Summary:
If SimplifyCFG pass is able to merge conditional stores into single one,
it loses the alignment. This may lead to incorrect codegen. Patch
sets the alignment of the new instruction if it is set in the original
one.
Reviewers: jmolloy
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36841
llvm-svn: 312030
Summary: When we move then-else code to if, we need to merge its debug info, otherwise the hoisted instruction may have inaccurate debug info attached.
Reviewers: aprantl, probinson, dblaikie, echristo, loladiro
Reviewed By: aprantl
Subscribers: sanjoy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36778
llvm-svn: 310985
Summary:
When simplifying unconditional branches from empty blocks, we pre-test if the
BB belongs to a set of loop headers and keep the block to prevent passes from
destroying canonical loop structure. However, the current algorithm fails if
the destination of the branch is a loop header. Especially when such a loop's
latch block is folded into loop header it results in additional backedges and
LoopSimplify turns it into a nested loop which prevent later optimizations
from being applied (e.g., loop unrolling and loop interleaving).
This patch augments the existing algorithm by further checking if the
destination of the branch belongs to a set of loop headers and defer
eliminating it if yes to LateSimplifyCFG.
Fixes PR33605: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33605
Reviewers: efriedma, mcrosier, pacxx, hsung, davidxl
Reviewed By: efriedma
Subscribers: ashutosh.nema, gberry, javed.absar, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35411
llvm-svn: 308422
Summary: In this code we got to Dom by following the predecessor link of BB. So it stands to reason that BB should also show up as a successor of Dom's terminator right? There isn't a way to have the CFG connect in only one direction is there?
Reviewers: jmolloy, davide, mcrosier
Reviewed By: mcrosier
Subscribers: mcrosier, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35025
llvm-svn: 307276
This patch appends the name of the function to the switch generated lookup
table. This will ease the visual debugging in identifying the function the table
is generated from.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34817
llvm-svn: 306867
I did this a long time ago with a janky python script, but now
clang-format has built-in support for this. I fed clang-format every
line with a #include and let it re-sort things according to the precise
LLVM rules for include ordering baked into clang-format these days.
I've reverted a number of files where the results of sorting includes
isn't healthy. Either places where we have legacy code relying on
particular include ordering (where possible, I'll fix these separately)
or where we have particular formatting around #include lines that
I didn't want to disturb in this patch.
This patch is *entirely* mechanical. If you get merge conflicts or
anything, just ignore the changes in this patch and run clang-format
over your #include lines in the files.
Sorry for any noise here, but it is important to keep these things
stable. I was seeing an increasing number of patches with irrelevant
re-ordering of #include lines because clang-format was used. This patch
at least isolates that churn, makes it easy to skip when resolving
conflicts, and gets us to a clean baseline (again).
llvm-svn: 304787
This patch provides an initial prototype for a pass that sinks instructions based on GVN information, similar to GVNHoist. It is not yet ready for commiting but I've uploaded it to gather some initial thoughts.
This pass attempts to sink instructions into successors, reducing static
instruction count and enabling if-conversion.
We use a variant of global value numbering to decide what can be sunk.
Consider:
[ %a1 = add i32 %b, 1 ] [ %c1 = add i32 %d, 1 ]
[ %a2 = xor i32 %a1, 1 ] [ %c2 = xor i32 %c1, 1 ]
\ /
[ %e = phi i32 %a2, %c2 ]
[ add i32 %e, 4 ]
GVN would number %a1 and %c1 differently because they compute different
results - the VN of an instruction is a function of its opcode and the
transitive closure of its operands. This is the key property for hoisting
and CSE.
What we want when sinking however is for a numbering that is a function of
the *uses* of an instruction, which allows us to answer the question "if I
replace %a1 with %c1, will it contribute in an equivalent way to all
successive instructions?". The (new) PostValueTable class in GVN provides this
mapping.
