected to work, but they may
still need more extensive documentation.

I know that there are some changes which are not strictly necessarily
coupled here. The process of developing this started out with a very
focused set of changes for the new structure of the graph and
algorithms, but subsequent changes to bring the APIs and code into
consistent and understandable patterns also ended up touching on other
aspects. There was no good way to separate these out without causing
*massive* merge conflicts. Ultimately, to a large degree this is
a rewrite of most of the core algorithms in the LCG class and so I don't
think it really matters much.

Many thanks to the careful review by Sanjoy Das!

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16802

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@261040 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2016-02-17 00:18:16 +00:00
Justin Bogner
6ca71e2374 [PM]: Fix a doc typo. NFC
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@250962 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2015-10-21 22:51:59 +00:00
Alexander Kornienko
cd52a7a381 Revert r240137 (Fixed/added namespace ending comments using clang-tidy. NFC)
Apparently, the style needs to be agreed upon first.


git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@240390 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2015-06-23 09:49:53 +00:00
Alexander Kornienko
cf0db29df2 Fixed/added namespace ending comments using clang-tidy. NFC
The patch is generated using this command:

tools/clang/tools/extra/clang-tidy/tool/run-clang-tidy.py -fix \
  -checks=-*,llvm-namespace-comment -header-filter='llvm/.*|clang/.*' \
  llvm/lib/


Thanks to Eugene Kosov for the original patch!



git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@240137 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2015-06-19 15:57:42 +00:00
Benjamin Kramer
da747d95a3 Remove std::move on return of temporary.
No functionality change. Found by -Wpessimizing-move.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@236317 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2015-05-01 15:25:29 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
1b279144ec [cleanup] Re-sort all the #include lines in LLVM using
utils/sort_includes.py.

I clearly haven't done this in a while, so more changed than usual. This
even uncovered a missing include from the InstrProf library that I've
added. No functionality changed here, just mechanical cleanup of the
include order.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@225974 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2015-01-14 11:23:27 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
92602ea18e [PM] Refactor the new pass manager to use a single template to implement
the generic functionality of the pass managers themselves.

In the new infrastructure, the pass "manager" isn't actually interesting
at all. It just pipelines a single chunk of IR through N passes. We
don't need to know anything about the IR or the passes to do this really
and we can replace the 3 implementations of the exact same functionality
with a single generic PassManager template, complementing the single
generic AnalysisManager template.

I've left typedefs in place to give convenient names to the various
obvious instantiations of the template.

With this, I think I've nuked almost all of the redundant logic in the
managers, and I think the overall design is actually simpler for having
single templates that clearly indicate there is no special logic here.
The logging is made somewhat more annoying by this change, but I don't
think the difference is worth having heavy-weight traits to help log
things.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@225783 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2015-01-13 11:13:56 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
6b1894aeae [PM] Fold all three analysis managers into a single AnalysisManager
template.

This consolidates three copies of nearly the same core logic. It adds
"complexity" to the ModuleAnalysisManager in that it makes it possible
to share a ModuleAnalysisManager across multiple modules... But it does
so by deleting *all of the code*, so I'm OK with that. This will
naturally make fixing bugs in this code much simpler, etc.

The only down side here is that we have to use 'typename' and 'this->'
in various places, and the implementation is lifted into the header.
I'll take that for the code size reduction.

The convenient names are still typedef-ed and used throughout so that
users can largely ignore this aspect of the implementation.

The follow-up change to this will do the exact same refactoring for the
PassManagers. =D

It turns out that the interesting different code is almost entirely in
the adaptors. At the end, that should be essentially all that is left.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@225757 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2015-01-13 02:51:47 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
9136fdd9b7 [PM] Re-clang-format much of this code as the code has changed some and
so has clang-format. Notably, this fixes a bunch of formatting in the
CGSCC pass manager side of things that has been improved in clang-format
recently.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@225743 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2015-01-13 00:36:47 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
21c4458d3c [PM] Sink the reference vs. value decision for IR units out of the
templated interface.

So far, every single IR unit I can come up with has address-identity.
That is, when two units of IR are both active in LLVM, their addresses
will be distinct of the IR is distinct. This is clearly true for
Modules, Functions, BasicBlocks, and Instructions. It turns out that the
only practical way to make the CGSCC stuff work the way we want is to
make it true for SCCs as well. I expect this pattern to continue.

When first designing the pass manager code, I kept this dimension of
freedom in the type parameters, essentially allowing for a wrapper-type
whose address did not form identity. But that really no longer makes
sense and is making the code more complex or subtle for no gain. If we
ever have an actual use case for this, we can figure out what makes
sense then and there. It will be better because then we will have the
actual example in hand.

While the simplifications afforded in this patch are fairly small
(mostly sinking the '&' out of many type parameters onto a few
interfaces), it would have become much more pronounced with subsequent
changes. I have a sequence of changes that will completely remove the
code duplication that currently exists between all of the pass managers
and analysis managers. =] Should make things much cleaner and avoid bug
fixing N times for the N pass managers.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@225723 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2015-01-12 22:53:31 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
9fc5a53118 [PM] Fix a pretty nasty bug where the new pass manager would invalidate
passes too many time.

