| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
Previously, in the NewPM pipeline, TailCallElim recalculates the DomTree when it modifies any instruction in the Function.
For example,
```
CallInst *CI = dyn_cast<CallInst>(&I);
...
CI->setTailCall();
Modified = true;
...
if (!Modified || ...)
return PreservedAnalyses::all();
```
After applying this patch, the DomTree only recalculates if needed (plus an extra insertEdge() + an extra deleteEdge() call).
When optimizing SQLite with `-passes="default<O3>"` pipeline of the newPM, the number of DomTree recalculation decreases by 6.2%, the number of nodes visited by DFS decreases by 2.9%. The time used by DomTree will decrease approximately 1%~2.5% after applying the patch.
Statistics:
```
Before the patch:
23010 dom-tree-stats - Number of DomTree recalculations
489264 dom-tree-stats - Number of nodes visited by DFS -- DomTree
After the patch:
21581 dom-tree-stats - Number of DomTree recalculations
475088 dom-tree-stats - Number of nodes visited by DFS -- DomTree
```
Reviewers: kuhar, dmgreen, brzycki, grosser, davide
Reviewed By: kuhar, brzycki
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D49982
llvm-svn: 338954
|
|
|
Summary:
In some specific scenarios with well understood operand bundle types
(like `"deopt"`) it may be possible to go ahead and convert recursion to
iteration, but TailRecursionElimination does not have that logic today
so avoid doing the right thing for now.
I need some input on whether `"funclet"` operand bundles should also
block tail recursion elimination. If not, I'll allow TRE across calls
with `"funclet"` operand bundles and add a test case.
Reviewers: rnk, majnemer, nlewycky, ahatanak
Subscribers: mcrosier, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26270
llvm-svn: 286147
|
