- Sep 24, 2012
-
-
Chandler Carruth authored
integer promotion analogous to vector promotion. When there is an integer alloca being accessed both as its integer type and as a narrower integer type, promote the narrower access to "insert" and "extract" the smaller integer from the larger one, and make the integer alloca a candidate for promotion. In the new formulation, we don't care about target legal integer or use thresholds to control things. Instead, we only perform this promotion to an integer type which the frontend has already emitted a load or store for. This bounds the scope and prevents optimization passes from coalescing larger and larger entities into a single integer. llvm-svn: 164479
-
- Sep 23, 2012
-
-
Chandler Carruth authored
across the uses of the alloca. It's entirely possible for negative numbers to come up here, and in some rare cases simply doing the 2's complement arithmetic isn't the correct decision. Notably, we can't zext the index of the GEP. The definition of GEP is that these offsets are sign extended or truncated to the size of the pointer, and then wrapping 2's complement arithmetic used. This patch fixes an issue that comes up with *no* input from the buildbots or bootstrap afaict. The only place where it manifested, disturbingly, is Clang's own regression test suite. A reduced and targeted collection of tests are added to cope with this. Note that I've tried to pin down the potential cases of overflow, but may have missed some cases. I've tried to add a few cases to test this, but its hard because LLVM has quite limited support for >64bit constructs. llvm-svn: 164475
-
- Sep 22, 2012
-
-
Chandler Carruth authored
selects with a constant condition. This resulted in the operands remaining live through the SROA rewriter. Most of the time, this just caused some dead allocas to persist and get zapped by later passes, but in one case found by Joerg, it caused a crash when we tried to *promote* the alloca despite it having this dead use. We already have the mechanisms in place to handle this, just wire select up to them. llvm-svn: 164427
-
- Sep 21, 2012
-
-
Benjamin Kramer authored
We rely on it when doing the transforms. This can happen when there is an indirectbr in the loop. Fixes PR13892. llvm-svn: 164383
-
Benjamin Kramer authored
Fixes PR13250. llvm-svn: 164377
-
Manman Ren authored
We already have HoistThenElseCodeToIf, this patch implements SinkThenElseCodeToEnd. When END block has only two predecessors and each predecessor terminates with unconditional branches, we compare instructions in IF and ELSE blocks backwards and check whether we can sink the common instructions down. rdar://12191395 llvm-svn: 164325
-
- Sep 19, 2012
-
-
Michael Ilseman authored
llvm-svn: 164238
-
Michael Ilseman authored
llvm-svn: 164235
-
Michael Ilseman authored
llvm-svn: 164232
-
Hans Wennborg authored
two variables where the first variable is returned and the second ignored. I don't think this occurs in practice (other passes should have cleaned up the unused phi node), but it should still be handled correctly. Also make the logic for determining if we should return early less sketchy. llvm-svn: 164225
-
Benjamin Kramer authored
llvm-svn: 164216
-
Hans Wennborg authored
This is a follow-up from r163302, which added a transformation to SimplifyCFG that turns some switches into loads from lookup tables. It was pointed out that some targets, such as GPUs and deeply embedded targets, might not find this appropriate, but SimplifyCFG doesn't have enough information about the target to decide this. This patch adds the reverse transformation to CodeGenPrep: it turns loads from lookup tables back into switches for targets where we do not build jump tables (assuming these are also the targets where lookup tables are inappropriate). Hopefully we will eventually get to have target information in SimplifyCFG, and then this CodeGenPrep transformation can be removed. llvm-svn: 164206
-
Chandler Carruth authored
from the dragonegg build bots when we turned on the full version of the pass. Included a much reduced test case for this pesky bug, despite bugpoint's uncooperative behavior. Also, I audited all the similar code I could find and didn't spot any other cases where this mistake cropped up. llvm-svn: 164178
-
Michael Ilseman authored
Implementation derived from compiler-rt's implementation of signed and unsigned integer division. llvm-svn: 164173
-
- Sep 18, 2012
-
-
Andrew Trick authored
llvm-svn: 164147
-
Chandler Carruth authored
working on FCA splitting. Instead of refusing to form a common type when there are uses of a subsection of the alloca as well as a use of the entire alloca, just skip the subsection uses and continue looking for a whole-alloca use with a type that we can use. This produces slightly prettier IR I think, and also fixes the other failure in the test. llvm-svn: 164146
-
Benjamin Kramer authored
llvm-svn: 164142
-
Benjamin Kramer authored
SROA: Use CRTP for OpSplitter to get rid of virtual dispatch and the virtual-dtor warnings that come with it. llvm-svn: 164140
-
Benjamin Kramer authored
SROA: Replace the member function template contraption for recursively splitting aggregates into a real class. No intended functionality change. llvm-svn: 164135
-
NAKAMURA Takumi authored
...I don't know why this could appease msvc...baad. llvm-svn: 164130
-
Benjamin Kramer authored
llvm-svn: 164124
-
Chandler Carruth authored
a fix to getCommonType in the previous patch. llvm-svn: 164120
-
Chandler Carruth authored
