| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
| |
This is a follow on to aaea24802bf5. In post commit discussion, Artur and I realized we could cleanup the code using Uses; this patch does so.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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
|
| |
|
|
| |
This is mostly NFC, but I removed the setting of the guard's calling convention onto the WC call. Why? Because it was untested, and was producing an ill defined output as the declaration's convention wasn't been changed leaving a mismatch which is UB.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
With the widenable condition construct, we have the ability to reason about branches which can be 'widened' (i.e. made to fail more often). We've got a couple o transforms which leverage this. This patch just cleans up the API a bit.
This is prep work for generalizing our definition of a widenable branch slightly. At the moment "br i1 (and A, wc()), ..." is considered widenable, but oddly, neither "br i1 (and wc(), B), ..." or "br i1 wc(), ..." is. That clearly needs addressed, so first, let's centralize the code in one place.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
These are a pre-requisite to removing #include "llvm/Support/Options.h"
from LLVMContext.h: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70280
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This broke the build, see e.g.
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-armv8-lnt/builds/4626/
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64be-linux-lnt/builds/18647/
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-x86_64-avx2-linux/builds/5856/
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/lld-x86_64-freebsd/builds/22800/
> We have multiple places in code where we try to identify whether or not
> some instruction is a guard. This patch factors out this logic into a separate
> utility function which works uniformly in all places.
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51152
> Reviewed By: fedor.sergeev
llvm-svn: 340923
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We have multiple places in code where we try to identify whether or not
some instruction is a guard. This patch factors out this logic into a separate
utility function which works uniformly in all places.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51152
Reviewed By: fedor.sergeev
llvm-svn: 340921
|
|
|
This patch creates file GuardUtils which will contain logic for work with guards
that can be shared across different passes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51151
Reviewed By: fedor.sergeev
llvm-svn: 340914
|