This pass has some shown really impressive improvements especially for codesize already on internal benchmarks, so I have high hopes it can replace all the sinking logic in SimplifyCFG.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24805
llvm-svn: 303850
This continues the changes started when computeSignBit was replaced with this new version of computeKnowBits.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33431
llvm-svn: 303773
Summary:
Implements PR889
Removing the virtual table pointer from Value saves 1% of RSS when doing
LTO of llc on Linux. The impact on time was positive, but too noisy to
conclusively say that performance improved. Here is a link to the
spreadsheet with the original data:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1F4FHir0qYnV0MEp2sYYp_BuvnJgWlWPhWOwZ6LbW7W4/edit?usp=sharing
This change makes it invalid to directly delete a Value, User, or
Instruction pointer. Instead, such code can be rewritten to a null check
and a call Value::deleteValue(). Value objects tend to have their
lifetimes managed through iplist, so for the most part, this isn't a big
deal. However, there are some places where LLVM deletes values, and
those places had to be migrated to deleteValue. I have also created
llvm::unique_value, which has a custom deleter, so it can be used in
place of std::unique_ptr<Value>.
I had to add the "DerivedUser" Deleter escape hatch for MemorySSA, which
derives from User outside of lib/IR. Code in IR cannot include MemorySSA
headers or call the MemoryAccess object destructors without introducing
a circular dependency, so we need some level of indirection.
Unfortunately, no class derived from User may have any virtual methods,
because adding a virtual method would break User::getHungOffOperands(),
which assumes that it can find the use list immediately prior to the
User object. I've added a static_assert to the appropriate OperandTraits
templates to help people avoid this trap.
Reviewers: chandlerc, mehdi_amini, pete, dberlin, george.burgess.iv
Reviewed By: chandlerc
Subscribers: krytarowski, eraman, george.burgess.iv, mzolotukhin, Prazek, nlewycky, hans, inglorion, pcc, tejohnson, dberlin, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31261
llvm-svn: 303362
Previously SimplifyCFG used getSetSize which returns an APInt that is 1 bit wider than the ConstantRange's bit width. In the reasonably common case that the ConstantRange is 64-bits wide, this requires returning a 65-bit APInt. APInt's can only store 64-bits without a memory allocation so this is inefficient.
The new method takes the 8 as an input and tells if the range contains more than that many elements without requiring any wider math.
llvm-svn: 302385
This patch introduces a new KnownBits struct that wraps the two APInt used by computeKnownBits. This allows us to treat them as more of a unit.
Initially I've just altered the signatures of computeKnownBits and InstCombine's simplifyDemandedBits to pass a KnownBits reference instead of two separate APInt references. I'll do similar to the SelectionDAG version of computeKnownBits/simplifyDemandedBits as a separate patch.
I've added a constructor that allows initializing both APInts to the same bit width with a starting value of 0. This reduces the repeated pattern of initializing both APInts. Once place default constructed the APInts so I added a default constructor for those cases.
Going forward I would like to add more methods that will work on the pairs. For example trunc, zext, and sext occur on both APInts together in several places. We should probably add a clear method that can be used to clear both pieces. Maybe a method to check for conflicting information. A method to return (Zero|One) so we don't write it out everywhere. Maybe a method for (Zero|One).isAllOnesValue() to determine if all bits are known. I'm sure there are many other methods we can come up with.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32376
llvm-svn: 301432
This patch uses various APInt methods to reduce temporary APInt creation.
This should be all of the unrelated cleanups that got buried in D32376(creating a KnownBits struct) as well as some pointed out by Simon during the review of that. Plus a few improvements to use counting instead of masking.
I've left out any places where we do something like (KnownZero & KnownOne) != 0 as I plan to add a helper method to KnownBits to ask that question and didn't want to thrash that code an additional time.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32495
llvm-svn: 301338
Currently we choose PostBB as the single successor of QFB, but its possible that QTB's single successor is QFB which would make QFB the correct choice.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32323
llvm-svn: 300992
The use list is a linked list so getNumUses requires a linear scan through the whole list. hasNUses will stop scanning at N and see if that is the end.
llvm-svn: 300505
and to expose a handle to represent the actual case rather than having
the iterator return a reference to itself.
