I'm not sure if this is a regression from D81448 + D81643,
which moved at least the code cast from elsewhere,
or somehow no one triggered that before.
But now we can reach it with a non-instruction..
It is not straight-forward to write cost-model tests for constantexprs,
`-cost-model -analyze -cost-kind=` does not appear to look at them,
or maybe i'm doing it wrong.
I've encountered that via a SimplifyCFG crash,
so reduced (currently-crashing) test is added.
There are likely other instances.
For now, simply restore previous status quo of
not crashing and returning TTI::TCC_Basic.
Summary:
According to HowToUpdateDebugInfo.rst:
```
Preserving the debug locations of speculated instructions can make
it seem like a condition is true when it's not (or vice versa), which
leads to a confusing single-stepping experience
```
This patch follows the recommendation to drop debug locations on
speculated instructions.
Reviewers: aprantl, davide
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82420
When an invoke instruction is converted to a call its
profile metadata is dropped because it has incompatible
format (see commit 16ad6eeb94ff).
This patch adds an attempt to convert profile data to
format of the call instruction. This used to work well
before the commit dcfa78a4ccec.
Reviewers: reames
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82071
The invoke instruction can have profile metadata with branch_weights,
which does not make sense for a call instruction and will be
rejected by the verifier.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81996
If the only user of `Instr` is in a return or unreachable block, we can
sink `Instr` to the`User` safely (unless it reads/writes memory).
Return or unreachable blocks are guaranteed to execute zero
or one time, and `Instr` always dominates `User`, so they either will
be executed together (execution of `User` always implies execution
of `Instr`) or not executed at all.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80120
Reviewed By: asbirlea, jdoerfert
If we don't know anything about the alignment of a pointer, Align(1) is
still correct: all pointers are at least 1-byte aligned.
Included in this patch is a bugfix for an issue discovered during this
cleanup: pointers with "dereferenceable" attributes/metadata were
assumed to be aligned according to the type of the pointer. This
wasn't intentional, as far as I can tell, so Loads.cpp was fixed to
stop making this assumption. Frontends may need to be updated. I
updated clang's handling of C++ references, and added a release note for
this.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80072
The "null-pointer-is-valid" attribute needs to be checked by many
pointer-related combines. To make the check more efficient, convert
it from a string into an enum attribute.
In the future, this attribute may be replaced with data layout
properties.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78862
For IR generated by a compiler, this is really simple: you just take the
datalayout from the beginning of the file, and apply it to all the IR
later in the file. For optimization testcases that don't care about the
datalayout, this is also really simple: we just use the default
datalayout.
The complexity here comes from the fact that some LLVM tools allow
overriding the datalayout: some tools have an explicit flag for this,
some tools will infer a datalayout based on the code generation target.
Supporting this properly required plumbing through a bunch of new
machinery: we want to allow overriding the datalayout after the
datalayout is parsed from the file, but before we use any information
from it. Therefore, IR/bitcode parsing now has a callback to allow tools
to compute the datalayout at the appropriate time.
Not sure if I covered all the LLVM tools that want to use the callback.
(clang? lli? Misc IR manipulation tools like llvm-link?). But this is at
least enough for all the LLVM regression tests, and IR without a
datalayout is not something frontends should generate.
This change had some sort of weird effects for certain CodeGen
regression tests: if the datalayout is overridden with a datalayout with
a different program or stack address space, we now parse IR based on the
overridden datalayout, instead of the one written in the file (or the
default one, if none is specified). This broke a few AVR tests, and one
AMDGPU test.
Outside the CodeGen tests I mentioned, the test changes are all just
fixing CHECK lines and moving around datalayout lines in weird places.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78403
We want to add a way to avoid merging identical calls so as to keep the
separate debug-information for those calls. There is also an asan
usecase where having this attribute would be beneficial to avoid
alternative work-arounds.
Here is the link to the feature request:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42783.
`nomerge` is different from `noline`. `noinline` prevents function from
inlining at callsites, but `nomerge` prevents multiple identical calls
from being merged into one.
This patch adds `nomerge` to disable the optimization in IR level. A
followup patch will be needed to let backend understands `nomerge` and
avoid tail merge at backend.
Reviewed By: asbirlea, rnk
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78659
Since intrinsics can now specify when an argument is required to be
constant, it is now OK to replace arguments with variables if they
aren't. This means intrinsics must now be accurately marked with
immarg.
On Powerpc fma is faster than fadd + fmul for some types,
(PPCTargetLowering::isFMAFasterThanFMulAndFAdd). we should implement target
hook isProfitableToHoist to prevent simplifyCFGpass from breaking fma
pattern by hoisting fmul to predecessor block.
