| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
function calls without used results (PR41259)'
This revision causes tests to fail under ASAN. Since the cause of the failures
is not clear (could be ASAN, could be a Clang bug, could be a bug in this
revision), the safest course of action seems to be to revert while investigating.
llvm-svn: 357667
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary: Currently ProfileSummaryBuilder doesn't count into callsite samples when computing total samples. Considering that ProfileSummaryInfo is used to checked the hotness of not only body samples but also callsite samples (from SampleProfileLoader), I think the callsite sample counts should be considered when computing total samples.
Reviewers: eraman, danielcdh, wmi
Subscribers: hiraditya, jdoerfert, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59835
llvm-svn: 357627
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary: Fixes PR41337
Reviewers: spatel
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60148
llvm-svn: 357564
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The test should really be checking for the property directly in the
code object headers, but there are problems with this. I don't see
this directly represented in the text form, and for the binary
emission this is depending on a function level subtarget feature to
emit a global flag.
llvm-svn: 357558
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
https://godbolt.org/z/gEMRZb
llvm-svn: 357549
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 357522
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary: Fixes PR41273
Reviewers: spatel
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60096
llvm-svn: 357521
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 357508
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Set the correct debug location on instructions which load arguments in
preparation for a call to an arg-promoted function.
This prevents location cascade from misattributing the line/scope of one
of these loads to the location of the instruction preceding the call.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60113
llvm-svn: 357500
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Bug: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41180
In the bug test case the debug location was missing for the cmp instruction in
the "middle block" BB. This patch fixes the bug by copying the debug location
from the cmp of the scalar loop's terminator branch, if it exists.
The patch also fixes the debug location on the subsequent branch instruction.
It was previously using the location of the of the original loop's pre-header
block terminator. Both of these instructions will now map to the source line of
the conditional branch in the original loop.
A regression test has been added that covers these issues.
Patch by Orlando Cazalet-Hyams!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59944
llvm-svn: 357499
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The code was failing to actually check for the presence of the call to widenable_condition. The whole point of specifying the widenable_condition intrinsic was allowing widening transforms. A normal branch is not widenable. A normal branch leading to a deopt is not widenable (in general).
I added a test case via LoopPredication, but GuardWidening has an analogous bug. Those are the only two passes actually using this utility just yet. Noticed while working on LoopPredication for non-widenable branches; POC in D60111.
llvm-svn: 357493
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
When inserting an `unreachable` after a noreturn call, we must ensure
that it's not a musttail call to avoid breaking the IR invariants for
musttail calls.
Reviewers: fedor.sergeev, majnemer
Reviewed By: majnemer
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60080
llvm-svn: 357485
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
actually hot.
Summary: It is possible that multiple indirect call targets have been promoted for a single callsite from the profiled binary. Current implementation repeats promotion for all these targets as far as the callsite itself is hot (the callsite is assumed to be hot if any one of these targets was "hot" during the profiling). However, even when one of the ICPed target is hot other targets may not, and we should not repeat promotion for "cold" targets.
Reviewers: danielcdh, wmi
Subscribers: hiraditya, jdoerfert, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59940
llvm-svn: 357484
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
When inserting an `unreachable` after a noreturn call, we must ensure
that it's not a musttail call to avoid breaking the IR invariants for
musttail calls.
Reviewers: fedor.sergeev, majnemer
Reviewed By: majnemer
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60079
llvm-svn: 357483
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
used results (PR41259)
The code was previously checking that candidates for sinking had exactly
one use or were a store instruction (which can't have uses). This meant
we could sink call instructions only if they had a use.
