summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* NewGVN: Evaluate phi of ops expressions before creating phi nodeDaniel Berlin2017-09-301-48/+72
| | | | llvm-svn: 314611
* NewGVN: Allow dependent PHI of opsDaniel Berlin2017-09-301-57/+100
| | | | llvm-svn: 314610
* NewGVN: Make OpIsSafeForPhiOfOps non-recursiveDaniel Berlin2017-09-301-7/+38
| | | | llvm-svn: 314609
* Revert r314435: "[JumpThreading] Preserve DT and LVI across the pass"Daniel Jasper2017-09-302-82/+29
| | | | | | | Causes a segfault on a builtbot (and in our internal bootstrapping of Clang). See Eli's response on the commit thread. llvm-svn: 314589
* Revert "Use the basic cost if a GEP is not used as addressing mode"Alex Shlyapnikov2017-09-292-2/+2
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This reverts commit r314517. This commit crashes sanitizer bots, for example: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/sanitizer-x86_64-linux/builds/4167 Stack snippet: ... /mnt/b/sanitizer-buildbot1/sanitizer-x86_64-linux/build/llvm/include/llvm/Support/Casting.h:255:0 llvm::TargetTransformInfoImplCRTPBase<llvm::X86TTIImpl>::getGEPCost(llvm::GEPOperator const*, llvm::ArrayRef<llvm::Value const*>) /mnt/b/sanitizer-buildbot1/sanitizer-x86_64-linux/build/llvm/include/llvm/Analysis/TargetTransformInfoImpl.h:742:0 llvm::TargetTransformInfoImplCRTPBase<llvm::X86TTIImpl>::getUserCost(llvm::User const*, llvm::ArrayRef<llvm::Value const*>) /mnt/b/sanitizer-buildbot1/sanitizer-x86_64-linux/build/llvm/include/llvm/Analysis/TargetTransformInfoImpl.h:782:0 /mnt/b/sanitizer-buildbot1/sanitizer-x86_64-linux/build/llvm/lib/Analysis/TargetTransformInfo.cpp:116:0 /mnt/b/sanitizer-buildbot1/sanitizer-x86_64-linux/build/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/SmallVector.h:116:0 /mnt/b/sanitizer-buildbot1/sanitizer-x86_64-linux/build/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/SmallVector.h:343:0 /mnt/b/sanitizer-buildbot1/sanitizer-x86_64-linux/build/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/SmallVector.h:864:0 /mnt/b/sanitizer-buildbot1/sanitizer-x86_64-linux/build/llvm/include/llvm/Analysis/TargetTransformInfo.h:285:0 ... llvm-svn: 314560
* Use the basic cost if a GEP is not used as addressing modeJun Bum Lim2017-09-292-2/+2
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Summary: Currently, getGEPCost() returns TCC_FREE whenever a GEP is a legal addressing mode in the target. However, since it doesn't check its actual users, it will return FREE even in cases where the GEP cannot be folded away as a part of actual addressing mode. For example, if an user of the GEP is a call instruction taking the GEP as a parameter, then the GEP may not be folded in isel. Reviewers: hfinkel, efriedma, mcrosier, jingyue, haicheng Reviewed By: hfinkel Subscribers: javed.absar, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38085 llvm-svn: 314517
* [JumpThreading] Preserve DT and LVI across the passEvandro Menezes2017-09-282-29/+82
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | JumpThreading now preserves dominance and lazy value information across the entire pass. The pass manager is also informed of this preservation with the goal of DT and LVI being recalculated fewer times overall during compilation. This change prepares JumpThreading for enhanced opportunities; particularly those across loop boundaries. Patch by: Brian Rzycki <b.rzycki@samsung.com>, Sebastian Pop <s.pop@samsung.com> Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37528 llvm-svn: 314435
* [LoopUnroll] Fix use after poison.Benjamin Kramer2017-09-281-1/+3
| | | | llvm-svn: 314418
* Use a BumpPtrAllocator for Loop objectsSanjoy Das2017-09-284-13/+27
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Summary: And now that we no longer have to explicitly free() the Loop instances, we can (with more ease) use the destructor of LoopBase to do what LoopBase::clear() was doing. Reviewers: chandlerc Subscribers: mehdi_amini, mcrosier, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38201 llvm-svn: 314375
* Fix -Wunused-variable for Release build.Rui Ueyama2017-09-271-1/+1
| | | | llvm-svn: 314353
* Return the LoopUnrollResult from tryToUnrollLoop; NFCSanjoy Das2017-09-271-31/+22
| | | | | | I will use this in a later change. llvm-svn: 314352
* LoopDeletion: use return value instead of passing in LPMUpdater; NFCSanjoy Das2017-09-271-19/+28
| | | | | | I will use this refactoring in a later patch. llvm-svn: 314351
* Rename LoopUnrollStatus to LoopUnrollResult; NFCSanjoy Das2017-09-271-3/+3
| | | | | | A "Result" suffix is more appropriate here llvm-svn: 314350
* [SimplifyCFG] add a struct to house optional folds (PR34603)Sanjay Patel2017-09-271-25/+23