FCAs. This is essential in order to promote allocas that are used in struct returns by frontends like Clang. The FCA load would block the rest of the pass from firing, resulting is significant regressions with the bullet benchmark in the nightly test suite. Thanks to Duncan for repeated discussions about how best to do this, and to both him and Benjamin for review. This appears to have blocked many places where the pass tries to fire, and so I'm expect somewhat different results with this fix added. As with the last big patch, I'm including a change to enable the SROA by default *temporarily*. Ben is going to remove this as soon as the LNT bots pick up the patch. I'm just trying to get a round of LNT numbers from the stable machines in the lab. NOTE: Four clang tests are expected to fail in the brief window where this is enabled. Sorry for the noise! llvm-svn: 164119
-
Richard Osborne authored
llvm-svn: 164117
-
Craig Topper authored
llvm-svn: 164090
-
Manman Ren authored
and a conditional branch; also when removing dead cases from a switch. llvm-svn: 164084
-
Manman Ren authored
Hanlde the case when we split the default edge if the default target has "icmp" and unconditinal branch. llvm-svn: 164076
-
Manman Ren authored
llvm-svn: 164068
-
- Sep 17, 2012
-
-
Manman Ren authored
destination in SimplifyCondBranchToCondBranch. llvm-svn: 164054
-
Bill Wendling authored
llvm-svn: 164040
-
Benjamin Kramer authored
MSVC8 won't compile lower_bound if one is missing. llvm-svn: 164035
-
Axel Naumann authored
The cases where no initialization happens should still be checked for logic flaws. llvm-svn: 164032
-
- Sep 16, 2012
-
-
Chandler Carruth authored
partition use lists a bit. No functionality changed. These visitors are actually visiting a tuple of a Use and an offset into the alloca. However, we use the InstVisitor to handle the dispatch over the users, and so the Use and Offset are stored in class member variables and set just before each call to visit(). This is fairly awkward and makes the functions a bit harder to read, but its the only real option we have until InstVisitor can be rewritten to use variadic templates. However, this pattern shouldn't be followed on the helper member functions where there is no interface constraint from the visitor. We already were passing the instruction as a normal parameter rather than use the Use to get at it, start passing the offset as well. This will become more important in subsequent patches as the offset will in some cases change while visiting a single instruction. llvm-svn: 164003
-
- Sep 15, 2012
-
-
Craig Topper authored
llvm-svn: 163974
-
Benjamin Kramer authored
What we have so far: - Some clang test failures (these were known already) - Perf results are mixed, some big regressions http://llvm.org/perf/db_default/v4/nts/3844 http://llvm.org/perf/db_default/v4/nts/3845 bullet suffers a lot. matmul is interesting: slower scalar code, faster with -vectorize. - Some dragonegg selfhost bots crash in SROA during selfhost now http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/dragonegg-x86_64-linux-gcc-4.6-self-host-checks/builds/1632 http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/dragonegg-x86_64-linux-gcc-4.5-self-host/builds/1891 llvm-svn: 163968
-
Chandler Carruth authored
new one, and add support for running the new pass in that mode and in that slot of the pass manager. With this the new pass can completely replace the old one within the pipeline. The strategy for enabling or disabling the SSAUpdater logic is to do it by making the requirement of the domtree analysis optional. By default, it is required and we get the standard mem2reg approach. This is usually the desired strategy when run in stand-alone situations. Within the CGSCC pass manager, we disable requiring of the domtree analysis and consequentially trigger fallback to the SSAUpdater promotion. In theory this would allow the pass to re-use a domtree if one happened to be available even when run in a mode that doesn't require it. In practice, it lets us have a single pass rather than two which was simpler for me to wrap my head around. There is a hidden flag to force the use of the SSAUpdater code path for the purpose of testing. The primary testing strategy is just to run the existing tests through that path. One notable difference is that it has custom code to handle lifetime markers, and one of the tests has been enhanced to exercise that code. This has survived a bootstrap and the test suite without serious correctness issues, however my run of the test suite produced *very* alarming performance numbers. I don't entirely understand or trust them though, so more investigation is on-going. To aid my understanding of the performance impact of the new SROA now that it runs throughout the optimization pipeline, I'm enabling it by default in this commit, and will disable it again once the LNT bots have picked up one iteration with it. I want to get those bots (which are much more stable) to evaluate the impact of the change before I jump to any conclusions. NOTE: Several Clang tests will fail because they run -O3 and check the result's order of output. They'll go back to passing once I disable it again. llvm-svn: 163965
-
Manman Ren authored
destination. Updated previous implementation to fix a case not covered: // PBI: br i1 %x, TrueDest, BB // BI: br i1 %y, TrueDest, FalseDest The other case was handled correctly. // PBI: br i1 %x, BB, FalseDest // BI: br i1 %y, TrueDest, FalseDest Also tried to use 64-bit arithmetic instead of APInt with scale to simplify the computation. Let me know if you have other opinions about this. llvm-svn: 163954
-
Bill Wendling authored
llvm-svn: 163945
-
- Sep 14, 2012
-
-
Manman Ren authored
case to a conditional branch and when removing dead cases. llvm-svn: 163942
-
Evan Cheng authored
llvm-svn: 163940
-