All of this allows the iterator to be used with common STL facilities,
standard algorithms, etc.
Doing this exposed some missing facilities in the iterator facade that
I've fixed and required some work to the actual iterator to fully
support the necessary API.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31548
llvm-svn: 300032
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
This moves it to the iterator facade utilities giving it full random
access semantics, etc. It can also now be used with standard algorithms
like std::all_of and std::any_of and range adaptors like llvm::reverse.
Also make the semantics of iterating match what every other iterator
uses and forbid decrementing past the begin iterator. This was used as
a hacky way to work around iterator invalidation. However, every
instance trying to do this failed to actually avoid touching invalid
iterators despite the clear documentation that the removed and all
subsequent iterators become invalid including the end iterator. So I've
added a return of the next iterator to removeCase and rewritten the
loops that were doing this to correctly follow the iterator pattern of
either incremneting or removing and assigning fresh values to the
iterator and the end.
In one case we were trying to go backwards to make this cleaner but it
doesn't actually work. I've made that code match the code we use
everywhere else to remove cases as we iterate. This changes the order of
cases in one test output and I moved that test to CHECK-DAG so it
wouldn't care -- the order isn't semantically meaningful anyways.
llvm-svn: 298791
Summary: Along with https://reviews.llvm.org/D27804, debug locations need to be merged when hoisting store instructions as well. Not sure if just dropping debug locations would make more sense for this case, but as the branch instruction will have at least different discriminator with the hoisted store instruction, I think there will be no difference in practice.
Reviewers: aprantl, andreadb, danielcdh
Reviewed By: aprantl
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29062
llvm-svn: 293372
Conservatively disable sinking and merging inline-asm instructions as doing so
can potentially create arguments that cannot satisfy the inline-asm constraints.
For example, SimplifyCFG used to do the following transformation:
(before)
if.then:
%0 = call i32 asm "rorl $2, $0", "=&r,0,n"(i32 %r6, i32 8)
br label %if.end
if.else:
%1 = call i32 asm "rorl $2, $0", "=&r,0,n"(i32 %r6, i32 6)
br label %if.end
(after)
%.sink = select i1 %tobool, i32 6, i32 8
%0 = call i32 asm "rorl $2, $0", "=&r,0,n"(i32 %r6, i32 %.sink)
This would result in a crash in the backend since only immediate integer operands
are permitted for constraint "n".
rdar://problem/30110806
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29111
llvm-svn: 293025
This reapplies r289828 (reverted in r289833 as it broke the address sanitizer). The
debugloc is now only set when the instruction is not a call, as this causes the
verifier to assert (the inliner requires an inlinable callsite to have a debug loc
if the caller and callee have debug info).
Original commit message:
Simplify CFG will try to sink the last instruction in a series of basic blocks,
creating a "common" instruction in the successor block (sinkLastInstruction).
When it does this, the debug location of the single instruction should be the
merged debug locations of the commoned instructions.
Original review: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27590
llvm-svn: 290973
Now that a new API to merge debug locations has been committed at r289661 (see
review D26256 for more details), we can use it to "improve" the code added by
revision r280995.
Instead of nulling the debugloc of a commoned instruction, we use the 'merged'
debug location. At the moment, this is just a no functional change since
function `DILocation::getMergedLocation()` is just a stub and would always
return a null location.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27804
llvm-svn: 289862
Simplify CFG will try to sink the last instruction in a series of basic blocks,
creating a "common" instruction in the successor block (sinkLastInstruction).