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This was intended to be no-functional-change, but it's not - there's a test diff. So I thought I should stop here and post it as-is to see if this looks like what was expected based on the discussion in PR34603: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34603 Notes: 1. The test improvement occurs because the existing 'LateSimplifyCFG' marker is not carried through the recursive calls to 'SimplifyCFG()->SimplifyCFGOpt().run()->SimplifyCFG()'. The parameter isn't passed down, so we pick up the default value from the function signature after the first level. I assumed that was a bug, so I've passed 'Options' down in all of the 'SimplifyCFG' calls. 2. I split 'LateSimplifyCFG' into 2 bits: ConvertSwitchToLookupTable and KeepCanonicalLoops. This would theoretically allow us to differentiate the transforms controlled by those params independently. 3. We could stash the optional AssumptionCache pointer and 'LoopHeaders' pointer in the struct too. I just stopped here to minimize the diffs. 4. Similarly, I stopped short of messing with the pass manager layer. I have another question that could wait for the follow-up: why is the new pass manager creating the pass with LateSimplifyCFG set to true no matter where in the pipeline it's creating SimplifyCFG passes? // Create an early function pass manager to cleanup the output of the // frontend. EarlyFPM.addPass(SimplifyCFGPass()); --> /// \brief Construct a pass with the default thresholds /// and switch optimizations. SimplifyCFGPass::SimplifyCFGPass() : BonusInstThreshold(UserBonusInstThreshold), LateSimplifyCFG(true) {} <-- switches get converted to lookup tables and loops may not be in canonical form If this is unintended, then it's possible that the current behavior of dropping the 'LateSimplifyCFG' setting via recursion was masking this bug. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38138 llvm-svn: 314308
* [DSE] Merge stores when the later store only writes to memory locations the ↵Sanjay Patel2017-09-261-3/+99
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | early store also wrote to (2nd try) This is a 2nd attempt at: https://reviews.llvm.org/rL310055 ...which was reverted at rL310123 because of PR34074: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34074 In this version, we break out of the inner loop after we successfully merge and kill a pair of stores. In the earlier rev, we were continuing instead, which meant we could process the invalid info from a now dead store. Original commit message (authored by Filipe Cabecinhas): This fixes PR31777. If both stores' values are ConstantInt, we merge the two stores (shifting the smaller store appropriately) and replace the earlier (and larger) store with an updated constant. In the future we should also support vectors of integers. And maybe float/double if we can. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30703 llvm-svn: 314206
* Rework loop predication passArtur Pilipenko2017-09-221-38/+220
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | We've found a serious issue with the current implementation of loop predication. The current implementation relies on SCEV and this turned out to be problematic. To fix the problem we had to rework the pass substantially. We have had the reworked implementation in our downstream tree for a while. This is the initial patch of the series of changes to upstream the new implementation. For now the transformation is limited to the following case: * The loop has a single latch with either ult or slt icmp condition. * The step of the IV used in the latch condition is 1. * The IV of the latch condition is the same as the post increment IV of the guard condition. * The guard condition is ult. See the review or the LoopPredication.cpp header for the details about the problem and the new implementation. Reviewed By: sanjoy, mkazantsev Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37569 llvm-svn: 313981
* Rename markAsErased to erase, as pointed out in a previous review; NFCSanjoy Das2017-09-221-1/+1
| | | | llvm-svn: 313951
* Re-land r313825: "[IR] Add llvm.dbg.addr, a control-dependent version of ↵Reid Kleckner2017-09-211-13/+17
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | llvm.dbg.declare" The fix is to avoid invalidating our insertion point in replaceDbgDeclare: Builder.insertDeclare(NewAddress, DIVar, DIExpr, Loc, InsertBefore); + if (DII == InsertBefore) + InsertBefore = &*std::next(InsertBefore->getIterator()); DII->eraseFromParent(); I had to write a unit tests for this instead of a lit test because the use list order matters in order to trigger the bug. The reduced C test case for this was: void useit(int*); static inline void inlineme() { int x[2]; useit(x); } void f() { inlineme(); inlineme(); } llvm-svn: 313905
