89 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Eli Friedman
309b52e532 [LoopReroll] Add an extra defensive check to avoid SCEV assertion.
Make sure getMinusSCEV() didn't return a pointer.  The following check
would never succeed if it was a pointer, anyway, but calling
getMulExpr() on a pointer SCEV now asserts.
2021-07-13 12:17:09 -07:00
Eli Friedman
b83eae9454 Recommit [ScalarEvolution] Make getMinusSCEV() fail for unrelated pointers.
As part of making ScalarEvolution's handling of pointers consistent, we
want to forbid multiplying a pointer by -1 (or any other value). This
means we can't blindly subtract pointers.

There are a few ways we could deal with this:
1. We could completely forbid subtracting pointers in getMinusSCEV()
2. We could forbid subracting pointers with different pointer bases
(this patch).
3. We could try to ptrtoint pointer operands.

The option in this patch is more friendly to non-integral pointers: code
that works with normal pointers will also work with non-integral
pointers. And it seems like there are very few places that actually
benefit from the third option.

As a minimal patch, the ScalarEvolution implementation of getMinusSCEV
still ends up subtracting pointers if they have the same base.  This
should eliminate the shared pointer base, but eventually we'll need to
rewrite it to avoid negating the pointer base. I plan to do this as a
separate step to allow measuring the compile-time impact.

This doesn't cause obvious functional changes in most cases; the one
case that is significantly affected is ICmpZero handling in LSR (which
is the source of almost all the test changes).  The resulting changes
seem okay to me, but suggestions welcome.  As an alternative, I tried
explicitly ptrtoint'ing the operands, but the result doesn't seem
obviously better.

I deleted the test lsr-undef-in-binop.ll becuase I couldn't figure out
how to repair it to test what it was actually trying to test.

Recommitting with fix to MemoryDepChecker::isDependent.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104806
2021-07-06 12:16:05 -07:00
Eli Friedman
61b59d3278 Revert "[ScalarEvolution] Make getMinusSCEV() fail for unrelated pointers."
This reverts commit 74d6ce5d5f169e9cf3fac0eb1042602e286dd2b9.

Seeing crashes on buildbots in MemoryDepChecker::isDependent.
2021-07-06 11:17:13 -07:00
Eli Friedman
b011bc0424 [ScalarEvolution] Make getMinusSCEV() fail for unrelated pointers.
As part of making ScalarEvolution's handling of pointers consistent, we
want to forbid multiplying a pointer by -1 (or any other value). This
means we can't blindly subtract pointers.

There are a few ways we could deal with this:
1. We could completely forbid subtracting pointers in getMinusSCEV()
2. We could forbid subracting pointers with different pointer bases
(this patch).
3. We could try to ptrtoint pointer operands.

The option in this patch is more friendly to non-integral pointers: code
that works with normal pointers will also work with non-integral
pointers. And it seems like there are very few places that actually
benefit from the third option.

As a minimal patch, the ScalarEvolution implementation of getMinusSCEV
still ends up subtracting pointers if they have the same base.  This
should eliminate the shared pointer base, but eventually we'll need to
rewrite it to avoid negating the pointer base. I plan to do this as a
separate step to allow measuring the compile-time impact.

This doesn't cause obvious functional changes in most cases; the one
case that is significantly affected is ICmpZero handling in LSR (which
is the source of almost all the test changes).  The resulting changes
seem okay to me, but suggestions welcome.  As an alternative, I tried
explicitly ptrtoint'ing the operands, but the result doesn't seem
obviously better.

I deleted the test lsr-undef-in-binop.ll becuase I couldn't figure out
how to repair it to test what it was actually trying to test.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104806
2021-07-06 10:54:41 -07:00
KAWASHIMA Takahiro
47186c3ead [LoopReroll] Fix rerolling loop with extra instructions
Fixes PR47627

This fix suppresses rerolling a loop which has an unrerollable
instruction.

