- Apr 02, 2012
-
-
Stepan Dyatkovskiy authored
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=12343 We have not trivial way for splitting edges that are goes from indirect branch. We can do it with some tricks, but it should be additionally discussed. And it is still dangerous due to difficulty of indirect branches controlling. Fix forbids this case for unswitching. llvm-svn: 153879
-
- Apr 01, 2012
-
-
Chandler Carruth authored
As a side note, I really dislike array_pod_sort... Do we really still care about any STL implementations that get this so wrong? Does libc++? llvm-svn: 153834
-
Chandler Carruth authored
a single missing character. Somehow, this had gone untested. I've added tests for returns-twice logic specifically with the always-inliner that would have caught this, and fixed the bug. Thanks to Matt for the careful review and spotting this!!! =D llvm-svn: 153832
-
- Mar 31, 2012
-
-
Chandler Carruth authored
the very high overhead of the complex inline cost analysis when all it wants to do is detect three patterns which must not be inlined. Comment the code, clean it up, and leave some hints about possible performance improvements if this ever shows up on a profile. Moving this off of the (now more expensive) inline cost analysis is particularly important because we have to run this inliner even at -O0. llvm-svn: 153814
-
Chandler Carruth authored
interfaces. These methods were used in the old inline cost system where there was a persistent cache that had to be updated, invalidated, and cleared. We're now doing more direct computations that don't require this intricate dance. Even if we resume some level of caching, it would almost certainly have a simpler and more narrow interface than this. llvm-svn: 153813
-
Chandler Carruth authored
on a per-callsite walk of the called function's instructions, in breadth-first order over the potentially reachable set of basic blocks. This is a major shift in how inline cost analysis works to improve the accuracy and rationality of inlining decisions. A brief outline of the algorithm this moves to: - Build a simplification mapping based on the callsite arguments to the function arguments. - Push the entry block onto a worklist of potentially-live basic blocks. - Pop the first block off of the *front* of the worklist (for breadth-first ordering) and walk its instructions using a custom InstVisitor. - For each instruction's operands, re-map them based on the simplification mappings available for the given callsite. - Compute any simplification possible of the instruction after re-mapping, and store that back int othe simplification mapping. - Compute any bonuses, costs, or other impacts of the instruction on the cost metric. - When the terminator is reached, replace any conditional value in the terminator with any simplifications from the mapping we have, and add any successors which are not proven to be dead from these simplifications to the worklist. - Pop the next block off of the front of the worklist, and repeat. - As soon as the cost of inlining exceeds the threshold for the callsite, stop analyzing the function in order to bound cost. The primary goal of this algorithm is to perfectly handle dead code paths. We do not want any code in trivially dead code paths to impact inlining decisions. The previous metric was *extremely* flawed here, and would always subtract the average cost of two successors of a conditional branch when it was proven to become an unconditional branch at the callsite. There was no handling of wildly different costs between the two successors, which would cause inlining when the path actually taken was too large, and no inlining when the path actually taken was trivially simple. There was also no handling of the code *path*, only the immediate successors. These problems vanish completely now. See the added regression tests for the shiny new features -- we skip recursive function calls, SROA-killing instructions, and high cost complex CFG structures when dead at the callsite being analyzed. Switching to this algorithm required refactoring the inline cost interface to accept the actual threshold rather than simply returning a single cost. The resulting interface is pretty bad, and I'm planning to do lots of interface cleanup after this patch. Several other refactorings fell out of this, but I've tried to minimize them for this patch. =/ There is still more cleanup that can be done here. Please point out anything that you see in review. I've worked really hard to try