When it does this, the debug location of the single instruction should be the
merged debug locations of the commoned instructions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27590
llvm-svn: 289828
After r289755, the AssumptionCache is no longer needed. Variables affected by
assumptions are now found by using the new operand-bundle-based scheme. This
new scheme is more computationally efficient, and also we need much less
code...
llvm-svn: 289756
Instead, expose whether the current type is an array or a struct, if an array
what the upper bound is, and if a struct the struct type itself. This is
in preparation for a later change which will make PointerType derive from
Type rather than SequentialType.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26594
llvm-svn: 288458
Summary: Debug info should *not* affect code generation. This patch properly handles debug info to make sure the generated code are the same with or without debug info.
Reviewers: davidxl, mzolotukhin, jmolloy
Subscribers: aprantl, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25286
llvm-svn: 284415
Not all ConstantExprs can be represented by a global variable, for example most
pointer arithmetic other than addition of a constant, so we can't convert these
values from switch statements to lookup tables.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25550
llvm-svn: 284379
BasicBlock::size is O(insts), making this loop O(blocks*insts), which
can be really slow on generated code. getPrevNode already checks if
we're at the beginning of the block and returns nullptr if so, just use
that instead. No functionality change intended.
llvm-svn: 284303
Summary:
Constant bundle operands may need to retain their constant-ness for
correctness. I'll admit that this is slightly odd, but it looks like
SimplifyCFG already does this for things like @llvm.frameaddress and
@llvm.stackmap, so I suppose adding one more case is not a big deal.
It is possible to add a mechanism to denote bundle operands that need to
remain constants, but that's probably too complicated for the time
being.
Reviewers: jmolloy
Subscribers: mcrosier, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25502
llvm-svn: 284028
With the ROPI and RWPI relocation models we can't always have pointers
to global data or functions in constant data, so don't try to convert switches
into lookup tables if any value in the lookup table would require a relocation.
We can still safely emit lookup tables of other values, such as simple
constants.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24462
llvm-svn: 283530
GetCaseResults assumed that a terminator with one successor was an
unconditional branch. This is not necessarily the case, it could be a
cleanupret.
Strengthen the check by querying whether or not the terminator is
exceptional.
llvm-svn: 283517
We were updating metadata but not IR flags. Because we pick an arbitrary instruction to be the CSE candidate, it comes down to luck (50% or less chance) if this results in broken codegen or not, which is why PR30373 which is actually not the fault of the commit it was bisected down to.
Fixes PR30373.
llvm-svn: 281889
This should *actually* fix PR30244. This cranks up the workaround for PR30188 so that we never sink loads or stores of allocas.
The idea is that these should be removed by SROA/Mem2Reg, and any movement of them may well confuse SROA or just cause unwanted code churn. It's not ideal that the midend should be crippled like this, but that unwanted churn can really cause significant regressions in important workloads (tsan).
llvm-svn: 281162
Exposed by PR30244, we will split a block currently if we think we can sink at least one instruction. However this isn't right - the reason we split predecessors is so that we can sink instructions that otherwise couldn't be sunk because it isn't safe to do so - stores, for example.
So, change the heuristic to only split if it thinks it can sink at least one non-speculatable instruction.
Should fix PR30244.
llvm-svn: 281160
Summary: The hoisted instruction is executed speculatively. It could affect the debugging experience as user would see gdb go into code that may not be expected to execute. It will also affect sample profile accuracy by assigning incorrect frequency to source within then/else branch.
Reviewers: davidxl, dblaikie, chandlerc, kcc, echristo
Subscribers: mehdi_amini, probinson, eric_niebler, andreadb, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24164
llvm-svn: 280995
We can't create metadata-valued PHIs; don't try to do so when sinking.
I created a test case for this using the @llvm.type.test intrinsic, because it
takes a metadata parameter and does not have severe side effects (thus
SimplifyCFG is willing to otherwise sink it).
Previously, running the test case would crash with:
Invalid use of metadata!