Sample IR for the explanation below:

```
define void @foo([2 x i32]* nocapture %a) {
entry:
  br label %loop

loop:
  ; base instruction
  %indvar = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %indvar.next, %loop ]

  ; unrerollable instructions
  %stptrx = getelementptr inbounds [2 x i32], [2 x i32]* %a, i64 %indvar, i64 0
  store i32 999, i32* %stptrx, align 4

  ; extra simple arithmetic operations, used by root instructions
  %plus20 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvar, 20
  %plus10 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvar, 10

  ; root instruction 0
  %ldptr0 = getelementptr inbounds [2 x i32], [2 x i32]* %a, i64 %plus20, i64 0
  %value0 = load i32, i32* %ldptr0, align 4
  %stptr0 = getelementptr inbounds [2 x i32], [2 x i32]* %a, i64 %plus10, i64 0
  store i32 %value0, i32* %stptr0, align 4

  ; root instruction 1
  %ldptr1 = getelementptr inbounds [2 x i32], [2 x i32]* %a, i64 %plus20, i64 1
  %value1 = load i32, i32* %ldptr1, align 4
  %stptr1 = getelementptr inbounds [2 x i32], [2 x i32]* %a, i64 %plus10, i64 1
  store i32 %value1, i32* %stptr1, align 4

  ; loop-increment and latch
  %indvar.next = add nuw nsw i64 %indvar, 1
  %exitcond = icmp eq i64 %indvar.next, 5
  br i1 %exitcond, label %exit, label %loop

exit:
  ret void
}
```

In the loop rerolling pass, `%indvar` and `%indvar.next` are appended
to the `LoopIncs` vector in the `LoopReroll::DAGRootTracker::findRoots`
function.

Before this fix, two instructions with `unrerollable instructions`
comment above are marked as `IL_All` at the end of the
`LoopReroll::DAGRootTracker::collectUsedInstructions` function,
as well as instructions with `extra simple arithmetic operations`
comment and `loop-increment and latch` comment. It is incorrect
because `IL_All` means that the instruction should be executed in all
iterations of the rerolled loop but the `store` instruction should
not.

This fix rejects instructions which may have side effects and don't
belong to def-use chains of any root instructions and reductions.

See https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47627 for more information.
2021-04-23 15:14:46 +09:00
Kazu Hirata
1e91412444 [Scalar] Use range-based for loops (NFC) 2021-02-25 19:54:38 -08:00
Kazu Hirata
b5d840801d [llvm] Use *Set::contains (NFC) 2021-01-07 20:29:34 -08:00
Arthur Eubanks
f62987dedb [LoopReroll][NewPM] Port -loop-reroll to NPM
Reviewed By: asbirlea

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87957
2020-09-25 12:09:06 -07:00
Eric Christopher
688a5b60e8 [Analysis/Transforms/Sanitizers] As part of using inclusive language
within the llvm project, migrate away from the use of blacklist and
whitelist.
2020-06-20 00:42:26 -07:00
Florian Hahn
69f89dfbd9 [SCEV] Move ScalarEvolutionExpander.cpp to Transforms/Utils (NFC).
SCEVExpander modifies the underlying function so it is more suitable in
Transforms/Utils, rather than Analysis. This allows using other
transform utils in SCEVExpander.

This patch was originally committed as b8a3c34eee06, but broke the
modules build, as LoopAccessAnalysis was using the Expander.

The code-gen part of LAA was moved to lib/Transforms recently, so this
patch can be landed again.

Reviewers: sanjoy.google, efriedma, reames

Reviewed By: sanjoy.google

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71537
2020-05-20 10:53:40 +01:00
KAWASHIMA Takahiro
a9e271942e [LoopReroll] Fix rerolling loop with use outside the loop
Fixes PR41696

The loop-reroll pass generates an invalid IR (or its assertion
fails in debug build) if values of the base instruction and
other root instructions (terms used in the loop-reroll pass)
are used outside the loop block. See IRs written in PR41696
as examples.