That limitation seemed a bit arbitrary, so this patch changes it to
"instruction has zero or one use" which seems more natural and removes
the need to special-case stores.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59936
llvm-svn: 357452
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 357443
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 357441
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
We'd been optimizing the case where the predicate was obviously true, do the same for the false case. Mostly just for completeness sake, but also may improve compile time in loops which will exit through the guard. Such loops are presumed rare in fastpath code, but may be present down untaken paths, so optimizing for them is still useful.
llvm-svn: 357408
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
LoopPredication was replacing the original condition, but leaving the instructions to compute the old conditions around. This would get cleaned up by other passes of course, but we might as well do it eagerly. That also makes the test output less confusing.
llvm-svn: 357406
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
I'm about to make some changes to the pass which cause widespread - but uninteresting - test diffs. Prepare the tests for easy updating.
llvm-svn: 357404
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
As highlighted by tests, if one of the operands is loop variant, but guaranteed to have the same value on all iterations, we have a missed oppurtunity.
llvm-svn: 357403
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
evaluateInDifferentElementOrder
Summary:
This fixes PR41270.
The recursive function evaluateInDifferentElementOrder expects to be called
on a vector Value, so when we call it on a vector GEP's arguments, we must
first check that the argument is indeed a vector.
Reviewers: reames, spatel
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60058
llvm-svn: 357389
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
evaluateInDifferentElementOrder"
This reverts commit 75216a6dbcfe5fb55039ef06a07e419fa875f4a5.
I'll recommit with a better commit message with reference to the
phabricator review.
llvm-svn: 357387
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 357386
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
evaluateInDifferentElementOrder
This fixes PR41270.
The recursive function evaluateInDifferentElementOrder expects to be called
on a vector Value, so when we call it on a vector GEP's arguments, we must
first check that the argument is indeed a vector.
llvm-svn: 357385
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
If we have a commutable vector binop with inverted select-shuffles,
we don't care about the order of the operands in each vector lane:
LHS = shuffle V1, V2, <0, 5, 6, 3>
RHS = shuffle V2, V1, <0, 5, 6, 3>
LHS + RHS --> <V1[0]+V2[0], V2[1]+V1[1], V2[2]+V1[2], V1[3]+V2[3]> --> V1 + V2
PR41304:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41304
...is currently titled as an SLP enhancement, but at least for the
given example, we can reduce that in instcombine because we are just
eliminating shuffles.
As noted in the TODO, this could be generalized, but I haven't thought
through those patterns completely, so this is limited to what appears
to be always safe.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60048
llvm-svn: 357382
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 357368
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
In PR41304:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41304
...we have a case where we want to fold a binop of select-shuffle (blended) values.
Rather than try to match commuted variants of the pattern, we can canonicalize the
shuffles and check for mask equality with commuted operands.
We don't produce arbitrary shuffle masks in instcombine, but select-shuffles are a
special case that the backend is required to handle because we already canonicalize
vector select to this shuffle form.
So there should be no codegen difference from this change. It's possible that this
improves CSE in IR though.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60016
llvm-svn: 357366
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 357360
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Since this can be set with s_setreg*, it should not be a subtarget
property. Set a default based on the calling convention, and Introduce
a new amdgpu-dx10-clamp attribute to override this if desired.
Also introduce a new amdgpu-ieee attribute to match.
The values need to match to allow inlining. I think it is OK for the
caller's dx10-clamp attribute to override the callee, but there
doesn't appear to be the infrastructure to do this currently without
definining the attribute in the generic Attributes.td.
Eventually the calling convention lowering will need to insert a mode
switch somewhere for these.
llvm-svn: 357302
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 357291
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 357288
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
For the cases where the icmp/fcmp predicate is commutative, use reorderInputsAccordingToOpcode to collect and commute the operands.
This requires a helper to recognise commutativity in both general Instruction and CmpInstr types - the CmpInst::isCommutative doesn't overload the Instruction::isCommutative method for reasons I'm not clear on (maybe because its based on predicate not opcode?!?).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59992
llvm-svn: 357266
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We should be able to match elements with the swapped predicate as well - as long as we commute the source operands.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59956
llvm-svn: 357243
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
For the attached test case, unchecked addition of immediate starts and
ends overflows, as they can be arbitrary i64 constants.
Proof: https://rise4fun.com/Alive/Plqc
Reviewers: qcolombet, gilr, efriedma
Reviewed By: efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59218
llvm-svn: 357217
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Even if the interleaving transform would otherwise be legal, we shouldn't
introduce an interleaved load that is wider than the original load: it might
have undefined behavior.
