| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Reapply the patches with a fix. Thanks Ilya and Hans for the reproducer!
This reverts commit r330416.
The issue was that removing predecessors invalidated uses that we stored
for rewrite. The fix is to finish manipulating with CFG before we select
uses for rewrite.
llvm-svn: 330431
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Revert r330413: "[SSAUpdaterBulk] Use SmallVector instead of DenseMap for storing rewrites."
Revert r330403 "Reapply "[PR16756] Use SSAUpdaterBulk in JumpThreading." one more time."
r330403 commit seems to crash clang during our integrate while doing PGO build with the following stacktrace:
#2 llvm::SSAUpdaterBulk::RewriteAllUses(llvm::DominatorTree*, llvm::SmallVectorImpl<llvm::PHINode*>*)
#3 llvm::JumpThreadingPass::ThreadEdge(llvm::BasicBlock*, llvm::SmallVectorImpl<llvm::BasicBlock*> const&, llvm::BasicBlock*)
#4 llvm::JumpThreadingPass::ProcessThreadableEdges(llvm::Value*, llvm::BasicBlock*, llvm::jumpthreading::ConstantPreference, llvm::Instruction*)
#5 llvm::JumpThreadingPass::ProcessBlock(llvm::BasicBlock*)
The crash happens while compiling 'lib/Analysis/CallGraph.cpp'.
r3340413 is reverted due to conflicting changes.
llvm-svn: 330416
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 330413
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Hopefully, changing set to vector removes nondeterminism detected by
some bots, or the new assert will catch something.
This reverts commit r330180.
llvm-svn: 330403
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
The following changes addresses the following two issues.
1) The existing loop rotation pass contains both loop latch simplification and loop rotation. So one flag RotationOnly is added to be passed to the loop rotation pass.
2) The threshold value is initialized with MAX_UINT since the loop rotation utility should not have threshold limit.
Reviewers: dmgreen, efriedma
Reviewed By: efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45582
llvm-svn: 330362
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
unswitching non-trivial edges.
Summary:
This fixes the bug pointed out in review with non-trivial unswitching.
This also provides a basis that should make it pretty easy to finish
fleshing out a routine to scan an entire function body for irreducible
control flow, but this patch remains minimal for disabling loop
unswitch.
Reviewers: sanjoy, fedor.sergeev
Subscribers: mcrosier, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45754
llvm-svn: 330357
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 330348
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
If those operands change, we might find a leader for ValueOp, which
could enable new phi-of-op creation.
This fixes a case where we missed creating a phi-of-ops node. With D43865
and this patch, bootstrapping clang/llvm works with -enable-newgvn, whereas
without it, the "value changed after iteration" assertion is triggered.
Reviewers: dberlin, davide
Reviewed By: dberlin
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42180
llvm-svn: 330334
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
After investigation discussed in D45439, it would seem that the nsw
flag restriction is unnecessary in most cases. So the IsInductionVar
lambda has been removed, the functionality extracted, and now only
require nsw when using eq/ne predicates.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45617
llvm-svn: 330256
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This reverts r330175. There are still stage3/stage4 miscompares.
llvm-svn: 330180
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
One more, hopefully the last, bug is fixed: when forming UsesToRewrite
we should ignore phi operands coming from edges that we want to delete.
This reverts r329910.
llvm-svn: 330175
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
As suggested in https://reviews.llvm.org/D45631#1068338,
looking at haveNoCommonBitsSet() users, and *trying* to
show the change effect elsewhere.
llvm-svn: 330100
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
"not not" -> "not" etc
llvm-svn: 330083
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
r327219 added wrappers to std::sort which randomly shuffle the container before sorting.
This will help in uncovering non-determinism caused due to undefined sorting
order of objects having the same key.
To make use of that infrastructure we need to invoke llvm::sort instead of std::sort.
Note: This patch is one of a series of patches to replace *all* std::sort to llvm::sort.
Refer the comments section in D44363 for a list of all the required patches.