to mirror at least the spirit of all of the previous heuristics in the new model. It's not clear that they are all correct any more, but I wanted to minimize the change in this single patch, it's already a bit ridiculous. One heuristic that is *not* yet mirrored is to allow inlining of functions with a dynamic alloca *if* the caller has a dynamic alloca. I will add this back, but I think the most reasonable way requires changes to the inliner itself rather than just the cost metric, and so I've deferred this for a subsequent patch. The test case is XFAIL-ed until then. As mentioned in the review mail, this seems to make Clang run about 1% to 2% faster in -O0, but makes its binary size grow by just under 4%. I've looked into the 4% growth, and it can be fixed, but requires changes to other parts of the inliner. llvm-svn: 153812
-
Benjamin Kramer authored
Internalize: Remove reference of @llvm.noinline, it was replaced with the noinline attribute a long time ago. llvm-svn: 153806
-
Hal Finkel authored
The powi intrinsic requires special handling because it always takes a single integer power regardless of the result type. As a result, we can vectorize only if the powers are equal. Fixes PR12364. llvm-svn: 153797
-
- Mar 29, 2012
-
-
Jakob Stoklund Olesen authored
CodeGenPrepare sinks compare instructions down to their uses to prevent live flags and predicate registers across basic blocks. PRE of a compare instruction prevents that, forcing the i1 compare result into a general purpose register. That is usually more expensive than the redundant compare PRE was trying to eliminate in the first place. llvm-svn: 153657
-
- Mar 28, 2012
-
-
Benjamin Kramer authored
GlobalOpt: If we have an inbounds GEP from a ConstantAggregateZero global that we just determined to be constant, replace all loads from it with a zero value. llvm-svn: 153576
-
Chandler Carruth authored
blocks in the function cloner. This removes the last case of trivially dead code that I've been seeing in the wild getting inlined, analyzed, re-inlined, optimized, only to be deleted. Nukes a FIXME from the cleanup tests. llvm-svn: 153572
-
Chad Rosier authored
llvm-svn: 153556
-
- Mar 27, 2012
-
-
Chandler Carruth authored
size bloat. Unfortunately, I expect this to disable the majority of the benefit from r152737. I'm hopeful at least that it will fix PR12345. To explain this requires... quite a bit of backstory I'm afraid. TL;DR: The change in r152737 actually did The Wrong Thing for linkonce-odr functions. This change makes it do the right thing. The benefits we saw were simple luck, not any actual strategy. Benchmark numbers after a mini-blog-post so that I've written down my thoughts on why all of this works and doesn't work... To understand what's going on here, you have to understand how the "bottom-up" inliner actually works. There are two fundamental modes to the inliner: 1) Standard fixed-cost bottom-up inlining. This is the mode we usually think about. It walks from the bottom of the CFG up to the top, looking at callsites, taking information about the callsite and the called function and computing th expected cost of inlining into that callsite. If the cost is under a fixed threshold, it inlines. It's a touch more complicated than that due to all the bonuses, weights, etc. Inlining the last callsite to an internal function gets higher weighth, etc. But essentially, this is the mode of operation. 2) Deferred bottom-up inlining (a term I just made up). This is the interesting mode for this patch an r152737. Initially, this works just like mode #1, but once we have the cost of inlining into the callsite, we don't just compare it with a fixed threshold. First, we check something else. Let's give some names to the entities at this point, or we'll end up hopelessly confused. We're considering inlining a function 'A' into its callsite within a function 'B'. We want to check whether 'B' has any callers, and whether it might be inlined into those callers. If so, we also check whether inlining 'A' into 'B' would block any of the opportunities for inlining 'B' into its callers. We take the sum of the costs of inlining 'B' into its callers where that inlining would be blocked by inlining 'A' into 'B', and if that cost is less than the cost of inlining 'A' into 'B', then we skip inlining 'A' into 'B'. Now, in order for #2 to make sense, we have to have some confidence that we will actually have the opportunity to inline 'B' into its callers when cheaper, *and* that we'll be able to revisit