The current implementation of the loop-reroll pass can reroll
only loops that don't have values that are used outside the
loop, except reduced values (the last values of reduction chains).
This is described in the comment of the `LoopReroll::reroll`
function.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/llvmorg-10.0.0/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopRerollPass.cpp#L1600

This is checked in the `LoopReroll::DAGRootTracker::validate`
function.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/llvmorg-10.0.0/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopRerollPass.cpp#L1393

However, the base instruction and other root instructions skip
this check in the validation loop.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/llvmorg-10.0.0/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopRerollPass.cpp#L1229

Moving the check in front of the skip is the logically simplest
fix. However, inserting the check in an earlier stage is better
in terms of compilation time of unrerollable loops. This fix
inserts the check for the base instruction into the function
to validate possible base/root instructions. Check for other
root instructions is unnecessary because they don't match any
base instructions if they have uses outside the loop.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79549
2020-05-13 13:03:03 +09:00
Florian Hahn
c2f9eea17d Revert "[SCEV] Move ScalarEvolutionExpander.cpp to Transforms/Utils (NFC)."
This reverts commit 51ef53f3bd23559203fe9af82ff2facbfedc1db3, as it
breaks some bots.
2020-01-04 18:44:38 +00:00
Florian Hahn
088559d18d [SCEV] Move ScalarEvolutionExpander.cpp to Transforms/Utils (NFC).
SCEVExpander modifies the underlying function so it is more suitable in
Transforms/Utils, rather than Analysis. This allows using other
transform utils in SCEVExpander.

Reviewers: sanjoy.google, efriedma, reames

Reviewed By: sanjoy.google

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71537
2020-01-04 18:29:35 +00:00
Reid Kleckner
68092989f3 Sink all InitializePasses.h includes
This file lists every pass in LLVM, and is included by Pass.h, which is
very popular. Every time we add, remove, or rename a pass in LLVM, it
caused lots of recompilation.

I found this fact by looking at this table, which is sorted by the
number of times a file was changed over the last 100,000 git commits
multiplied by the number of object files that depend on it in the
current checkout:
  recompiles    touches affected_files  header
  342380        95      3604    llvm/include/llvm/ADT/STLExtras.h
  314730        234     1345    llvm/include/llvm/InitializePasses.h
  307036        118     2602    llvm/include/llvm/ADT/APInt.h
  213049        59      3611    llvm/include/llvm/Support/MathExtras.h
  170422        47      3626    llvm/include/llvm/Support/Compiler.h
  162225        45      3605    llvm/include/llvm/ADT/Optional.h
  158319        63      2513    llvm/include/llvm/ADT/Triple.h
  140322        39      3598    llvm/include/llvm/ADT/StringRef.h
  137647        59      2333    llvm/include/llvm/Support/Error.h
  131619        73      1803    llvm/include/llvm/Support/FileSystem.h

Before this change, touching InitializePasses.h would cause 1345 files
to recompile. After this change, touching it only causes 550 compiles in
an incremental rebuild.

Reviewers: bkramer, asbirlea, bollu, jdoerfert

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70211
2019-11-13 16:34:37 -08:00
Teresa Johnson
0062c013da Change TargetLibraryInfo analysis passes to always require Function
Summary:
This is the first change to enable the TLI to be built per-function so
that -fno-builtin* handling can be migrated to use function attributes.
See discussion on D61634 for background. This is an enabler for fixing
handling of these options for LTO, for example.

This change should not affect behavior, as the provided function is not
yet used to build a specifically per-function TLI, but rather enables
that migration.

Most of the changes were very mechanical, e.g. passing a Function to the
legacy analysis pass's getTLI interface, or in Module level cases,
adding a callback. This is similar to the way the per-function TTI
analysis works.

There was one place where we were looking for builtins but not in the
context of a specific function. See FindCXAAtExit in
lib/Transforms/IPO/GlobalOpt.cpp. I'm somewhat concerned my workaround
could provide the wrong behavior in some corner cases. Suggestions
welcome.