%.sink = select i1 %flag, metadata <...>, metadata <0x4e45dc0>
LLVM ERROR: Broken function found, compilation aborted!
llvm-svn: 280866
In failure cases it's not guaranteed that the PHI we're inspecting is actually in the successor block! In this case we need to bail out early, and never query getIncomingValueForBlock() as that will cause an assert.
llvm-svn: 280794
I should have realised this the first time around, but if we're avoiding sinking stores where the operands come from allocas so they don't create selects, we also have to do the same for loads because SROA will be just as defective looking at loads of selected addresses as stores.
Fixes PR30188 (again).
llvm-svn: 280792
PR30292 showed a case where our PHI checking wasn't correct. We were checking that all values were used by the same PHI before deciding to sink, but we weren't checking that the incoming values for that PHI were what we expected. As a result, we had to bail out after block splitting which caused us to never reach a steady state in SimplifyCFG.
Fixes PR30292.
llvm-svn: 280790
We're sinking stores, which is a good thing, but in the process creating selects for the store address operand, which SROA/Mem2Reg can't look through, which caused serious regressions.
The real fix is in SROA, which I'll be looking into.
llvm-svn: 280470
This was a real restriction in the original version of SinkIfThenCodeToEnd. Now it's been rewritten, the restriction can be lifted.
As part of this, we handle a very common and useful case where one of the incoming branches is actually conditional. Consider:
if (a)
x(1);
else if (b)
x(2);
This produces the following CFG:
[if]
/ \
[x(1)] [if]
| | \
| | \
| [x(2)] |
\ | /
[ end ]
[end] has two unconditional predecessor arcs and one conditional. The conditional refers to the implicit empty 'else' arc. This same pattern can also be caused by an empty default block in a switch.
We can't sink the call to x() down to end because no call to x() happens on the third incoming arc (assume that x() has sideeffects for the sake of argument; if something is safe to speculate we could indeed sink nevertheless but this cannot happen in the general case and causes many extra selects).
We are now able to detect this case and split off the unconditional arcs to a common successor:
[if]
/ \
[x(1)] [if]
| | \
| | \
| [x(2)] |
\ / |
[sink.split] |
\ /
[ end ]
Now we can sink the call to x() into %sink.split. This can cause significant code simplification in many testcases.
llvm-svn: 280364
r279460 rewrote this function to be able to handle more than two incoming edges and took pains to ensure this didn't regress anything.
This time we change the logic for determining if an instruction should be sunk. Previously we used a single pass greedy algorithm - sink instructions until one requires more than one PHI node or we run out of instructions to sink.
This had the problem that sinking instructions that had non-identical but trivially the same operands needed extra logic so we sunk them aggressively. For example:
%a = load i32* %b %d = load i32* %b
%c = gep i32* %a, i32 0 %e = gep i32* %d, i32 1
Sinking %c and %e would naively require two PHI merges as %a != %d. But the loads are obviously equivalent (and maybe can't be hoisted because there is no common predecessor).
This is why we implemented the fairly complex function areValuesTriviallySame(), to look through trivial differences like this. However it's just not clever enough.
Instead, throw areValuesTriviallySame away, use pointer equality to check equivalence of operands and switch to a two-stage algorithm.
In the "scan" stage, we look at every sinkable instruction in isolation from end of block to front. If it's sinkable, we keep track of all operands that required PHI merging.
In the "sink" stage, we iteratively sink the last non-terminator in the source blocks. But when calculating how many PHIs are actually required to be inserted (to work out if we should stop or not) we remove any values that have already been sunk from the set of PHI-merges required, which allows us to be more aggressive.
This turns an algorithm with potentially recursive lookahead (looking through GEPs, casts, loads and any other instruction potentially not CSE'd) to two linear scans.
llvm-svn: 280351
We iterate over the result from SafeToMergeTerminators, so make it a SmallSetVector instead of a SmallPtrSet.