Reviewed By: nemanjai
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D76207
SimplifyCFG should not merge empty return blocks and leave a CallBr behind
with a duplicated destination since the verifier will then trigger an
assert. This patch checks for this case and avoids the transformation.
CodeGenPrepare has a similar check which also has a FIXME comment about why
this is needed. It seems perhaps better if these two passes would eventually
instead update the CallBr instruction instead of just checking and avoiding.
This fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45062.
Review: Craig Topper
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75620
When InstCombine initially populates the worklist, it already
performs constant folding and DCE. However, as the instructions
are initially visited in program order, this DCE can pick up only
the last instruction of a dead chain, the rest would only get
picked up in the main InstCombine run.
To avoid this, we instead perform the DCE in separate pass over the
collected instructions in reverse order, which will allow us to
pick up full dead instruction chains. We already need to do this
reverse iteration anyway to populate the worklist, so this
shouldn't add extra cost.
This by itself only fixes a small part of the problem though:
The same basic issue also applies during the main InstCombine loop.
We generally always want DCE to occur as early as possible,
because it will allow one-use folds to happen. Address this by also
performing DCE while adding deferred instructions to the main worklist.
This drops the number of tests that perform more than 2 InstCombine
iterations from ~80 to ~40. There's some spurious test changes due
to operand order / icmp toggling.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75008
This reverts commit 61b35e4111160fe834a00c33d040e01150b576ac.
This commit causes a timeout in chromium builds; likely to have a
similar cause to the previous timeout issue caused by this commit (see
6ded69f294a9 for more details). It is possible that there is no way to
fix this bug that will not cause this issue; further investigations as
to the efficiency of handling large amounts of debug info will be
necessary.
This reverts commit 636c93ed11a5f98b5c3ff88241460d61cb7785bb.
The original patch caused build failures on TSan buildbots. Commit 6ded69f294a9
fixes this issue by reducing the rate at which empty debug intrinsics
propagate, reducing the memory footprint and preventing a fatal spike.
This fixes a bug where a PHI node that is only referenced by a lifetime.end intrinsic in an otherwise empty cleanuppad can cause SimplyCFG to create an SSA violation while removing the empty cleanuppad. Theoretically the same problem can occur with debug intrinsics.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D72540
Summary:
In commit d60f34c20a2f31335c8d5626e (llvm-svn 317128,
PR35113) MergeBlockIntoPredecessor was changed into
discarding some dbg.value intrinsics referring to
PHI values, post-splice due to loop rotation.
That elimination of dbg.value intrinsics did not
consider which dbg.value to keep depending on the
context (e.g. if the variable is changing its value
several times inside the basic block).
In the past that hasn't been such a big problem since
CodeGenPrepare::placeDbgValues has moved the dbg.value
to be next to the PHI node anyway. But after commit
00e238896cd8ad3a7d7 CodeGenPrepare isn't doing that
any longer, so we need to be more careful when avoiding
duplicate dbg.value intrinsics in MergeBlockIntoPredecessor.
This patch replaces the code that tried to avoid duplicate
dbg.values by using the RemoveRedundantDbgInstrs helper.
Reviewers: aprantl, jmorse, vsk
Reviewed By: aprantl, vsk
Subscribers: jholewinski, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71480
GEP index size can be specified in the DataLayout, introduced in D42123. However, there were still places
in which getIndexSizeInBits was used interchangeably with getPointerSizeInBits. This notably caused issues
with Instcombine's visitPtrToInt; but the unit tests was incorrect, so this remained undiscovered.
This fixes the buildbot failures.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68328
Patch by Joseph Faulls!
GEP index size can be specified in the DataLayout, introduced in D42123. However, there were still places
in which getIndexSizeInBits was used interchangeably with getPointerSizeInBits. This notably caused issues
with Instcombine's visitPtrToInt; but the unit tests was incorrect, so this remained undiscovered.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68328
Patch by Joseph Faulls!
basic blocks
Originally applied in 72ce759928e6dfee6a9efa310b966c19722352ba.
Fixed a build failure caused by incorrect use of cast instead of
dyn_cast.
This reverts commit 8b0780f795eb58fca0a2456e308adaaa1a0b5013.