Reviewers: chandlerc, hfinkel

Subscribers: arsenm, dschuff, jvesely, nhaehnle, mehdi_amini, javed.absar, sbc100, jgravelle-google, eraman, aheejin, steven_wu, george.burgess.iv, dexonsmith, jfb, asbirlea, gchatelet, llvm-commits

Tags: #llvm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66428

llvm-svn: 371284
2019-09-07 03:09:36 +00:00
Eli Friedman
50787e3047 [LoopReroll] Fix reroll root legality checking.
The code checked that the first root was an appropriate distance from
the base value, but skipped checking the other roots. This could lead to
rerolling a loop that can't be legally rerolled (at least, not without
rewriting the loop in a non-trivial way).

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56812

llvm-svn: 353779
2019-02-12 00:33:25 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
ae65e281f3 Update the file headers across all of the LLVM projects in the monorepo
to reflect the new license.

We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.

Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.

llvm-svn: 351636
2019-01-19 08:50:56 +00:00
Eli Friedman
659a645d9a [LoopReroll] Rewrite induction variable rewriting.
This gets rid of a bunch of weird special cases; instead, just use SCEV
rewriting for everything.  In addition to being simpler, this fixes a
bug where we would use the wrong stride in certain edge cases.

The one bit I'm not quite sure about is the trip count handling,
specifically the FIXME about overflow.  In general, I think we need to
widen the exit condition, but that's probably not profitable if the new
type isn't legal, so we probably need a check somewhere.  That said, I
don't think I'm making the existing problem any worse.

As a followup to this, a bunch of IV-related code in root-finding could
be cleaned up; with SCEV-based rewriting, there isn't any reason to
assume a loop will have exactly one or two PHI nodes.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45191

llvm-svn: 335400
2018-06-22 22:58:55 +00:00
Florian Hahn
4173bf063e Use SmallPtrSet explicitly for SmallSets with pointer types (NFC).
Currently SmallSet<PointerTy> inherits from SmallPtrSet<PointerTy>. This
patch replaces such types with SmallPtrSet, because IMO it is slightly
clearer and allows us to get rid of unnecessarily including SmallSet.h

Reviewers: dblaikie, craig.topper

Reviewed By: dblaikie

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47836

llvm-svn: 334492
2018-06-12 11:16:56 +00:00
Craig Topper
3e90558514 Use SmallPtrSet instead of SmallSet in places where we iterate over the set.
SmallSet forwards to SmallPtrSet for pointer types. SmallPtrSet supports iteration, but a normal SmallSet doesn't. So if it wasn't for the forwarding, this wouldn't work.

These places were found by hiding the begin/end methods in the SmallSet forwarding

llvm-svn: 334343
2018-06-09 05:04:20 +00:00
David Blaikie
93054c1e87 Move Analysis/Utils/Local.h back to Transforms
Review feedback from r328165. Split out just the one function from the
file that's used by Analysis. (As chandlerc pointed out, the original
change only moved the header and not the implementation anyway - which
was fine for the one function that was used (since it's a
template/inlined in the header) but not in general)

llvm-svn: 333954
2018-06-04 21:23:21 +00:00
Nicola Zaghen
9667127c14 Rename DEBUG macro to LLVM_DEBUG.
The DEBUG() macro is very generic so it might clash with other projects.
The renaming was done as follows:
- git grep -l 'DEBUG' | xargs sed -i 's/\bDEBUG\s\?(/LLVM_DEBUG(/g'
- git diff -U0 master | ../clang/tools/clang-format/clang-format-diff.py -i -p1 -style LLVM
- Manual change to APInt
- Manually chage DOCS as regex doesn't match it.