the decision and inline 'A' into 'B' if that ever becomes the correct tradeoff. This often isn't true for external functions -- we can see very few of their callers, and we won't be able to re-consider inlining 'A' into 'B' if 'B' is external when we finally see more callers of 'B'. There are two cases where we believe this to be true for C/C++ code: functions local to a translation unit, and functions with an inline definition in every translation unit which uses them. These are represented as internal linkage and linkonce-odr (resp.) in LLVM. I enabled this logic for linkonce-odr in r152737. Unfortunately, when I did that, I also introduced a subtle bug. There was an implicit assumption that the last caller of the function within the TU was the last caller of the function in the program. We want to bonus the last caller of the function in the program by a huge amount for inlining because inlining that callsite has very little cost. Unfortunately, the last caller in the TU of a linkonce-odr function is *not* the last caller in the program, and so we don't want to apply this bonus. If we do, we can apply it to one callsite *per-TU*. Because of the way deferred inlining works, when it sees this bonus applied to one callsite in the TU for 'B', it decides that inlining 'B' is of the *utmost* importance just so we can get that final bonus. It then proceeds to essentially force deferred inlining regardless of the actual cost tradeoff. The result? PR12345: code bloat, code bloat, code bloat. Another result is getting *damn* lucky on a few benchmarks, and the over-inlining exposing critically important optimizations. I would very much like a list of benchmarks that regress after this change goes in, with bitcode before and after. This will help me greatly understand what opportunities the current cost analysis is missing. Initial benchmark numbers look very good. WebKit files that exhibited the worst of PR12345 went from growing to shrinking compared to Clang with r152737 reverted. - Bootstrapped Clang is 3% smaller with this change. - Bootstrapped Clang -O0 over a single-source-file of lib/Lex is 4% faster with this change. Please let me know about any other performance impact you see. Thanks to Nico for reporting and urging me to actually fix, Richard Smith, Duncan Sands, Manuel Klimek, and Benjamin Kramer for talking through the issues today. llvm-svn: 153506
-
- Mar 26, 2012
-
-
Nadav Rotem authored
153465 was incorrect. In this code we wanted to check that the pointer operand is of pointer type (and not vector type). llvm-svn: 153468
-
Nadav Rotem authored
llvm-svn: 153465
-
Andrew Trick authored
Fixes PR11950. llvm-svn: 153463
-
Andrew Trick authored
llvm-svn: 153462
-
Chris Lattner authored
llvm-svn: 153458
-
Eric Christopher authored
llvm-svn: 153456
-
Eric Christopher authored
llvm-svn: 153455
-
Andrew Trick authored
Thanks Andrey. llvm-svn: 153451
-
Kostya Serebryany authored
[tsan] treat vtable pointer updates in a special way (requires tbaa); fix a bug (forgot to return true after instrumenting); make sure the tsan tests are run llvm-svn: 153448
-
Craig Topper authored
llvm-svn: 153429
-
- Mar 25, 2012
-
-
Chandler Carruth authored
aggressively. There are lots of dire warnings about this being expensive that seem to predate switching to the TrackingVH-based value remapper that is automatically updated on RAUW. This makes it easy to not just prune single-entry PHIs, but to fully simplify PHIs, and to recursively simplify the newly inlined code to propagate PHINode simplifications. This introduces a bit of a thorny problem though. We may end up simplifying a branch condition to a constant when we fold PHINodes, and we would like to nuke any dead blocks resulting from this so that time isn't wasted continually analyzing them, but this isn't easy. Deleting basic blocks *after* they are fully cloned and mapped into the new function currently requires manually updating the value map. The last piece of the simplification-during-inlining puzzle will require either switching to WeakVH mappings or some other piece of refactoring. I've left a FIXME in the testcase about this. llvm-svn: 153410
-
Chandler Carruth authored