Should fix stage3 convergence builds.
llvm-svn: 280342
A very important case is not handled here: multiple arcs to a single block with a PHI. Consider:
a:
%1 = icmp %b, 1
br %1, label %c, label %e
c:
%2 = icmp %b, 2
br %2, label %d, label %e
d:
br %e
e:
phi [0, %a], [1, %c], [2, %d]
FoldValueComparisonIntoPredecessors will refuse to fold this, as it doesn't know how to deal with two arcs to a common destination with different PHI values. The answer is obvious - just split all conflicting arcs.
llvm-svn: 280338
We check that a sinking candidate is used by only one PHI node during our legality checks. However for instructions that are used by other sinking candidates our heuristic is less conservative. This can result in a candidate actually being illegal when we come to sink it because of how we sunk a predecessor. Do the used-by-only-one-PHI checks again during sinking to ensure we don't crash.
llvm-svn: 280228
We're sinking stores, which is a good thing, but in the process creating selects for the store address operand, which SROA/Mem2Reg can't look through, which caused serious regressions.
The real fix is in SROA, which I'll be looking into.
llvm-svn: 280219
A very important case is not handled here: multiple arcs to a single block with a PHI. Consider:
a:
%1 = icmp %b, 1
br %1, label %c, label %e
c:
%2 = icmp %b, 2
br %2, label %d, label %e
d:
br %e
e:
phi [0, %a], [1, %c], [2, %d]
FoldValueComparisonIntoPredecessors will refuse to fold this, as it doesn't know how to deal with two arcs to a common destination with different PHI values. The answer is obvious - just split all conflicting arcs.
llvm-svn: 280218
This was a real restriction in the original version of SinkIfThenCodeToEnd. Now it's been rewritten, the restriction can be lifted.
As part of this, we handle a very common and useful case where one of the incoming branches is actually conditional. Consider:
if (a)
x(1);
else if (b)
x(2);
This produces the following CFG:
[if]
/ \
[x(1)] [if]
| | \
| | \
| [x(2)] |
\ | /
[ end ]
[end] has two unconditional predecessor arcs and one conditional. The conditional refers to the implicit empty 'else' arc. This same pattern can also be caused by an empty default block in a switch.
We can't sink the call to x() down to end because no call to x() happens on the third incoming arc (assume that x() has sideeffects for the sake of argument; if something is safe to speculate we could indeed sink nevertheless but this cannot happen in the general case and causes many extra selects).
We are now able to detect this case and split off the unconditional arcs to a common successor:
[if]
/ \
[x(1)] [if]
| | \
| | \
| [x(2)] |
\ / |
[sink.split] |
\ /
[ end ]
Now we can sink the call to x() into %sink.split. This can cause significant code simplification in many testcases.
llvm-svn: 280217
r279460 rewrote this function to be able to handle more than two incoming edges and took pains to ensure this didn't regress anything.
This time we change the logic for determining if an instruction should be sunk. Previously we used a single pass greedy algorithm - sink instructions until one requires more than one PHI node or we run out of instructions to sink.
This had the problem that sinking instructions that had non-identical but trivially the same operands needed extra logic so we sunk them aggressively. For example:
%a = load i32* %b %d = load i32* %b
%c = gep i32* %a, i32 0 %e = gep i32* %d, i32 1
Sinking %c and %e would naively require two PHI merges as %a != %d. But the loads are obviously equivalent (and maybe can't be hoisted because there is no common predecessor).
This is why we implemented the fairly complex function areValuesTriviallySame(), to look through trivial differences like this. However it's just not clever enough.
Instead, throw areValuesTriviallySame away, use pointer equality to check equivalence of operands and switch to a two-stage algorithm.
In the "scan" stage, we look at every sinkable instruction in isolation from end of block to front. If it's sinkable, we keep track of all operands that required PHI merging.
In the "sink" stage, we iteratively sink the last non-terminator in the source blocks. But when calculating how many PHIs are actually required to be inserted (to work out if we should stop or not) we remove any values that have already been sunk from the set of PHI-merges required, which allows us to be more aggressive.