In the transition period the DEBUG() macro is still present and aliased
to the LLVM_DEBUG() one.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D43624

llvm-svn: 332240
2018-05-14 12:53:11 +00:00
David Blaikie
2efa3f569e Transforms: Introduce Transforms/Utils.h rather than spreading the declarations amongst Scalar.h and IPO.h
Fixes layering - Transforms/Utils shouldn't depend on including a Scalar
or IPO header, because Scalar and IPO depend on Utils.

llvm-svn: 328717
2018-03-28 17:44:36 +00:00
David Blaikie
a9b82b5ec4 Fix a couple of layering violations in Transforms
Remove #include of Transforms/Scalar.h from Transform/Utils to fix layering.

Transforms depends on Transforms/Utils, not the other way around. So
remove the header and the "createStripGCRelocatesPass" function
declaration (& definition) that is unused and motivated this dependency.

Move Transforms/Utils/Local.h into Analysis because it's used by
Analysis/MemoryBuiltins.cpp.

llvm-svn: 328165
2018-03-21 22:34:23 +00:00
Eugene Zelenko
74914fb100 [Transforms] Fix some Clang-tidy modernize and Include What You Use warnings; other minor fixes (NFC).
llvm-svn: 316128
2017-10-18 21:46:47 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
eb66b33867 Sort the remaining #include lines in include/... and lib/....
I did this a long time ago with a janky python script, but now
clang-format has built-in support for this. I fed clang-format every
line with a #include and let it re-sort things according to the precise
LLVM rules for include ordering baked into clang-format these days.

I've reverted a number of files where the results of sorting includes
isn't healthy. Either places where we have legacy code relying on
particular include ordering (where possible, I'll fix these separately)
or where we have particular formatting around #include lines that
I didn't want to disturb in this patch.

This patch is *entirely* mechanical. If you get merge conflicts or
anything, just ignore the changes in this patch and run clang-format
over your #include lines in the files.

Sorry for any noise here, but it is important to keep these things
stable. I was seeing an increasing number of patches with irrelevant
re-ordering of #include lines because clang-format was used. This patch
at least isolates that churn, makes it easy to skip when resolving
conflicts, and gets us to a clean baseline (again).

llvm-svn: 304787
2017-06-06 11:49:48 +00:00
Davide Italiano
79a2f25422 [LoopReroll] Prefer hasNUses/hasNUses or more as they're cheaper. NFCI.
llvm-svn: 300607
2017-04-18 21:42:21 +00:00
Zvi Rackover
9a0fbd2ef8 LoopRerollPass: Prefer Value::hasOneUse() over Value::getNumUses(). NFC.
getNumUses() can be more expensive as it iterates over all list's elements.

llvm-svn: 300558
2017-04-18 14:55:43 +00:00
Eli Friedman
6b340b2b35 [LoopReroll] Make root-finding more aggressive.
Allow using an instruction other than a mul or phi as the base for
root-finding. For example, the included testcase includes a loop
which requires using a getelementptr as the base for root-finding.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26529

llvm-svn: 287588
2016-11-21 22:35:34 +00:00
Duncan P. N. Exon Smith
4e09f9bf86 ADT: Give ilist<T>::reverse_iterator a handle to the current node
Reverse iterators to doubly-linked lists can be simpler (and cheaper)
than std::reverse_iterator.  Make it so.

In particular, change ilist<T>::reverse_iterator so that it is *never*
invalidated unless the node it references is deleted.  This matches the
guarantees of ilist<T>::iterator.

(Note: MachineBasicBlock::iterator is *not* an ilist iterator, but a
MachineInstrBundleIterator<MachineInstr>.  This commit does not change
MachineBasicBlock::reverse_iterator, but it does update
MachineBasicBlock::reverse_instr_iterator.  See note at end of commit
message for details on bundle iterators.)

Given the list (with the Sentinel showing twice for simplicity):

     [Sentinel] <-> A <-> B <-> [Sentinel]

the following is now true:
 1. begin() represents A.
 2. begin() holds the pointer for A.
 3. end() represents [Sentinel].
 4. end() holds the poitner for [Sentinel].
 5. rbegin() represents B.
 6. rbegin() holds the pointer for B.
 7. rend() represents [Sentinel].
 8. rend() holds the pointer for [Sentinel].