* Revert r313825: "[IR] Add llvm.dbg.addr, a control-dependent version of ↵Daniel Jasper2017-09-211-17/+13
| | | | | | | | | | | llvm.dbg.declare" .. as well as the two subsequent changes r313826 and r313875. This leads to segfaults in combination with ASAN. Will forward repro instructions to the original author (rnk). llvm-svn: 313876
* [SROA] Really remove associated dbg.declare when removing dead allocaMikael Holmen2017-09-211-6/+9
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Summary: There already was code that tried to remove the dbg.declare, but that code was placed after we had called I->replaceAllUsesWith(UndefValue::get(I->getType())); on the alloca, so when we searched for the relevant dbg.declare, we couldn't find it. Now we do the search before we call RAUW so there is a chance to find it. An existing testcase needed update due to this. Two dbg.declare with undef were removed and then suddenly one of the two CHECKS failed. Before this patch we got call void @llvm.dbg.declare(metadata i24* undef, metadata !14, metadata !DIExpression(DW_OP_LLVM_fragment, 32, 24)), !dbg !15 call void @llvm.dbg.declare(metadata %struct.prog_src_register* undef, metadata !14, metadata !DIExpression()), !dbg !15 call void @llvm.dbg.value(metadata i32 0, metadata !14, metadata !DIExpression(DW_OP_LLVM_fragment, 0, 32)), !dbg !15 call void @llvm.dbg.value(metadata i32 0, metadata !14, metadata !DIExpression(DW_OP_LLVM_fragment, 32, 24)), !dbg !15 and with it we get call void @llvm.dbg.value(metadata i32 0, metadata !14, metadata !DIExpression(DW_OP_LLVM_fragment, 0, 32)), !dbg !15 call void @llvm.dbg.value(metadata i32 0, metadata !14, metadata !DIExpression(DW_OP_LLVM_fragment, 32, 24)), !dbg !15 However, the CHECKs in the testcase checked things in a silly order, so they only passed since they found things in the first dbg.declare. Now we changed the order of the checks and the test passes. Reviewers: rnk Reviewed By: rnk Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37900 llvm-svn: 313875
* Revert "Re-enable "[IRCE] Identify loops with latch comparison against ↵Serguei Katkov2017-09-211-51/+13
| | | | | | | | | | current IV value"" Revert the patch causing the functional failures. The patch owner is notified with test cases which fail. Test case has been provided to Maxim offline. llvm-svn: 313857
* [IR] Add llvm.dbg.addr, a control-dependent version of llvm.dbg.declareReid Kleckner2017-09-201-9/+10
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Summary: This implements the design discussed on llvm-dev for better tracking of variables that live in memory through optimizations: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-September/117222.html This is tracked as PR34136 llvm.dbg.addr is intended to be produced and used in almost precisely the same way as llvm.dbg.declare is today, with the exception that it is control-dependent. That means that dbg.addr should always have a position in the instruction stream, and it will allow passes that optimize memory operations on local variables to insert llvm.dbg.value calls to reflect deleted stores. See SourceLevelDebugging.rst for more details. The main drawback to generating DBG_VALUE machine instrs is that they usually cause LLVM to emit a location list for DW_AT_location. The next step will be to teach DwarfDebug.cpp how to recognize more DBG_VALUE ranges as not needing a location list, and possibly start setting DW_AT_start_offset for variables whose lifetimes begin mid-scope. Reviewers: aprantl, dblaikie, probinson Subscribers: eraman, hiraditya, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37768 llvm-svn: 313825
* Tighten the invariants around LoopBase::invalidateSanjoy Das2017-09-201-6/+7
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Summary: With this change: - Methods in LoopBase trip an assert if the receiver has been invalidated - LoopBase::clear frees up the memory held the LoopBase instance This change also shuffles things around as necessary to work with this stricter invariant. Reviewers: chandlerc Subscribers: mehdi_amini, mcrosier, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38055 llvm-svn: 313708
* GVNSink: Make ModelledPHIs constructor linear (and avoid edge case it ↵Daniel Berlin2017-09-201-7/+8
| | | | | | worries about) by avoiding getIncomingValueForBlock llvm-svn: 313702
* Revert "[GVNSink] Remove dependency on SmallPtrSet iteration order."Daniel Berlin2017-09-201-2/+0
| | | | | | This reverts commit r312156, because now the op and block arrays are not in the same order :(. llvm-svn: 313701
* NewGVN: Remove unused includesDaniel Berlin2017-09-201-21/+0
| | | | llvm-svn: 313700