I think this is actually the issue that someone raised with me at the
developer's meeting and in an email, but that we never really got to the
bottom of. Having all the testing utilities made it much easier to dig
down and uncover the core issue.

When a pass manager is running many passes over a single function, we
need it to invalidate the analyses between each run so that they can be
re-computed as needed. We also need to track the intersection of
preserved higher-level analyses across all the passes that we run (for
example, if there is one module analysis which all the function analyses
preserve, we want to track that and propagate it). Unfortunately, this
interacted poorly with any enclosing pass adaptor between two IR units.
It would see the intersection of preserved analyses, and need to
invalidate any other analyses, but some of the un-preserved analyses
might have already been invalidated *and recomputed*! We would fail to
propagate the fact that the analysis had already been invalidated.

The solution to this struck me as really strange at first, but the more
I thought about it, the more natural it seemed. After a nice discussion
with Duncan about it on IRC, it seemed even nicer. The idea is that
invalidating an analysis *causes* it to be preserved! Preserving the
lack of result is trivial. If it is recomputed, great. Until something
*else* invalidates it again, we're good.

The consequence of this is that the invalidate methods on the analysis
manager which operate over many passes now consume their
PreservedAnalyses object, update it to "preserve" every analysis pass to
which it delivers an invalidation (regardless of whether the pass
chooses to be removed, or handles the invalidation itself by updating
itself). Then we return this augmented set from the invalidate routine,
letting the pass manager take the result and use the intersection of
*that* across each pass run to compute the final preserved set. This
accounts for all the places where the early invalidation of an analysis
has already "preserved" it for a future run.

I've beefed up the testing and adjusted the assertions to show that we
no longer repeatedly invalidate or compute the analyses across nested
pass managers.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@225333 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2015-01-07 01:58:35 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
040ca449b2 [PM] Add names and debug logging for analysis passes to the new pass
manager.

This starts to allow us to test analyses more easily, but it's really
only the beginning. Some of the code here is still untestable without
manual changes to create analysis passes, but I wanted to factor it into
a small of chunks as possible.

Next up in order to be able to test things are, in no particular order:
- No-op analyses passes so we don't have to use real ones to exercise
  the pass maneger itself.
- Automatic way of generating dummy passes that require an analysis be
  run, including a variant that calls a 'print' method on a pass to make
  it even easier to print out the results of an analysis.
- Dummy passes that invalidate all analyses for their IR unit so we can
  test invalidation and re-runs.
- Automatic way to print each analysis pass as it is re-run.
- Automatic but optional verification of analysis passes everywhere
  possible.

I'm not claiming I'll get to all of these immediately, but that's what
is in the pipeline at some stage. I'm fleshing out exactly what I need
and what to prioritize by working on converting analyses and then trying
to test the conversion. =]

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@225162 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2015-01-05 12:21:44 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
b246acebf4 [PM] Switch the new pass manager to use a reference-based API for IR
units.

This was debated back and forth a bunch, but using references is now
clearly cleaner. Of all the code written using pointers thus far, in
only one place did it really make more sense to have a pointer. In most
cases, this just removes immediate dereferencing from the code. I think
it is much better to get errors on null IR units earlier, potentially
at compile time, than to delay it.

Most notably, the legacy pass manager uses references for its routines
and so as more and more code works with both, the use of pointers was
likely to become really annoying. I noticed this when I ported the
domtree analysis over and wrote the entire thing with references only to
have it fail to compile. =/ It seemed better to switch now than to
delay. We can, of course, revisit this is we learn that references are
really problematic in the API.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@225145 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2015-01-05 02:47:05 +00:00
Benjamin Kramer
00e08fcaa0 Canonicalize header guards into a common format.
Add header guards to files that were missing guards. Remove #endif comments
as they don't seem common in LLVM (we can easily add them back if we decide
they're useful)

Changes made by clang-tidy with minor tweaks.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@215558 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2014-08-13 16:26:38 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
9f2150c046 [LCG] Normalize the post-order SCC iterator to just iterate over the SCC
values rather than having pointers in weird places.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@207053 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2014-04-23 23:51:07 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
57418d8f54 [PM] Add a new-PM-style CGSCC pass manager using the newly added
LazyCallGraph analysis framework. Wire it up all the way through the opt
driver and add some very basic testing that we can build pass pipelines
including these components. Still a lot more to do in terms of testing
that all of this works, but the basic pieces are here.

There is a *lot* of boiler plate here. It's something I'm going to
actively look at reducing, but I don't have any immediate ideas that
don't end up making the code terribly complex in order to fold away the
boilerplate. Until I figure out something to minimize the boilerplate,
almost all of this is based on the code for the existing pass managers,
copied and heavily adjusted to suit the needs of the CGSCC pass
management layer.

The actual CG management still has a bunch of FIXMEs in it. Notably, we
don't do *any* updating of the CG as it is potentially invalidated.
I wanted to get this in place to motivate the new analysis, and add
update APIs to the analysis and the pass management layers in concert to
make sure that the *right* APIs are present.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@206745 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2014-04-21 11:12:00 +00:00