The changes are #6 and #8.  Here are some properties from the old
scheme (which used std::reverse_iterator):
- rbegin() held the pointer for [Sentinel] and rend() held the pointer
  for A;
- operator*() cost two dereferences instead of one;
- converting from a valid iterator to its valid reverse_iterator
  involved a confusing increment; and
- "RI++->erase()" left RI invalid.  The unintuitive replacement was
  "RI->erase(), RE = end()".

With vector-like data structures these properties are hard to avoid
(since past-the-beginning is not a valid pointer), and don't impose a
real cost (since there's still only one dereference, and all iterators
are invalidated on erase).  But with lists, this was a poor design.

Specifically, the following code (which obviously works with normal
iterators) now works with ilist::reverse_iterator as well:

    for (auto RI = L.rbegin(), RE = L.rend(); RI != RE;)
      fooThatMightRemoveArgFromList(*RI++);

Converting between iterator and reverse_iterator for the same node uses
the getReverse() function.

    reverse_iterator iterator::getReverse();
    iterator reverse_iterator::getReverse();

Why doesn't iterator <=> reverse_iterator conversion use constructors?

In order to catch and update old code, reverse_iterator does not even
have an explicit conversion from iterator.  It wouldn't be safe because
there would be no reasonable way to catch all the bugs from the changed
semantic (see the changes at call sites that are part of this patch).

Old code used this API:

    std::reverse_iterator::reverse_iterator(iterator);
    iterator std::reverse_iterator::base();

Here's how to update from old code to new (that incorporates the
semantic change), assuming I is an ilist<>::iterator and RI is an
ilist<>::reverse_iterator:

            [Old]         ==>          [New]
    reverse_iterator(I)       (--I).getReverse()
    reverse_iterator(I)         ++I.getReverse()
  --reverse_iterator(I)           I.getReverse()
    reverse_iterator(++I)         I.getReverse()
          RI.base()          (--RI).getReverse()
          RI.base()            ++RI.getReverse()
        --RI.base()              RI.getReverse()
      (++RI).base()              RI.getReverse()
  delete &*RI, RE = end()         delete &*RI++
  RI->erase(), RE = end()         RI++->erase()

=======================================
Note: bundle iterators are out of scope
=======================================

MachineBasicBlock::iterator, also known as
MachineInstrBundleIterator<MachineInstr>, is a wrapper to represent
MachineInstr bundles.  The idea is that each operator++ takes you to the
beginning of the next bundle.  Implementing a sane reverse iterator for
this is harder than ilist.  Here are the options:
- Use std::reverse_iterator<MBB::i>.  Store a handle to the beginning of
  the next bundle.  A call to operator*() runs a loop (usually
  operator--() will be called 1 time, for unbundled instructions).
  Increment/decrement just works.  This is the status quo.
- Store a handle to the final node in the bundle.  A call to operator*()
  still runs a loop, but it iterates one time fewer (usually
  operator--() will be called 0 times, for unbundled instructions).
  Increment/decrement just works.
- Make the ilist_sentinel<MachineInstr> *always* store that it's the
  sentinel (instead of just in asserts mode).  Then the bundle iterator
  can sniff the sentinel bit in operator++().

I initially tried implementing the end() option as part of this commit,
but updating iterator/reverse_iterator conversion call sites was
error-prone.  I have a WIP series of patches that implements the final
option.

llvm-svn: 280032
2016-08-30 00:13:12 +00:00
David Majnemer
85242fb9f9 Use the range variant of find instead of unpacking begin/end
If the result of the find is only used to compare against end(), just
use is_contained instead.