* [LoopInfo] Make LoopBase and Loop destructors non-publicSanjoy Das2017-09-191-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Summary: See comment for why I think this is a good idea. This change also: - Removes an SCEV test case. The SCEV test was not testing anything useful (most of it was `#if 0` ed out) and it would need to be updated to deal with a private ~Loop::Loop. - Updates the loop pass manager test case to deal with a private ~Loop::Loop. - Renames markAsRemoved to markAsErased to contrast with removeLoop, via the usual remove vs. erase idiom we already have for instructions and basic blocks. Reviewers: chandlerc Subscribers: mehdi_amini, mcrosier, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37996 llvm-svn: 313695
* This patch fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32352 Vivek Pandya2017-09-151-2/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | It enables OptimizationRemarkEmitter::allowExtraAnalysis and MachineOptimizationRemarkEmitter::allowExtraAnalysis to return true not only for -fsave-optimization-record but when specific remarks are requested with command line options. The diagnostic handler used to be callback now this patch adds a class DiagnosticHandler. It has virtual method to provide custom diagnostic handler and methods to control which particular remarks are enabled. However LLVM-C API users can still provide callback function for diagnostic handler. llvm-svn: 313390
* This reverts r313381Vivek Pandya2017-09-151-1/+2
| | | | llvm-svn: 313387
* This patch fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32352 Vivek Pandya2017-09-151-2/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | It enables OptimizationRemarkEmitter::allowExtraAnalysis and MachineOptimizationRemarkEmitter::allowExtraAnalysis to return true not only for -fsave-optimization-record but when specific remarks are requested with command line options. The diagnostic handler used to be callback now this patch adds a class DiagnosticHandler. It has virtual method to provide custom diagnostic handler and methods to control which particular remarks are enabled. However LLVM-C API users can still provide callback function for diagnostic handler. llvm-svn: 313382
* Refactor collectChildrenInLoop to LoopUtils [NFC]Alina Sbirlea2017-09-151-23/+0
| | | | | | | | | | | | Summary: Move to LoopUtils method that collects all children of a node inside a loop. Reviewers: majnemer, sanjoy Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37870 llvm-svn: 313322
* [Transforms] Fix some Clang-tidy modernize-use-using and Include What You ↵Eugene Zelenko2017-09-133-63/+133
| | | | | | Use warnings; other minor fixes (NFC). llvm-svn: 313198
* [GVNHoist] Factor out reachability to search for anticipable instructions ↵Aditya Kumar2017-09-131-288/+418
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | quickly Factor out the reachability such that multiple queries to find reachability of values are fast. This is based on finding the ANTIC points in the CFG which do not change during hoisting. The ANTIC points are basically the dominance-frontiers in the inverse graph. So we introduce a data structure (CHI nodes) to keep track of values flowing out of a basic block. We only do this for values with multiple occurrences in the function as they are the potential hoistable candidates. This patch allows us to hoist instructions to a basic block with >2 successors, as well as deal with infinite loops in a trivial way. Relevant test cases are added to show the functionality as well as regression fixes from PR32821. Regression from previous GVNHoist: We do not hoist fully redundant expressions because fully redundant expressions are already handled by NewGVN Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35918 Reviewers: dberlin, sebpop, gberry, llvm-svn: 313116
* Make promoteLoopAccessesToScalars independent of AliasSet [NFC]Alina Sbirlea2017-09-121-47/+52
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Summary: The current promoteLoopAccessesToScalars method receives an AliasSet, but the information used is in fact a list of Value*, known to must alias. Create the list ahead of time to make this method independent of the AliasSet class. While there is no functionality change, this adds overhead for creating a set of Value*, when promotion would normally exit earlier. This is meant to be as a first refactoring step in order to start replacing AliasSetTracker with MemorySSA. And while the end goal is to redesign LICM, the first few steps will focus on adding MemorySSA as an alternative to the AliasSetTracker using most of the existing functionality. Reviewers: mkuper, danielcdh, dberlin Subscribers: sanjoy, chandlerc, gberry, davide, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35439 llvm-svn: 313075
* [DivRempairs] add a pass to optimize div/rem pairs (PR31028)Sanjay Patel2017-09-093-0/+208
