post-increment value, should be first cast to the appropriated type (to the
type of the common expr). Otherwise, the rewrite of a use based on (common +
iv) may end up with an incorrect type.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@28735 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
to link in the implementation. Thanks to Anton Korobeynikov for figuring out
what was going on here.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@28660 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
code (while cloning) it often gets the branch/switch instructions. Since it
knows that edges of the CFG are dead, it need not clone (or even look) at
the obviously dead blocks. This should speed up the inliner substantially on
code where there are lots of inlinable calls to functions with constant
arguments. On C++ code in particular, this kicks in.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@28641 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
reimplement getValueDominatingFunction to walk the DominanceTree rather than
just searching blindly.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@28618 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
is now theoretically feature-complete. It has not, however, been thoroughly
test, and is still considered experimental.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@28529 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
the iterated Dominance Frontier of the loop-closure Phi's. This is the
second phase of the LCSSA pass. The third phase (coming soon) will be to
update all uses of loop variables to use the loop-closure Phi's instead.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@28524 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
makes it so that it constant folds instructions on the fly. This is good
for several reasons:
0. Many instructions are constant foldable after inlining, particularly if
inlining a call with constant arguments.
1. Without this, the inliner has to allocate memory for all of the instructions
that can be constant folded, then a subsequent pass has to delete them. This
gets the job done without this extra work.
2. This makes the inliner *pass* a bit more aggressive: in particular, it
partially solves a phase order issue where the inliner would inline lots
of code that folds away to nothing, but think that the resultant function
is big because of this code that will be gone. Now the code never exists.
This is the first part of a 2-step process. The second part will be smart
enough to see when this implicit constant folding propagates a constant into
a branch or switch instruction, making CFG edges dead.
This implements Transforms/Inline/inline_constprop.ll
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@28521 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
the program. This exposes more opportunities for the instcombiner, and implements
vec_shuffle.ll:test6
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@28487 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
When doing the initial pass of constant folding, if we get a constantexpr,
simplify the constant expr like we would do if the constant is folded in the
normal loop.
This fixes the missed-optimization regression in
Transforms/InstCombine/getelementptr.ll last night.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@28224 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
1. Implement InstCombine/deadcode.ll by not adding instructions in unreachable
blocks (due to constants in conditional branches/switches) to the worklist.
This causes them to be deleted before instcombine starts up, leading to
better optimization.
2. In the prepass over instructions, do trivial constprop/dce as we go. This
has the effect of improving the effectiveness of #1. In addition, it
*significantly* speeds up instcombine on test cases with large amounts of
constant folding code (for example, that produced by code specialization
or partial evaluation). In one example, it speeds up instcombine from
0.0589s to 0.0224s with a release build (a 2.6x speedup).
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@28215 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
