summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/llvm/test/Transforms/SimplifyCFG/CoveredLookupTable.ll
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* [SimplifyCFG] NFC, update Switch tests as a baseline.Shawn Landden2019-06-131-15/+16
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Also add baseline tests to show effect of later patches. There were a couple of regressions here that were never caught, but my patch set that this is a preparation to will fix them. This is the third attempt to land this patch. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61150 llvm-svn: 363319
* [SimplifyCFG] reverting preliminary Switch patches againShawn Landden2019-06-131-16/+15
| | | | | | | | | This reverts 363226 and 363227, both NFC intended I swear I fixed the test case that is failing, and ran the tests, but I will look into it again. llvm-svn: 363229
* [SimplifyCFG] NFC, update Switch tests to better examine successive patchesShawn Landden2019-06-131-15/+16
| | | | | | | | | | | Also add baseline tests to show effect of later patches. There were a couple of regressions here that were never caught, but my patch set that this is a preparation to will fix them. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61150 llvm-svn: 363226
* [SimplifyCFG] revert the last commit.Shawn Landden2019-06-131-20/+15
| | | | | | I ran ALL the test suite locally, so I will look into this... llvm-svn: 363223
* [SimplifyCFG] NFC, update Switch tests to HEAD so I canShawn Landden2019-06-131-15/+20
| | | | | | | | | | see if my changes change anything Also add baseline tests to show effect of later patches. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61150 llvm-svn: 363222
* [SimplifyCFG] back out all SwitchInst commitsShawn Landden2019-05-261-20/+15
| | | | | | | | They caused the sanitizer builds to fail. My suspicion is the change the countLeadingZeros(). llvm-svn: 361736
* [SimplifyCFG] NFC, fix failing tests from last patches.Shawn Landden2019-05-261-15/+20
| | | | | | No problems with the transforms. llvm-svn: 361730
* Revert "Temporarily Revert "Add basic loop fusion pass.""Eric Christopher2019-04-171-0/+49
| | | | | | | | The reversion apparently deleted the test/Transforms directory. Will be re-reverting again. llvm-svn: 358552
* Temporarily Revert "Add basic loop fusion pass."Eric Christopher2019-04-171-49/+0
| | | | | | | | As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton). This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda. llvm-svn: 358546
* [NewPM] Add Option handling for SimplifyCFGSerguei Katkov2019-04-151-0/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | This patch enables passing options to SimplifyCFGPass via the passes pipeline. Reviewers: chandlerc, fedor.sergeev, leonardchan, philip.pfaffe Reviewed By: fedor.sergeev Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60675 llvm-svn: 358379
* [SimplifyCFG] use pass options and remove the latesimplifycfg passSanjay Patel2017-10-281-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This is no-functional-change-intended. This is repackaging the functionality of D30333 (defer switch-to-lookup-tables) and D35411 (defer folding unconditional branches) with pass parameters rather than a named "latesimplifycfg" pass. Now that we have individual options to control the functionality, we could decouple when these fire (but that's an independent patch if desired). The next planned step would be to add another option bit to disable the sinking transform mentioned in D38566. This should also make it clear that the new pass manager needs to be updated to limit simplifycfg in the same way as the old pass manager. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38631 llvm-svn: 316835
* Split the SimplifyCFG pass into two variants.Joerg Sonnenberger2017-03-261-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The first variant contains all current transformations except transforming switches into lookup tables. The second variant contains all current transformations. The switch-to-lookup-table conversion results in code that is more difficult to analyze and optimize by other passes. Most importantly, it can inhibit Dead Code Elimination. As such it is often beneficial to only apply this transformation very late. A common example is inlining, which can often result in range restrictions for the switch expression. Changes in execution time according to LNT: SingleSource/Benchmarks/Misc/fp-convert +3.03% MultiSource/Benchmarks/ASC_Sequoia/CrystalMk/CrystalMk -11.20% MultiSource/Benchmarks/Olden/perimeter/perimeter -10.43% and a couple of smaller changes. For perimeter it also results 2.6% a smaller binary. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30333 llvm-svn: 298799
* Teach simplify-cfg how to correctly create covered lookup tables for ↵Michael Gottesman2013-10-201-0/+48
switches on iN with N >= 3. One optimization simplify-cfg performs is the converting of switches to lookup tables if the switch has > 4 cases. This is done by: 1. Finding the max/min case value and calculating the switch case range. 2. Create a lookup table basic block. 3. Perform a check in the switch's BB to see if the input value is in the switch's case range. If the input value satisfies said predicate branch to the lookup table BB, otherwise branch to the switch's default destination BB using the default value as the result. The conditional check consists of subtracting the min case value of the table from any input iN value and then ensuring that said value is unsigned less than the size of the lookup table represented as an iN value. If the lookup table is a covered lookup table, the size of the table will be N which is 0 as an iN value. Thus the comparison will be an `icmp ult` of an iN value against 0 which is always false yielding the incorrect result. This patch fixes this problem by recognizing if we have a covered lookup table and if we do, unconditionally jumps to the lookup table BB since the covering property of the lookup table implies no input values could not be handled by said BB. rdar://15268442 llvm-svn: 193045
OpenPOWER on IntegriCloud