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This is intended to be a superset of the functionality from D31037 (EarlyCSE) but implemented as an independent pass, so there's no stretching of scope and feature creep for an existing pass. I also proposed a weaker version of this for SimplifyCFG in D30910. And I initially had almost this same functionality as an addition to CGP in the motivating example of PR31028: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31028 The advantage of positioning this ahead of SimplifyCFG in the pass pipeline is that it can allow more flattening. But it needs to be after passes (InstCombine) that could sink a div/rem and undo the hoisting that is done here. Decomposing remainder may allow removing some code from the backend (PPC and possibly others). Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37121 llvm-svn: 312862
* Re-enable "[IRCE] Identify loops with latch comparison against current IV value"Max Kazantsev2017-09-081-13/+51
| | | | | | | | Re-applying after the found bug was fixed. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36215 llvm-svn: 312783
* diff --git a/lib/Transforms/Scalar/InductiveRangeCheckElimination.cpp ↵Max Kazantsev2017-09-081-49/+11
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | b/lib/Transforms/Scalar/InductiveRangeCheckElimination.cpp index f72a808..9fa49fd 100644 --- a/lib/Transforms/Scalar/InductiveRangeCheckElimination.cpp +++ b/lib/Transforms/Scalar/InductiveRangeCheckElimination.cpp @@ -450,20 +450,10 @@ struct LoopStructure { // equivalent to: // // intN_ty inc = IndVarIncreasing ? 1 : -1; - // pred_ty predicate = IndVarIncreasing - // ? IsSignedPredicate ? ICMP_SLT : ICMP_ULT - // : IsSignedPredicate ? ICMP_SGT : ICMP_UGT; + // pred_ty predicate = IndVarIncreasing ? ICMP_SLT : ICMP_SGT; // - // - // for (intN_ty iv = IndVarStart; predicate(IndVarBase, LoopExitAt); - // iv = IndVarNext) + // for (intN_ty iv = IndVarStart; predicate(iv, LoopExitAt); iv = IndVarBase) // ... body ... - // - // Here IndVarBase is either current or next value of the induction variable. - // in the former case, IsIndVarNext = false and IndVarBase points to the - // Phi node of the induction variable. Otherwise, IsIndVarNext = true and - // IndVarBase points to IV increment instruction. - // Value *IndVarBase; Value *IndVarStart; @@ -471,13 +461,12 @@ struct LoopStructure { Value *LoopExitAt; bool IndVarIncreasing; bool IsSignedPredicate; - bool IsIndVarNext; LoopStructure() : Tag(""), Header(nullptr), Latch(nullptr), LatchBr(nullptr), LatchExit(nullptr), LatchBrExitIdx(-1), IndVarBase(nullptr), IndVarStart(nullptr), IndVarStep(nullptr), LoopExitAt(nullptr), - IndVarIncreasing(false), IsSignedPredicate(true), IsIndVarNext(false) {} + IndVarIncreasing(false), IsSignedPredicate(true) {} template <typename M> LoopStructure map(M Map) const { LoopStructure Result; @@ -493,7 +482,6 @@ struct LoopStructure { Result.LoopExitAt = Map(LoopExitAt); Result.IndVarIncreasing = IndVarIncreasing; Result.IsSignedPredicate = IsSignedPredicate; - Result.IsIndVarNext = IsIndVarNext; return Result; } @@ -841,42 +829,21 @@ LoopStructure::parseLoopStructure(ScalarEvolution &SE, return false; }; - // `ICI` can either be a comparison against IV or a comparison of IV.next. - // Depending on the interpretation, we calculate the start value differently. + // `ICI` is interpreted as taking the backedge if the *next* value of the + // induction variable satisfies some constraint. - // Pair {IndVarBase; IsIndVarNext} semantically designates whether the latch - // comparisons happens against the IV before or after its value is - // incremented. Two valid combinations for them are: - // - // 1) { phi [ iv.start, preheader ], [ iv.next, latch ]; false }, - // 2) { iv.next; true }. - // - // The latch comparison happens against IndVarBase which can be either current - // or next value of the induction variable. const SCEVAddRecExpr *IndVarBase = cast<SCEVAddRecExpr>(LeftSCEV); bool IsIncreasing = false; bool IsSignedPredicate = true; - bool IsIndVarNext = false; ConstantInt *StepCI; if (!IsInductionVar(IndVarBase, IsIncreasing, StepCI)) { FailureReason = "LHS in icmp not induction variable"; return None; } - const SCEV *IndVarStart = nullptr; - // TODO: Currently we only handle comparison against IV, but we can extend - // this analysis to be able to deal with comparison against sext(iv) and such. - if (isa<PHINode>(LeftValue) && - cast<PHINode>(LeftValue)->getParent() == Header) - // The comparison is made against current IV value. - IndVarStart = IndVarBase->getStart(); - else { - // Assume that the comparison is made against next IV value. - const SCEV *StartNext = IndVarBase->getStart(); - const SCEV *Addend = SE.getNegativeSCEV(IndVarBase->getStepRecurrence(SE)); - IndVarStart = SE.getAddExpr(StartNext, Addend); - IsIndVarNext = true; - } + const SCEV *StartNext = IndVarBase->getStart(); + const SCEV *Addend = SE.getNegativeSCEV(IndVarBase->getStepRecurrence(SE)); + const SCEV *IndVarStart = SE.getAddExpr(StartNext, Addend); const SCEV *Step = SE.getSCEV(StepCI); ConstantInt *One = ConstantInt::get(IndVarTy, 1); @@ -1060,7 +1027,6 @@ LoopStructure::parseLoopStructure(ScalarEvolution &SE, Result.IndVarIncreasing = IsIncreasing; Result.LoopExitAt = RightValue; Result.IsSignedPredicate = IsSignedPredicate; - Result.IsIndVarNext = IsIndVarNext; FailureReason = nullptr; @@ -1350,9 +1316,8 @@ LoopConstrainer::RewrittenRangeInfo LoopConstrainer::changeIterationSpaceEnd( BranchToContinuation); NewPHI->addIncoming(PN->getIncomingValueForBlock(Preheader), Preheader); - auto *FixupValue = - LS.IsIndVarNext ? PN->getIncomingValueForBlock(LS.Latch) : PN; - NewPHI->addIncoming(FixupValue, RRI.ExitSelector); + NewPHI->addIncoming(PN->getIncomingValueForBlock(LS.Latch), + RRI.ExitSelector); RRI.PHIValuesAtPseudoExit.push_back(NewPHI); } @@ -1735,10 +1700,7 @@ bool InductiveRangeCheckElimination::runOnLoop(Loop *L, LPPassManager &LPM) { } LoopStructure LS = MaybeLoopStructure.getValue(); const SCEVAddRecExpr *IndVar = - cast<SCEVAddRecExpr>(SE.getSCEV(LS.IndVarBase)); - if (LS.IsIndVarNext) - IndVar = cast<SCEVAddRecExpr>(SE.getMinusSCEV(IndVar, - SE.getSCEV(LS.IndVarStep))); + cast<SCEVAddRecExpr>(SE.getMinusSCEV(SE.getSCEV(LS.IndVarBase), SE.getSCEV(LS.IndVarStep))); Optional<InductiveRangeCheck::Range> SafeIterRange; Instruction *ExprInsertPt = Preheader->getTerminator(); diff --git a/test/Transforms/IRCE/latch-comparison-against-current-value.ll b/test/Transforms/IRCE/latch-comparison-against-current-value.ll deleted file mode 100644 index afea0e6..0000000 --- a/test/Transforms/IRCE/latch-comparison-against-current-value.ll +++ /dev/null @@ -1,182 +0,0 @@ -; RUN: opt -verify-loop-info -irce-print-changed-loops -irce -S < %s 2>&1 | FileCheck %s - -; Check that IRCE is able to deal with loops where the latch comparison is -; done against current value of the IV, not the IV.next. - -; CHECK: irce: in function test_01: constrained Loop at depth 1 containing: %loop<header><exiting>,%in.bounds<latch><exiting> -; CHECK: irce: in function test_02: constrained Loop at depth 1 containing: %loop<header><exiting>,%in.bounds<latch><exiting> -; CHECK-NOT: irce: in function test_03: constrained Loop at depth 1 containing: %loop<header><exiting>,%in.bounds<latch><exiting> -; CHECK-NOT: irce: in function test_04: constrained Loop at depth 1 containing: %loop<header><exiting>,%in.bounds<latch><exiting> - -; SLT condition for increasing loop from 0 to 100. -define void @test_01(i32* %arr, i32* %a_len_ptr) #0 { - -; CHECK: test_01 -; CHECK: entry: -; CHECK-NEXT: %exit.mainloop.at = load i32, i32* %a_len_ptr, !range !0 -; CHECK-NEXT: [[COND2:%[^ ]+]] = icmp slt i32 0, %exit.mainloop.at -; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 [[COND2]], label %loop.preheader, label %main.pseudo.exit -; CHECK: loop: -; CHECK-NEXT: %idx = phi i32 [ %idx.next, %in.bounds ], [ 0, %loop.preheader ] -; CHECK-NEXT: %idx.next = add nuw nsw i32 %idx, 1 -; CHECK-NEXT: %abc = icmp slt i32 %idx, %exit.mainloop.at -; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 true, label %in.bounds, label %out.of.bounds.loopexit1 -; CHECK: in.bounds: -; CHECK-NEXT: %addr = getelementptr i32, i32* %arr, i32 %idx -; CHECK-NEXT: store i32 0, i32* %addr -; CHECK-NEXT: %next = icmp slt i32 %idx, 100 -; CHECK-NEXT: [[COND3:%[^ ]+]] = icmp slt i32 %idx, %exit.mainloop.at -; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 [[COND3]], label %loop, label %main.exit.selector -; CHECK: main.exit.selector: -; CHECK-NEXT: %idx.lcssa = phi i32 [ %idx, %in.bounds ] -; CHECK-NEXT: [[COND4:%[^ ]+]] = icmp slt i32 %idx.lcssa, 100 -; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 [[COND4]], label %main.pseudo.exit, label %exit -; CHECK-NOT: loop.preloop: -; CHECK: loop.postloop: -; CHECK-NEXT: %idx.postloop = phi i32 [ %idx.copy, %postloop ], [ %idx.next.postloop, %in.bounds.postloop ] -; CHECK-NEXT: %idx.next.postloop = add nuw nsw i32 %idx.postloop, 1 -; CHECK-NEXT: %abc.postloop = icmp slt i32 %idx.postloop, %exit.mainloop.at -; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 %abc.postloop, label %in.bounds.postloop, label %out.of.bounds.loopexit - -entry: - %len = load i32, i32* %a_len_ptr, !range !0 - br label %loop - -loop: - %idx = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %idx.next, %in.bounds ] - %idx.next = add nsw nuw i32 %idx, 1 - %abc = icmp slt i32 %idx, %len - br i1 %abc, label %in.bounds, label %out.of.bounds - -in.bounds: - %addr = getelementptr