No functionality change is intended.

llvm-svn: 278433
2016-08-11 22:21:41 +00:00
Sanjoy Das
057da043be [LoopReroll] Reroll loops with unordered atomic memory accesses
Reviewers: hfinkel, jfb, reames

Subscribers: mcrosier, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D22385

llvm-svn: 275932
2016-07-19 00:23:54 +00:00
Benjamin Kramer
eef5ae3754 Apply clang-tidy's modernize-loop-convert to most of lib/Transforms.
Only minor manual fixes. No functionality change intended.

llvm-svn: 273808
2016-06-26 12:28:59 +00:00
Lawrence Hu
84f170e1c6 Enable loopreroll for sext of loop control only IV
This patch extend loopreroll to allow the instruction chain
        of loop control only IV has sext.

        Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19820

llvm-svn: 269121
2016-05-10 21:16:49 +00:00
Lawrence Hu
ebbd866e5b Revert r26084: Enable loopreroll for sext of loop control only IV
llvm-svn: 269119
2016-05-10 21:11:09 +00:00
Lawrence Hu
8953864da8 Enable loopreroll for sext of loop control only IV
This patch extend loopreroll to allow the instruction chain
    of loop control only IV has sext.

llvm-svn: 269084
2016-05-10 17:42:27 +00:00
Lawrence Hu
840b3f8ac8 Reroll loops with multiple IV and negative step part 3
support multiple induction variables

    This patch enable loop reroll for the following case:
        for(int i=0;  i<N; i += 2) {
           S += *a++;
           S += *a++;
        };

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16550

llvm-svn: 268147
2016-04-30 00:51:22 +00:00
Andrew Kaylor
653d361880 Re-commit optimization bisect support (r267022) without new pass manager support.
The original commit was reverted because of a buildbot problem with LazyCallGraph::SCC handling (not related to the OptBisect handling).

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19172

llvm-svn: 267231
2016-04-22 22:06:11 +00:00
Vedant Kumar
b6cc52b7d8 Revert "Initial implementation of optimization bisect support."
This reverts commit r267022, due to an ASan failure:

  http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/job/clang-stage2-cmake-RgSan_check/1549

llvm-svn: 267115
2016-04-22 06:51:37 +00:00
Andrew Kaylor
fd49f275f8 Initial implementation of optimization bisect support.
This patch implements a optimization bisect feature, which will allow optimizations to be selectively disabled at compile time in order to track down test failures that are caused by incorrect optimizations.

The bisection is enabled using a new command line option (-opt-bisect-limit).  Individual passes that may be skipped call the OptBisect object (via an LLVMContext) to see if they should be skipped based on the bisect limit.  A finer level of control (disabling individual transformations) can be managed through an addition OptBisect method, but this is not yet used.

The skip checking in this implementation is based on (and replaces) the skipOptnoneFunction check.  Where that check was being called, a new call has been inserted in its place which checks the bisect limit and the optnone attribute.  A new function call has been added for module and SCC passes that behaves in a similar way.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19172

llvm-svn: 267022
2016-04-21 17:58:54 +00:00
Zinovy Nis
490efbdf4e [PATCH] Force LoopReroll to reset the loop trip count value after reroll.
It's a bug fix. 
For rerolled loops SE trip count remains unchanged. It leads to incorrect work of the next passes.
My patch just resets SE info for rerolled loop forcing SE to re-evaluate it next time it requested.
I also added a verifier call in the exisitng test to be sure no invalid SE data remain. Without my fix this test would fail with -verify-scev.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18316

llvm-svn: 264051
2016-03-22 13:50:57 +00:00
Elena Demikhovsky
c545950e89 Allow setting MaxRerollIterations above 16
By Ayal Zaks.

Differential Revision http://reviews.llvm.org/D17258

llvm-svn: 261517
2016-02-22 09:38:28 +00:00
Chandler Carruth
b42444d804 [LPM] Factor all of the loop analysis usage updates into a common helper
routine.

We were getting this wrong in small ways and generally being very
inconsistent about it across loop passes. Instead, let's have a common
place where we do this. One minor downside is that this will require
some analyses like SCEV in more places than they are strictly needed.
However, this seems benign as these analyses are complete no-ops, and
without this consistency we can in many cases end up with the legacy
pass manager scheduling deciding to split up a loop pass pipeline in
order to run the function analysis half-way through. It is very, very
annoying to fix these without just being very pedantic across the board.

