This is important for vectors of pointers because only DataLayout,
not the underlying vector type, knows how to calculate the size
of the pointers in the vector. Fixes PR14138.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@166401 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
It passes all tests, produces better results than the old code but uses the
wrong pass, LoopDependenceAnalysis, which is old and unmaintained. "Why is it
still in tree?", you might ask. The answer is obviously: "To confuse developers."
Just swapping in the new dependency pass sends the pass manager into an infinte
loop, I'll try to figure out why tomorrow.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@166399 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Requires a lot less code and complexity on loop-idiom's side and the more
precise analysis can catch more cases, like the one I included as a test case.
This also fixes the edge-case miscompilation from PR9481. I'm not entirely
sure that all cases are handled that the old checks handled but LDA will
certainly become smarter in the future.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@166390 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
We used a SCEV to detect that A[X] is consecutive. We assumed that X was
the induction variable. But X can be any expression that uses the induction
for example: X = i + 2;
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@166388 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This is important for nested-loop reductions such as :
In the innermost loop, the induction variable does not start with zero:
for (i = 0 .. n)
for (j = 0 .. m)
sum += ...
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@166387 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
obvious stuff and most new code being committed conforms to that. Some old
code does not; this might cause confusion and this is the motivation to
document the correct guidelines.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@166378 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
If the pointer is consecutive then it is safe to read and write. If the pointer is non-loop-consecutive then
it is unsafe to vectorize it because we may hit an ordering issue.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@166371 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
(The change at Clang side was committed in r166345)
2. Cosmetic change in order to conform to coding standards.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@166350 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Currently, it is enabled only if option "enable-mips-tail-calls" is given and
all of the callee's arguments are passed in registers.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@166342 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
a memory operand. Retain this information and then add the sizing directives
to the IR. This allows the backend to do proper instruction selection.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@166316 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
- The XTARGET feature (inherited from old DG tests) was just confusing (and
barely ever used). The same effect can now be achieved with a combination of
the more useful REQUIRES and XFAIL.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@166305 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
which is supposed to consistently raise SIGTRAP across all systems. In contrast,
__builtin_trap() behave differently on different systems. e.g. it raises SIGTRAP on ARM, and
SIGILL on X86. The purpose of __builtin_debugtrap() is to consistently provide "trap"
functionality, in the mean time preserve the compatibility with on gcc on __builtin_trap().
The X86 backend is already able to handle debugtrap(). This patch is to:
1) make front-end recognize "__builtin_debugtrap()" (emboddied in the one-line change to Clang).
2) In DAG legalization phase, by default, "debugtrap" will be replaced with "trap", which
make the __builtin_debugtrap() "available" to all existing ports without the hassle of
changing their code.
3) If trap-function is specified (via -trap-func=xyz to llc), both __builtin_debugtrap() and
__builtin_trap() will be expanded into the function call of the specified trap function.
This behavior may need change in the future.
The provided testing-case is to make sure 2) and 3) are working for ARM port, and we
already have a testing case for x86.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@166300 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