i32, i32* %arr, i32 %idx - store i32 0, i32* %addr - %next = icmp slt i32 %idx, 100 - br i1 %next, label %loop, label %exit - -out.of.bounds: - ret void - -exit: - ret void -} - -; ULT condition for increasing loop from 0 to 100. -define void @test_02(i32* %arr, i32* %a_len_ptr) #0 { - -; CHECK: test_02 -; CHECK: entry: -; CHECK-NEXT: %exit.mainloop.at = load i32, i32* %a_len_ptr, !range !0 -; CHECK-NEXT: [[COND2:%[^ ]+]] = icmp ult i32 0, %exit.mainloop.at -; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 [[COND2]], label %loop.preheader, label %main.pseudo.exit -; CHECK: loop: -; CHECK-NEXT: %idx = phi i32 [ %idx.next, %in.bounds ], [ 0, %loop.preheader ] -; CHECK-NEXT: %idx.next = add nuw nsw i32 %idx, 1 -; CHECK-NEXT: %abc = icmp ult i32 %idx, %exit.mainloop.at -; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 true, label %in.bounds, label %out.of.bounds.loopexit1 -; CHECK: in.bounds: -; CHECK-NEXT: %addr = getelementptr i32, i32* %arr, i32 %idx -; CHECK-NEXT: store i32 0, i32* %addr -; CHECK-NEXT: %next = icmp ult i32 %idx, 100 -; CHECK-NEXT: [[COND3:%[^ ]+]] = icmp ult i32 %idx, %exit.mainloop.at -; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 [[COND3]], label %loop, label %main.exit.selector -; CHECK: main.exit.selector: -; CHECK-NEXT: %idx.lcssa = phi i32 [ %idx, %in.bounds ] -; CHECK-NEXT: [[COND4:%[^ ]+]] = icmp ult i32 %idx.lcssa, 100 -; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 [[COND4]], label %main.pseudo.exit, label %exit -; CHECK-NOT: loop.preloop: -; CHECK: loop.postloop: -; CHECK-NEXT: %idx.postloop = phi i32 [ %idx.copy, %postloop ], [ %idx.next.postloop, %in.bounds.postloop ] -; CHECK-NEXT: %idx.next.postloop = add nuw nsw i32 %idx.postloop, 1 -; CHECK-NEXT: %abc.postloop = icmp ult i32 %idx.postloop, %exit.mainloop.at -; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 %abc.postloop, label %in.bounds.postloop, label %out.of.bounds.loopexit - -entry: - %len = load i32, i32* %a_len_ptr, !range !0 - br label %loop - -loop: - %idx = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %idx.next, %in.bounds ] - %idx.next = add nsw nuw i32 %idx, 1 - %abc = icmp ult i32 %idx, %len - br i1 %abc, label %in.bounds, label %out.of.bounds - -in.bounds: - %addr = getelementptr i32, i32* %arr, i32 %idx - store i32 0, i32* %addr - %next = icmp ult i32 %idx, 100 - br i1 %next, label %loop, label %exit - -out.of.bounds: - ret void - -exit: - ret void -} - -; Same as test_01, but comparison happens against IV extended to a wider type. -; This test ensures that IRCE rejects it and does not falsely assume that it was -; a comparison against iv.next. -; TODO: We can actually extend the recognition to cover this case. -define void @test_03(i32* %arr, i64* %a_len_ptr) #0 { - -; CHECK: test_03 - -entry: - %len = load i64, i64* %a_len_ptr, !range !1 - br label %loop - -loop: - %idx = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %idx.next, %in.bounds ] - %idx.next = add nsw nuw i32 %idx, 1 - %idx.ext = sext i32 %idx to i64 - %abc = icmp slt i64 %idx.ext, %len - br i1 %abc, label %in.bounds, label %out.of.bounds - -in.bounds: - %addr = getelementptr i32, i32* %arr, i32 %idx - store i32 0, i32* %addr - %next = icmp slt i32 %idx, 100 - br i1 %next, label %loop, label %exit - -out.of.bounds: - ret void - -exit: - ret void -} - -; Same as test_02, but comparison happens against IV extended to a wider type. -; This test ensures that IRCE rejects it and does not falsely assume that it was -; a comparison against iv.next. -; TODO: We can actually extend the recognition to cover this case. -define void @test_04(i32* %arr, i64* %a_len_ptr) #0 { - -; CHECK: test_04 - -entry: - %len = load i64, i64* %a_len_ptr, !range !1 - br label %loop - -loop: - %idx = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %idx.next, %in.bounds ] - %idx.next = add nsw nuw i32 %idx, 1 - %idx.ext = sext i32 %idx to i64 - %abc = icmp ult i64 %idx.ext, %len - br i1 %abc, label %in.bounds, label %out.of.bounds - -in.bounds: - %addr = getelementptr i32, i32* %arr, i32 %idx - store i32 0, i32* %addr - %next = icmp ult i32 %idx, 100 - br i1 %next, label %loop, label %exit - -out.of.bounds: - ret void - -exit: - ret void -} - -!0 = !{i32 0, i32 50} -!1 = !{i64 0, i64 50} llvm-svn: 312775
* Sink some IntrinsicInst.h and Intrinsics.h out of llvm/includeReid Kleckner2017-09-072-0/+3
| | | | | | | Many of these uses can get by with forward declarations. Hopefully this speeds up compilation after adding a single intrinsic. llvm-svn: 312759
* Disable jump threading into loop headersKrzysztof Parzyszek2017-09-061-4/+9
