| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The reversion apparently deleted the test/Transforms directory.
Will be re-reverting again.
llvm-svn: 358552
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).
This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.
llvm-svn: 358546
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We can remove dead stores in the presence of fence instructions. Fence
does not change an otherwise thread local store to visible.
reviewers: reames, dexonsmith, jfb
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D22001
llvm-svn: 274795
|
|
|
A release fence acts as a publication barrier for stores within the current thread to become visible to other threads which might observe the release fence. It does not require the current thread to observe stores performed on other threads. As a result, we can allow store-load and load-load forwarding across a release fence.
We choose to be much more conservative about stores. In theory, nothing prevents us from shifting a store from after a release fence to before it, and then eliminating the preceeding (previously fenced) store. Doing this without actually moving the second store is likely also legal, but we chose to be conservative at this time.
The LangRef indicates only atomic loads and stores are effected by fences. This patch chooses to be far more conservative then that.
This is the GVN companion to http://reviews.llvm.org/D11434 which applied the same logic in EarlyCSE and has been baking in tree for a while now.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11436
llvm-svn: 264472
|