This turns an algorithm with potentially recursive lookahead (looking through GEPs, casts, loads and any other instruction potentially not CSE'd) to two linear scans.
llvm-svn: 280216
This was deliberately disabled during my rewrite of SinkIfThenToEnd to keep behaviour
at least vaguely consistent with the previous version and keep it as close to NFC as
I could.
There's no real reason not to merge sideeffect calls though, so let's do it! Small fixup
along the way to ensure we don't create indirect calls.
Should fix PR28964.
llvm-svn: 280215
[Recommitting now an unrelated assertion in SROA is sorted out]
The new version has several advantages:
1) IMSHO it's more readable and neater
2) It handles loads and stores properly
3) It can handle any number of incoming blocks rather than just two. I'll be taking advantage of this in a followup patch.
With this change we can now finally sink load-modify-store idioms such as:
if (a)
return *b += 3;
else
return *b += 4;
=>
%z = load i32, i32* %y
%.sink = select i1 %a, i32 5, i32 7
%b = add i32 %z, %.sink
store i32 %b, i32* %y
ret i32 %b
When this works for switches it'll be even more powerful.
Round 4. This time we should handle all instructions correctly, and not replace any operands that need to be constant with variables.
This was really hard to determine safely, so the helper function should be put into the Instruction API. I'll do that as a followup.
llvm-svn: 279460
The new version has several advantages:
1) IMSHO it's more readable and neater
2) It handles loads and stores properly
3) It can handle any number of incoming blocks rather than just two. I'll be taking advantage of this in a followup patch.
With this change we can now finally sink load-modify-store idioms such as:
if (a)
return *b += 3;
else
return *b += 4;
=>
%z = load i32, i32* %y
%.sink = select i1 %a, i32 5, i32 7
%b = add i32 %z, %.sink
store i32 %b, i32* %y
ret i32 %b
When this works for switches it'll be even more powerful.
Round 4. This time we should handle all instructions correctly, and not replace any operands that need to be constant with variables.
This was really hard to determine safely, so the helper function should be put into the Instruction API. I'll do that as a followup.
llvm-svn: 279443
The new version has several advantages:
1) IMSHO it's more readable and neater
2) It handles loads and stores properly
3) It can handle any number of incoming blocks rather than just two. I'll be taking advantage of this in a followup patch.
With this change we can now finally sink load-modify-store idioms such as:
if (a)
return *b += 3;
else
return *b += 4;
=>
%z = load i32, i32* %y
%.sink = select i1 %a, i32 5, i32 7
%b = add i32 %z, %.sink
store i32 %b, i32* %y
ret i32 %b
When this works for switches it'll be even more powerful.
llvm-svn: 279229
When comparing a User* to a BasicBlock::iterator in
passingValueIsAlwaysUndefined, don't dereference the iterator in case it
is end().
llvm-svn: 278872
This reverts commit r278660.
It causes downstream assertion failure in InstCombine on shuffle
instructions. Comes up in __mm_swizzle_epi32.
llvm-svn: 278672
The new version has several advantages:
1) IMSHO it's more readable and neater
2) It handles loads and stores properly
3) It can handle any number of incoming blocks rather than just two. I'll be taking advantage of this in a followup patch.
With this change we can now finally sink load-modify-store idioms such as:
if (a)
return *b += 3;
else
return *b += 4;
=>
%z = load i32, i32* %y
%.sink = select i1 %a, i32 5, i32 7
%b = add i32 %z, %.sink
store i32 %b, i32* %y
ret i32 %b
When this works for switches it'll be even more powerful.
llvm-svn: 278660
This generated IR based on the order of evaluation, which is different
between GCC and Clang. With that in mind you get bootstrap miscompares
if you compare a Clang built with GCC-built Clang vs. Clang built with
Clang-built Clang. Diagnosing that made my head hurt.