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Consider this type of a loop: for (...) { ... if (...) continue; ... } Normally, the "continue" would branch to the loop control code that checks whether the loop should continue iterating and which contains the (often) unique loop latch branch. In certain cases jump threading can "thread" the inner branch directly to the loop header, creating a second loop latch. Loop canonicalization would then transform this loop into a loop nest. The problem with this is that in such a loop nest neither loop is countable even if the original loop was. This may inhibit subsequent loop optimizations and be detrimental to performance. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36404 llvm-svn: 312664
* [GVNHoist] Move duplicated code to a helper function. NFCI.Davide Italiano2017-09-051-24/+21
| | | | llvm-svn: 312575
* NewGVN: Fix PR 34430 - we need to look through predicateinfo copies to ↵Daniel Berlin2017-09-051-31/+32
| | | | | | detect self-cycles of phi nodes. We also need to not ignore certain types of arguments when testing whether the phi has a backedge or was originally constant. llvm-svn: 312510
* NewGVN: Fix PR 34452 by passing instruction all the way down when we do ↵Daniel Berlin2017-09-051-7/+9
| | | | | | aggregate value simplification llvm-svn: 312509
* NewGVN: Detect copies through predicateinfoDaniel Berlin2017-09-051-1/+12
| | | | llvm-svn: 312508
* NewGVN: Change where check for original instruction in phi of ops leader ↵Daniel Berlin2017-09-051-3/+8
| | | | | | finding is done. Where we had it before, we would stop looking when we hit the original instruction, but skip it. Now we skip it and keep looking. llvm-svn: 312507
* Fix PR/33305. caused by trying to simplify expressions in phi of ops that ↵Daniel Berlin2017-09-021-50/+144
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | should have no leaders. Summary: After a discussion with Rekka, i believe this (or a small variant) should fix the remaining phi-of-ops problems. Rekka's algorithm for completeness relies on looking up expressions that should have no leader, and expecting it to fail (IE looking up expressions that can't exist in a predecessor, and expecting it to find nothing). Unfortunately, sometimes these expressions can be simplified to constants, but we need the lookup to fail anyway. Additionally, our simplifier outsmarts this by taking these "not quite right" expressions, and simplifying them into other expressions or walking through phis, etc. In the past, we've sometimes been able to find leaders for these expressions, incorrectly. This change causes us to not to try to phi of ops such expressions. We determine safety by seeing if they depend on a phi node in our block. This is not perfect, we can do a bit better, but this should be a "correctness start" that we can then improve. It also requires a bunch of caching that i'll eventually like to eliminate. The right solution, longer term, to the simplifier issues, is to make the query interface for the instruction simplifier/constant folder have the flags we need, so that we can keep most things going, but turn off the possibly-invalid parts (threading through phis, etc). This is an issue in another wrong code bug as well. Reviewers: davide, mcrosier Subscribers: sanjoy, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37175 llvm-svn: 312401
* [Analysis, Transforms] Fix some Clang-tidy modernize and Include What You ↵Eugene Zelenko2017-09-012-131/+228
| | | | | | Use warnings; other minor fixes (NFC). llvm-svn: 312383
* NewGVN: Make sure we don't incorrectly use PredicateInfo when doing PHI of opsDaniel Berlin2017-09-011-3/+10
| | | | | | | | | | | | Summary: When we backtranslate expressions, we can't use the predicateinfo, since we are evaluating them in a different context. Reviewers: davide, mcrosier Subscribers: sanjoy, Prazek, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37174 llvm-svn: 312352
* [MergeICmps] Fix build of rL312315 on clang-with-thin-lto-windows:Clement Courbet2017-09-011-2/+4
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | MergeICmps.cpp(68,15): error: chosen constructor is explicit in copy-initialization return {}; APInt.h(339,12): note: explicit constructor declared here explicit APInt() : BitWidth(1) { U.VAL = 0; } ^ MergeICmps.cpp(56,9): note: in implicit initialization of field 'Offset' with omitted initializer APInt Offset; ^ llvm-svn: 312326
* Reland rL312315: [MergeICmps] MergeICmps is a new optimization pass that ↵Clement Courbet2017-09-013-0/+647
| | | | | | | | | | turns chains of integer Add missing header. This reverts commit 86dd6335cf7607af22f383a9a8e072ba929848cf. llvm-svn: 312322
* Revert "[MergeICmps] MergeICmps is a new optimization pass that turns chains ↵Clement Courbet2017-09-013-643/+0
| | | | | | | | | | of integer" Break build This reverts commit d07ab866f7f88f81e49046d691a80dcd32d7198b. llvm-svn: 312317
OpenPOWER on IntegriCloud