Reviewers: kcc, pcc, danielcdh, jmolloy, sanjoy, dberlin, ruiu
Reviewed By: ruiu
Subscribers: ruiu, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45142
llvm-svn: 330059
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 329987
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This reverts commit r329865. Causes stage2/stage3 miscompare.
llvm-svn: 329910
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Created a helper function to query for non negative SCEVs. Uses the
SGE predicate to catch constants that could be interpreted as
negative.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45481
llvm-svn: 329907
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
"is is" -> "is", "if if" -> "if", "or or" -> "or"
llvm-svn: 329878
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This reapplies commit r329644.
llvm-svn: 329865
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
edge values
This is based on an example that was recently posted on llvm-dev:
void *propagate_null(void* b, int* g) {
if (!b) {
return 0;
}
(*g)++;
return b;
}
https://godbolt.org/g/xYk3qG
The original code or constant propagation in other passes has obscured the fact
that the phi can be removed completely.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45448
llvm-svn: 329755
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This reverts r329661. Bots are still unhappy.
llvm-svn: 329666
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This reapplies commit r329644.
llvm-svn: 329661
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This reverts commit r329644.
llvm-svn: 329650
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
SSAUpdater is a bottleneck in JumpThreading, and this patch improves the
situation by using SSAUpdaterBulk instead.
Compile time impact: no noticable changes on CTMark, a big improvement
on the test from PR16756.
Reviewers: dberlin, davide, MatzeB
Subscribers: llvm-commits, hiraditya
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44282
llvm-svn: 329644
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 329572
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
We do not try to move the instructions and split the block till we
know the blocks can be split, i.e. BCE-cmp-insts can be separated from
non-BCE-cmp-insts.
Reviewers: davide, courbet
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44443
llvm-svn: 329564
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
In IRCE, we have a very old legacy check that works when we collect comparisons that we
treat as range checks. It ensures that the value against which the indvar is compared is
loop invariant and is also positive.
This latter condition remained there since the times when IRCE was only able to handle
signed latch comparison. As the optimization evolved, it now learned how to intersect
signed or unsigned ranges, and this logic has no reliance on the fact that the right border
of each range should be positive.
The old implementation of this non-negativity check was also naive enough and just looked
into ranges (while most of other IRCE logic tries to use power of SCEV implications), so this
check did not allow to deal with the most simple case that looks like follows:
int size; // not known non-negative
int length; //known non-negative;
i = 0;
if (size != 0) {
do {
range_check(i < size);
range_check(i < length);
++i;
} while (i < size)
}
In this case, even if from some dominating conditions IRCE could parse loop
structure, it could only remove the range check against `length` and simply
ignored the check against `size`.
In this patch we remove this obsolete check. It will allow IRCE to pick comparison
against `size` as a potential range check and then let Range Intersection logic
decide whether it is OK to eliminate it or not.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45362
Reviewed By: samparker
llvm-svn: 329547
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
"is is" -> "is", "are are" -> "are"
llvm-svn: 329546
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 329530
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Reviewers: reames, spatel, davide, dberlin
Subscribers: mcrosier, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45162
llvm-svn: 329443
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 329383
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Reviewers: samparker, karthikthecool, blitz.opensource
Reviewed By: samparker
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45209
llvm-svn: 329269
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
LoopInterchange relies on LoopInfo being up-to-date, so we should
preserve it after interchanging. This patch updates restructureLoops to
move the BBs of the interchanged loops to the right place.
Reviewers: davide, efriedma, karthikthecool, mcrosier
Reviewed By: efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45278
llvm-svn: 329264
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
If the callsite is inside landing pad, do not perform callsite splitting.
Callsite splitting uses utility function llvm::DuplicateInstructionsInSplitBetween, which eventually calls llvm::SplitEdge. llvm::SplitEdge calls llvm::SplitCriticalEdge with an assumption that the function returns nullptr only when the target edge is not a critical edge (and further assumes that if the return value was not nullptr, the predecessor of the original target edge always has a single successor because critical edge splitting was successful). However, this assumtion is not true because SplitCriticalEdge returns nullptr if the destination block is a landing pad. This invalid assumption results assertion failure.
Fundamental solution might be fixing llvm::SplitEdge to not to rely on the invalid assumption. However, it'll involve a lot of work because current API assumes that llvm::SplitEdge never fails. Instead, this patch makes callsite splitting to not to attempt splitting if the callsite is in a landing pad.
Attached test case will crash with assertion failure without the fix.
Reviewers: fhahn, junbuml, dberlin
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45130
llvm-svn: 329250
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fixes cases like the new test @nonuniform. In that test, %cc itself
is a uniform value; however, when reading it after the end of the loop in
basic block %if, its value is effectively non-uniform, so the branch is
non-uniform.
This problem was encountered in
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103743; however, this change
in itself is not sufficient to fix that bug, as there is another issue
in the AMDGPU backend.
As discovered after committing an earlier version of this change, this
exposes a subtle interaction between this pass and DivergenceAnalysis:
since we remove and re-create branch instructions, we can no longer rely
on DivergenceAnalysis for branches in subregions that were already
processed by the pass.