When basic blocks are killed, either due to being empty or to being an if.then
or if.else block whose complement contains identical instructions, some of the
debug intrinsics in that block are lost. This patch sinks those intrinsics
into the single successor block, setting them Undef if necessary to
prevent debug info from falling out-of-date.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70318
As a reminder, a "widenable branch" is the pattern "br i1 (and i1 X, WC()), label %taken, label %untaken" where "WC" is the widenable condition intrinsics. The semantics of such a branch (derived from the semantics of WC) is that a new condition can be added into the condition arbitrarily without violating legality.
Broaden the definition in two ways:
Allow swapped operands to the br (and X, WC()) form
Allow widenable branch w/trivial condition (i.e. true) which takes form of br i1 WC()
The former is just general robustness (e.g. for X = non-instruction this is what instcombine produces). The later is specifically important as partial unswitching of a widenable range check produces exactly this form above the loop.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70502
Similar to/extension of D70208 (rGee0882bdf866), but this one
may finally allow closing motivating bugs.
This is another step towards having FMF apply only to FP values
rather than those + fcmp. See PR38086 for one of the original
discussions/motivations:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38086
And the test here is derived from PR39535:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39535
Currently, we lose FMF when converting any phi to select in
SimplifyCFG. There are a small number of similar changes needed
to correct within SimplifyCFG, so it should be quick to patch
this pass up.
FMF was extended to select and phi with:
D61917
D67564
It doesn't seem that there are any perf/param knobs that can be turned
to create selects for the FP variants of the tests, but that may not
always be true in the future. If it changes, we should propagate FMF.
This is another step towards having FMF apply only to FP values
rather than those + fcmp. See PR38086 for one of the original
discussions/motivations:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38086
And the test here is derived from PR39535:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39535
Currently, we lose FMF when converting any phi to select in
SimplifyCFG. There are a small number of similar changes needed
to correct within SimplifyCFG, so it should be quick to patch
this pass up.
FMF was extended to select and phi with:
D61917
D67564
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70208
We had a subtle, but nasty bug in our definition of a widenable branch, and thus in the transforms which used that utility. Specifically, we returned true for any branch which included a widenable condition within it's condition, regardless of whether that widenable condition also had other uses.
The problem is that the result of the WC() call is defined to be one particular value. As such, all users must agree as to what that value is. If we widen a branch without also updating *all other users* of the WC in the same way, we have broken the required semantics.
Most of the textual diff is updating existing transforms not to leave dead uses hanging around. They're largely NFC as the dead instructions would be immediately deleted by other passes. The reason to make these changes is so that the transforms preserve the widenable branch form.
In practice, we don't get bitten by this only because it isn't profitable to CSE WC() calls and the lowering pass from guards uses distinct WC calls per branch.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69916
This transformation is a variation on the GuardWidening transformation we have checked in as it's own pass. Instead of focusing on merge (i.e. hoisting and simplifying) two widenable branches, this transform makes the observation that simply removing a second slowpath block (by reusing an existing one) is often a very useful canonicalization. This may lead to later merging, or may not. This is a useful generalization when the intermediate block has loads whose dereferenceability is hard to establish.
As noted in the patch, this can be generalized further, and will be.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69689
Summary:
As it can be see in the changed test, while `div` is really costly,
we were speculating it. This does not seem correct.
Also, the old code would run for every single insturuction in BB,
instead of eagerly bailing out as soon as there are too many instructions.
This function still has a problem that `PHINodeFoldingThreshold` is
per-basic-block, while it should be for all the basic blocks.
Reviewers: efriedma, craig.topper, dmgreen, jmolloy
Reviewed By: jmolloy
Subscribers: xbolva00, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67315
llvm-svn: 372255
Summary:
Previously, if the threshold was 2, we were willing to speculatively
execute 2 cheap instructions in both basic blocks (thus we were willing
to speculatively execute cost = 4), but weren't willing to speculate
when one BB had 3 instructions and other one had no instructions,
even thought that would have total cost of 3.
This looks inconsistent to me.
I don't think `cmov`-like instructions will start executing
until both of it's inputs are available: https://godbolt.org/z/zgHePf
So i don't see why the existing behavior is the correct one.
Also, let's add it's own `cl::opt` for this threshold,
with default=4, so it is not stricter than the previous threshold:
will allow to fold when there are 2 BB's each with cost=2.
And since the logic has changed, it will also allow to fold when
one BB has cost=3 and other cost=1, or there is only one BB with cost=4.
This is an alternative solution to D65148:
This fix is mainly motivated by `signbit-like-value-extension.ll` test.
That pattern comes up in JPEG decoding, see e.g.
`Figure F.12 – Extending the sign bit of a decoded value in V`
of `ITU T.81` (JPEG specification).