This also reverts commit r277337, which "fixed" the test case.
llvm-svn: 277820
Using RAUW was wrong here; if we have a switch transform such as:
18 -> 6 then
6 -> 0
If we use RAUW, while performing the second transform the *transformed* 6
from the first will be also replaced, so we end up with:
18 -> 0
6 -> 0
Found by clang stage2 bootstrap; testcase added.
llvm-svn: 277332
If a switch is sparse and all the cases (once sorted) are in arithmetic progression, we can extract the common factor out of the switch and create a dense switch. For example:
switch (i) {
case 5: ...
case 9: ...
case 13: ...
case 17: ...
}
can become:
if ( (i - 5) % 4 ) goto default;
switch ((i - 5) / 4) {
case 0: ...
case 1: ...
case 2: ...
case 3: ...
}
or even better:
switch ( ROTR(i - 5, 2) {
case 0: ...
case 1: ...
case 2: ...
case 3: ...
}
The division and remainder operations could be costly so we only do this if the factor is a power of two, and emit a right-rotate instead of a divide/remainder sequence. Dense switches can be lowered significantly better than sparse switches and can even be transformed into lookup tables.
llvm-svn: 277325
r273711 was reverted by r273743. The inliner needs to know about any
call sites in the inlined function. These were obscured if we replaced
a call to undef with an undef but kept the call around.
This fixes PR28298.
llvm-svn: 273753
reduce the number of comparisons.
Specifically, InstCombine can turn:
(i == 5334 || i == 5335)
into:
((i | 1) == 5335)
SimplifyCFG was already able to detect the pattern:
(i == 5334 || i == 5335)
to:
((i & -2) == 5334)
This patch supersedes D21315 and resolves PR27555
(https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=27555).
Thanks to David and Chandler for the suggestions!
Author: Thomas Jablin (tjablin)
Reviewers: majnemer chandlerc halfdan cycheng
http://reviews.llvm.org/D21397
llvm-svn: 273639
Switch from m_Constant to m_APInt per David's request. NFC.
Author: Thomas Jablin (tjablin)
Reviewers: majnemer cycheng
http://reviews.llvm.org/D21440
llvm-svn: 272977
(i == 5334 || i == 5335)
to:
((i & -2) == 5334)
This transformation has some incorrect side conditions. Specifically, the
transformation is only applied when the right-hand side constant (5334 in
the example) is a power of two not equal and not equal to the negated mask.
These side conditions were added in r258904 to fix PR26323. The correct side
condition is that: ((Constant & Mask) == Constant)[(5334 & -2) == 5334].
It's a little bit hard to see why these transformations are correct and what
the side conditions ought to be. Here is a CVC3 program to verify them for
64-bit values:
ONE : BITVECTOR(64) = BVZEROEXTEND(0bin1, 63);
x : BITVECTOR(64);
y : BITVECTOR(64);
z : BITVECTOR(64);
mask : BITVECTOR(64) = BVSHL(ONE, z);
QUERY( (y & ~mask = y) =>
((x & ~mask = y) <=> (x = y OR x = (y | mask)))
);
Please note that each pattern must be a dual implication (<--> or iff). One
directional implication can create spurious matches. If the implication is
only one-way, an unsatisfiable condition on the left side can imply a
satisfiable condition on the right side. Dual implication ensures that
satisfiable conditions are transformed to other satisfiable conditions and
unsatisfiable conditions are transformed to other unsatisfiable conditions.
Here is a concrete example of a unsatisfiable condition on the left
implying a satisfiable condition on the right:
mask = (1 << z)
(x & ~mask) == y --> (x == y || x == (y | mask))
Substituting y = 3, z = 0 yields:
(x & -2) == 3 --> (x == 3 || x == 2)
The version of this code before r258904 had no side-conditions and
incorrectly justified itself in comments through one-directional
implication.
Thanks to Chandler for the suggestion!
Author: Thomas Jablin (tjablin)
Reviewers: chandlerc majnemer hfinkel cycheng
http://reviews.llvm.org/D21417
llvm-svn: 272873