Explicitly remove branch instructions from DivergenceAnalysis to
avoid dangling pointers as a matter of defensive programming, and
change how we detect non-uniform subregions.
Change-Id: I32bbffece4a32f686fab54964dae1a5dd72949d4
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D43743
llvm-svn: 329165
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Move the check canPeel() to Hexagon Target before setting PeelCount.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44880
llvm-svn: 329129
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
It also updates test/Transforms/LoopInterchange/call-instructions.ll
to use accesses where we can prove dependence after D35430.
Reviewers: sebpop, karthikthecool, blitz.opensource
Reviewed By: sebpop
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45206
llvm-svn: 329111
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
For Hexagon, peeling loops with small runtime trip count is beneficial for our
benchmarks. We set PeelCount in HexagonTargetInfo.cpp and we use PeelCount set
by the target for computing the desired peel count.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44880
llvm-svn: 329042
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 328907
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 328822
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
In r312664 (D36404), JumpThreading stopped threading edges into
loop headers. Unfortunately, I observed a significant performance
regression as a result of this change. Upon further investigation,
the problematic pattern looked something like this (after
many high level optimizations):
while (true) {
bool cond = ...;
if (!cond) {
<body>
}
if (cond)
break;
}
Now, naturally we want jump threading to essentially eliminate the
second if check and hook up the edges appropriately. However, the
above mentioned change, prevented it from doing this because it would
have to thread an edge into the loop header.
Upon further investigation, what is happening is that since both branches
are threadable, JumpThreading picks one of them at arbitrarily. In my
case, because of the way that the IR ended up, it tended to pick
the one to the loop header, bailing out immediately after. However,
if it had picked the one to the exit block, everything would have
worked out fine (because the only remaining branch would then be folded,
not thraded which is acceptable).
Thus, to fix this problem, we can simply eliminate loop headers from
consideration as possible threading targets earlier, to make sure that
if there are multiple eligible branches, we can still thread one of
the ones that don't target a loop header.
Patch by Keno Fischer!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42260
llvm-svn: 328798
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
with Loop Rotation Utility Interface
The existing LoopRotation.cpp is implemented as one of loop passes instead of
being a utility. The user cannot easily perform the loop rotation selectively
(or on demand) under different optimization level. For example, the loop
rotation is needed as part of the logic to convert a loop into a loop with
bottom test for a transformation. If the loop rotation is simply added as a
loop pass before the transformation, the pass is skipped if it is compiled at
–O0 or if it is explicitly disabled by the user, causing the compiler to
generate incorrect code. Furthermore, as a loop pass it will rotate all loops
instead of just the relevant loops.
We provide a utility interface for the loop rotation so that the loop rotation
can be called on demand. The changeset is as follows:
- Create a new file lib/Transforms/Utils/LoopRotationUtils.cpp and move the main
implementation of class LoopRotate into this file.
- Create a new file llvm/include/Transform/Utils/LoopRotationUtils.h with the
interface LoopRotation(...).
- Original LoopRotation.cpp is changed to use the utility function LoopRotation
in LoopRotationUtils.cpp. This is done in the same way community did for
mem-to-reg implementation.
Patch by Jin Lin!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44595
llvm-svn: 328766
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
dependency
Thanks to echristo for the pointers on direction.
llvm-svn: 328737
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
LoopSimplifyCFG things back
llvm-svn: 328720
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 328660
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
As a follow-up to r328480, this updates the logic for the decreasing
safety checks in a similar manner:
- CanBeMax is replaced by CannotBeMaxInLoop which queries
isLoopEntryGuardedByCond on the maximum value.
- SumCanReachMin is replaced by isSafeDecreasingBound which includes
some logic from parseLoopStructure and, again, has been updated to
use isLoopEntryGuardedByCond on the given bounds.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44776
llvm-svn: 328613
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Implement TTI interface for targets to indicate that the LSR should give
priority to post-incrementing addressing modes.
Combination of patches by Sebastian Pop and Brendon Cahoon.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44758
llvm-svn: 328490
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
CanBeMin is currently used which will report true for any unknown
values, but often a check is performed outside the loop which covers
this situation:
for (int i = 0; i < N; ++i)
...
if (N > 0)
for (int i = 0; i < N; ++i)
...
So I've add 'LoopGuardedAgainstMin' which reports whether N is
greater than the minimum value which then allows loop with a variable
loop count to be optimised. I've also moved the increasing bound
checking into its own function and replaced SumCanReachMax is another
isLoopEntryGuardedByCond function.
llvm-svn: 328480
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 328387
|