It might be possible to perform some sort of mask-narrowing transform in
some cases (using a narrower interleaved load, then extending the
results using shufflevectors). But I haven't tried to implement that,
at least for now.
Fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41245 .
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59954
llvm-svn: 357212
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
By swapping icmp/fcmp predicates we can commute their operands to improve vectorization
llvm-svn: 357204
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Some predicates are fully commutative - we should be able to easily commute their operands to improve vectorization
llvm-svn: 357202
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
This adds a BranchFusion feature to replace the usage of the MacroFusion
for AMD CPUs.
See D59688 for context.
Reviewers: andreadb, lebedev.ri
Subscribers: hiraditya, jdoerfert, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59872
llvm-svn: 357171
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
With this change, the VPlan native path is triggered with the directive:
#pragma clang loop vectorize(enable)
There is no need to specify the vectorize_width(N) clause.
Patch by Francesco Petrogalli <francesco.petrogalli@arm.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57598
llvm-svn: 357156
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The issue here is that we actually allow CGSCC passes to mutate IR (and
therefore invalidate analyses) outside of the current SCC. At a minimum,
we need to support mutating parent and ancestor SCCs to support the
ArgumentPromotion pass which rewrites all calls to a function.
However, the analysis invalidation infrastructure is heavily based
around not needing to invalidate the same IR-unit at multiple levels.
With Loop passes for example, they don't invalidate other Loops. So we
need to customize how we handle CGSCC invalidation. Doing this without
gratuitously re-running analyses is even harder. I've avoided most of
these by using an out-of-band preserved set to accumulate the cross-SCC
invalidation, but it still isn't perfect in the case of re-visiting the
same SCC repeatedly *but* it coming off the worklist. Unclear how
important this use case really is, but I wanted to call it out.
Another wrinkle is that in order for this to successfully propagate to
function analyses, we have to make sure we have a proxy from the SCC to
the Function level. That requires pre-creating the necessary proxy.
The motivating test case now works cleanly and is added for
ArgumentPromotion.
Thanks for the review from Philip and Wei!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59869
llvm-svn: 357137
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Start using the uadd.sat and usub.sat intrinsics for the existing
canonicalizations. These intrinsics should optimize better than
expanded IR, have better handling in the X86 backend and should
be no worse than expanded IR in other backends, as far as we know.
rL357012 already introduced use of uadd.sat for the add+umin pattern.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58872
llvm-svn: 357103
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 357099
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Add baseline tests for canonicalization of
ssubo X, C -> saddo X, -C.
Patch by Dan Robertson.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59653
llvm-svn: 357013
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This is the last step towards solving the examples shown in:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14613
With this change, x86 should end up with psubus instructions
when those are available.
All known codegen issues with expanding the saturating intrinsics
were resolved with:
D59006 / rL356855
We also have some early evidence in D58872 that using the intrinsics
will lead to better perf. If some target regresses from this, custom
lowering of the intrinsics (as in the above for x86) may be needed.
llvm-svn: 357012
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 357005
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 357004
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
reorderInputsAccordingToOpcode
As discussed on D59738, this generalizes reorderInputsAccordingToOpcode to handle multiple + non-commutative instructions so we can get rid of reorderAltShuffleOperands and make use of the extra canonicalizations that reorderInputsAccordingToOpcode brings.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59784
llvm-svn: 356939
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59738
llvm-svn: 356915
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
canonicalization
Remove attempts to commute non-Instructions to the LHS - the codegen changes appear to rely on chance more than anything else and also have a tendency to fight existing instcombine canonicalization which moves constants to the RHS of commutable binary ops.
This is prep work towards:
(a) reusing reorderInputsAccordingToOpcode for alt-shuffles and removing the similar reorderAltShuffleOperands
(b) improving reordering to optimized cases with commutable and non-commutable instructions to still find splat/consecutive ops.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59738
llvm-svn: 356913
|