to instead rely on much more generic and powerful instruction simplification in the function cloner (and thus inliner). This teaches the pruning function cloner to use instsimplify rather than just the constant folder to fold values during cloning. This can simplify a large number of things that constant folding alone cannot begin to touch. For example, it will realize that 'or' and 'and' instructions with certain constant operands actually become constants regardless of what their other operand is. It also can thread back through the caller to perform simplifications that are only possible by looking up a few levels. In particular, GEPs and pointer testing tend to fold much more heavily with this change. This should (in some cases) have a positive impact on compile times with optimizations on because the inliner itself will simply avoid cloning a great deal of code. It already attempted to prune proven-dead code, but now it will be use the stronger simplifications to prove more code dead. llvm-svn: 153403
-
Chandler Carruth authored
fire if anything ever invalidates the assumption of a terminator instruction being unchanged throughout the routine. I've convinced myself that the current definition of simplification precludes such a transformation, so I think getting some asserts coverage that we don't violate this agreement is sufficient to make this code safe for the foreseeable future. Comments to the contrary or other suggestions are of course welcome. =] The bots are now happy with this code though, so it appears the bug here has indeed been fixed. llvm-svn: 153401
-
Chandler Carruth authored
list. This is a bad idea. ;] I'm hopeful this is the bug that's showing up with the MSVC bots, but we'll see. It is definitely unnecessary. InstSimplify won't do anything to a terminator instruction, we don't need to even include it in the iteration range. We can also skip the now dead terminator check, although I've made it an assert to help document that this is an important invariant. I'm still a bit queasy about this because there is an implicit assumption that the terminator instruction cannot be RAUW'ed by the simplification code. While that appears to be true at the moment, I see no guarantee that would ensure it remains true in the future. I'm looking at the cleanest way to solve that... llvm-svn: 153399
-
- Mar 24, 2012
-
-
Chandler Carruth authored
bit simpler by handling a common case explicitly. Also, refactor the implementation to use a worklist based walk of the recursive users, rather than trying to use value handles to detect and recover from RAUWs during the recursive descent. This fixes a very subtle bug in the previous implementation where degenerate control flow structures could cause mutually recursive instructions (PHI nodes) to collapse in just such a way that From became equal to To after some amount of recursion. At that point, we hit the inf-loop that the assert at the top attempted to guard against. This problem is defined away when not using value handles in this manner. There are lots of comments claiming that the WeakVH will protect against just this sort of error, but they're not accurate about the actual implementation of WeakVHs, which do still track RAUWs. I don't have any test case for the bug this fixes because it requires running the recursive simplification on unreachable phi nodes. I've no way to either run this or easily write an input that triggers it. It was found when using instruction simplification inside the inliner when running over the nightly test-suite. llvm-svn: 153393
-
Francois Pichet authored
llvm-svn: 153366
-
Andrew Trick authored
llvm-svn: 153362
-
Kostya Serebryany authored
llvm-svn: 153353
-
- Mar 23, 2012
-
-
Dan Gohman authored
is retaining the return value of an invoke that it immediately follows. llvm-svn: 153344
-
Dan Gohman authored
same basic block, and it's not safe to insert code in the successor blocks if the edges are critical edges. Splitting those edges is possible, but undesirable, especially on the unwind side. Instead, make the bottom-up code motion to consider invokes to be part of their successor blocks, rather than part of their parent blocks, so that it doesn't push code past them and onto the edges. This fixes PR12307. llvm-svn: 153343
-
Duncan Sands authored
dominated by Root, check that B is available throughout the scope. This is obviously true (famous last words?) given the current logic, but the check may be helpful if more complicated reasoning is added one day. llvm-svn: 153323
-
Duncan Sands authored
llvm-svn: 153322
-
- Mar 22, 2012
-
-
Andrew Trick authored
llvm-svn: 153287
-
Andrew Trick authored
Tests cases have been removed but attached to open PR12330. llvm-svn: 153286
-
Dan Gohman authored
llvm-svn: 153267
-
Andrew Trick authored
llvm-svn: 153262
-
Andrew Trick authored
llvm-svn: 153260
-