That branch is not predictable, and it is within the innermost loop,
so the fact that that pattern ends up being stuck with a branch
instead of `select` (i.e. `CMOV` for x86) is unlikely to be beneficial.
This has great results on the final assembly (vanilla test-suite + RawSpeed): (metric pass - D67240)
| metric | old | new | delta | % |
| x86-mi-counting.NumMachineFunctions | 37720 | 37721 | 1 | 0.00% |
| x86-mi-counting.NumMachineBasicBlocks | 773545 | 771181 | -2364 | -0.31% |
| x86-mi-counting.NumMachineInstructions | 7488843 | 7486442 | -2401 | -0.03% |
| x86-mi-counting.NumUncondBR | 135770 | 135543 | -227 | -0.17% |
| x86-mi-counting.NumCondBR | 423753 | 422187 | -1566 | -0.37% |
| x86-mi-counting.NumCMOV | 24815 | 25731 | 916 | 3.69% |
| x86-mi-counting.NumVecBlend | 17 | 17 | 0 | 0.00% |
We significantly decrease basic block count, notably decrease instruction count,
significantly decrease branch count and very significantly increase `cmov` count.
Performance-wise, unsurprisingly, this has great effect on
target RawSpeed benchmark. I'm seeing 5 **major** improvements:
```
Benchmark Time CPU Time Old Time New CPU Old CPU New
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Samsung/NX3000/_3184416.SRW/threads:8/process_time/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 49 vs 49
Samsung/NX3000/_3184416.SRW/threads:8/process_time/real_time_mean -0.3064 -0.3064 226.9913 157.4452 226.9800 157.4384
Samsung/NX3000/_3184416.SRW/threads:8/process_time/real_time_median -0.3057 -0.3057 226.8407 157.4926 226.8282 157.4828
Samsung/NX3000/_3184416.SRW/threads:8/process_time/real_time_stddev -0.4985 -0.4954 0.3051 0.1530 0.3040 0.1534
Kodak/DCS760C/86L57188.DCR/threads:8/process_time/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 49 vs 49
Kodak/DCS760C/86L57188.DCR/threads:8/process_time/real_time_mean -0.1747 -0.1747 80.4787 66.4227 80.4771 66.4146
Kodak/DCS760C/86L57188.DCR/threads:8/process_time/real_time_median -0.1742 -0.1743 80.4686 66.4542 80.4690 66.4436
Kodak/DCS760C/86L57188.DCR/threads:8/process_time/real_time_stddev +0.6089 +0.5797 0.0670 0.1078 0.0673 0.1062
Sony/DSLR-A230/DSC08026.ARW/threads:8/process_time/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 49 vs 49
Sony/DSLR-A230/DSC08026.ARW/threads:8/process_time/real_time_mean -0.1598 -0.1598 171.6996 144.2575 171.6915 144.2538
Sony/DSLR-A230/DSC08026.ARW/threads:8/process_time/real_time_median -0.1598 -0.1597 171.7109 144.2755 171.7018 144.2766
Sony/DSLR-A230/DSC08026.ARW/threads:8/process_time/real_time_stddev +0.4024 +0.3850 0.0847 0.1187 0.0848 0.1175
Canon/EOS 77D/IMG_4049.CR2/threads:8/process_time/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 49 vs 49
Canon/EOS 77D/IMG_4049.CR2/threads:8/process_time/real_time_mean -0.0550 -0.0551 280.3046 264.8800 280.3017 264.8559
Canon/EOS 77D/IMG_4049.CR2/threads:8/process_time/real_time_median -0.0554 -0.0554 280.2628 264.7360 280.2574 264.7297
Canon/EOS 77D/IMG_4049.CR2/threads:8/process_time/real_time_stddev +0.7005 +0.7041 0.2779 0.4725 0.2775 0.4729
Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9929.CR2/threads:8/process_time/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 49 vs 49
Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9929.CR2/threads:8/process_time/real_time_mean -0.0354 -0.0355 316.7396 305.5208 316.7342 305.4890
Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9929.CR2/threads:8/process_time/real_time_median -0.0354 -0.0356 316.6969 305.4798 316.6917 305.4324
Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9929.CR2/threads:8/process_time/real_time_stddev +0.0493 +0.0330 0.3562 0.3737 0.3563 0.3681
```
That being said, it's always best-effort, so there will likely
be cases where this worsens things.
Reviewers: efriedma, craig.topper, dmgreen, jmolloy, fhahn, Carrot, hfinkel, chandlerc
Reviewed By: jmolloy
Subscribers: xbolva00, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67318
llvm-svn: 372009
