| 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
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 336268
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 324448
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
asserts are enabled."
Before r324429 we essentially didn't have a verification of LCSSA, so
no wonder that it has been broken: currently loop-sink breaks it (the
attached test illustrates the failure).
It was detected during a stage2 RA build, so to unbreak it I'm disabling
the check for now.
llvm-svn: 324445
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This test checks that load from constant memory will be sunk regardless of
aliasing stores in the loop.
Patch by Daniil Suchkov!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39113
llvm-svn: 316207
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Sinking of unordered atomic load into loop must be disallowed because it turns
a single load into multiple loads. The relevant section of the documentation
is: http://llvm.org/docs/Atomics.html#unordered, specifically the Notes for
Optimizers section. Here is the full text of this section:
> Notes for optimizers
> In terms of the optimizer, this **prohibits any transformation that
> transforms a single load into multiple loads**, transforms a store into
> multiple stores, narrows a store, or stores a value which would not be
> stored otherwise. Some examples of unsafe optimizations are narrowing
> an assignment into a bitfield, rematerializing a load, and turning loads
> and stores into a memcpy call. Reordering unordered operations is safe,
> though, and optimizers should take advantage of that because unordered
> operations are common in languages that need them.
Patch by Daniil Suchkov!
Reviewed By: reames
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38392
llvm-svn: 315438
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Like several other loop passes (the vectorizer, etc) this pass doesn't
really fit the model of a loop pass. The critical distinction is that it
isn't intended to be pipelined together with other loop passes. I plan
to add some documentation to the loop pass manager to make this more
clear on that side.
LoopSink is also different because it doesn't really need a lot of the
infrastructure of our loop passes. For example, if there aren't loop
invariant instructions causing a preheader to exist, there is no need to
form a preheader. It also doesn't need LCSSA because this pass is
only involved in sinking invariant instructions from a preheader into
the loop, not reasoning about live-outs.
This allows some nice simplifications to the pass in the new PM where we
can directly walk the loops once without restructuring them.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28921
llvm-svn: 292589
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary: For functions with profile data, we are confident that loop sink will be optimal in sinking code.
Reviewers: davidxl, hfinkel
Subscribers: mehdi_amini, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26155
llvm-svn: 286325
|
|
|
Summary: LICM may hoist instructions to preheader speculatively. Before code generation, we need to sink down the hoisted instructions inside to loop if it's beneficial. This pass is a reverse of LICM: looking at instructions in preheader and sinks the instruction to basic blocks inside the loop body if basic block frequency is smaller than the preheader frequency.
Reviewers: hfinkel, davidxl, chandlerc
Subscribers: anna, modocache, mgorny, beanz, reames, dberlin, chandlerc, mcrosier, junbuml, sanjoy, mzolotukhin, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D22778
llvm-svn: 285308
|