The only loop passes I've not updated here are ones that use
AU.setPreservesAll() such as IVUsers (an analysis) and the pass printer.
They seemed less relevant.

With this patch, almost all of the problems in PR24804 around loop pass
pipelines are fixed. The one remaining issue is that we run simplify-cfg
and instcombine in the middle of the loop pass pipeline. We've recently
added some loop variants of these passes that would seem substantially
cleaner to use, but this at least gets us much closer to the previous
state. Notably, the seven loop pass managers is down to three.

I've not updated the loop passes using LoopAccessAnalysis because that
analysis hasn't been fully wired into LoopSimplify/LCSSA, and it isn't
clear that those transforms want to support those forms anyways. They
all run late anyways, so this is harmless. Similarly, LSR is left alone
because it already carefully manages its forms and doesn't need to get
fused into a single loop pass manager with a bunch of other loop passes.

LoopReroll didn't use loop simplified form previously, and I've updated
the test case to match the trivially different output.

Finally, I've also factored all the pass initialization for the passes
that use this technique as well, so that should be done regularly and
reliably.

Thanks to James for the help reviewing and thinking about this stuff,
and Ben for help thinking about it as well!

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17435

llvm-svn: 261316
2016-02-19 10:45:18 +00:00
Lawrence Hu
baafd4c214 Enable loopreroll to rerool loop with pointer induction variable.
Example:

while (buf !=end ) {
   S += buf[0];
   S += buf[1];
   buf +=2;
};

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13151

llvm-svn: 258709
2016-01-25 19:43:45 +00:00
Lawrence Hu
0572a631ee Undo commit 258700 due to missing commit message
llvm-svn: 258708
2016-01-25 19:36:30 +00:00
Lawrence Hu
1cf7c9fba6 Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13151
llvm-svn: 258700
2016-01-25 18:53:39 +00:00
Sanjoy Das
5292411857 [SCEV] Add and use SCEVConstant::getAPInt; NFCI
llvm-svn: 255921
2015-12-17 20:28:46 +00:00
Justin Bogner
621a2ef540 LPM: Stop threading Pass * through all of the loop utility APIs. NFC
A large number of loop utility functions take a `Pass *` and reach
into it to find out which analyses to preserve. There are a number of
problems with this:

- The APIs have access to pretty well any Pass state they want, so
  it's hard to tell what they may or may not do.

- Other APIs have copied these and pass around a `Pass *` even though
  they don't even use it. Some of these just hand a nullptr to the API
  since the callers don't even have a pass available.

- Passes in the new pass manager don't work like the current ones, so
  the APIs can't be used as is there.

Instead, we should explicitly thread the analysis results that we
actually care about through these APIs. This is both simpler and more
reusable.

llvm-svn: 255669
2015-12-15 19:40:57 +00:00
Benjamin Kramer
042f072423 [ScalarOpts] Remove dead code.
Does not touch debug dumpers. NFC.

llvm-svn: 250417
2015-10-15 15:08:58 +00:00
Duncan P. N. Exon Smith
f5f123721d Scalar: Remove remaining ilist iterator implicit conversions
Remove remaining `ilist_iterator` implicit conversions from
LLVMScalarOpts.

This change exposed some scary behaviour in
lib/Transforms/Scalar/SCCP.cpp around line 1770.  This patch changes a
call from `Function::begin()` to `&Function::front()`, since the return
was immediately being passed into another function that takes a
`Function*`.  `Function::front()` started to assert, since the function
was empty.  Note that `Function::end()` does not point at a legal
`Function*` -- it points at an `ilist_half_node` -- so the other
function was getting garbage before.  (I added the missing check for
`Function::isDeclaration()`.)

Otherwise, no functionality change intended.

llvm-svn: 250211
2015-10-13 19:26:58 +00:00