- Nov 16, 2011
-
-
Bob Wilson authored
There may be many invokes that share one landing pad, and the previous code would record the landing pad once for each invoke. Besides the wasted effort, a pair of volatile loads gets inserted every time the landing pad is processed. The rest of the code can get optimized away when a landing pad is processed repeatedly, but the volatile loads remain, resulting in code like: LBB35_18: Ltmp483: ldr r2, [r7, #-72] ldr r2, [r7, #-68] ldr r2, [r7, #-72] ldr r2, [r7, #-68] ldr r2, [r7, #-72] ldr r2, [r7, #-68] ldr r2, [r7, #-72] ldr r2, [r7, #-68] ldr r2, [r7, #-72] ldr r2, [r7, #-68] ldr r2, [r7, #-72] ldr r2, [r7, #-68] ldr r2, [r7, #-72] ldr r2, [r7, #-68] ldr r2, [r7, #-72] ldr r2, [r7, #-68] ldr r4, [r7, #-72] ldr r2, [r7, #-68] llvm-svn: 144787
-
rdar://problem/10444602Bob Wilson authored
This same basic code was in the older version of the SjLj exception handling, but it was removed in the recent revisions to that code. It needs to be there. llvm-svn: 144782
-
Evan Cheng authored
llvm-svn: 144776
-
Evan Cheng authored
If the 2addr instruction has other kills, don't move it below any other uses since we don't want to extend other live ranges. llvm-svn: 144772
-
Evan Cheng authored
RescheduleKillAboveMI() must backtrack to before the rescheduled DBG_VALUE instructions. rdar://10451185 llvm-svn: 144771
-
-
Eli Friedman authored
llvm-svn: 144768
-
Eli Friedman authored
Add a couple asserts so it will be easier to debug if we accidentally pass indexed loads/stores to the legalizer. llvm-svn: 144767
-
Owen Anderson authored
llvm-svn: 144747
-
Eric Christopher authored
failure during bootstrap with it turned on. llvm-svn: 144731
-
Chad Rosier authored
%arrayidx135 = getelementptr inbounds [4 x [4 x [4 x [4 x i32]]]]* %M0, i32 0, i64 0 %arrayidx136 = getelementptr inbounds [4 x [4 x [4 x i32]]]* %arrayidx135, i32 0, i64 %idxprom134 Prior to this commit, the GEP instruction that defines %arrayidx136 thought that %arrayidx135 was a trivial kill. The GEP that defines %arrayidx135 doesn't generate any code and thus %M0 gets folded into the second GEP. Thus, we need to look through GEPs with all zero indices. rdar://10443319 llvm-svn: 144730
-
- Nov 15, 2011
-
-
Pete Cooper authored
by later instructions. Only done for DEC64m right now. Fixes <rdar://problem/6172640> llvm-svn: 144705
-
Devang Patel authored
llvm-svn: 144696
-
Rafael Espindola authored
has a reference to it. Unfortunately, that doesn't work for codegen passes since we don't get notified of MBB's being deleted (the original BB stays). Use that fact to our advantage and after printing a function, check if any of the IL BBs corresponds to a symbol that was not printed. This fixes pr11202. llvm-svn: 144674
-
Benjamin Kramer authored
llvm-svn: 144648
-
Benjamin Kramer authored
llvm-svn: 144647
-
Jakob Stoklund Olesen authored
A function using any RC alias is enough to enable the ExeDepsFix pass. llvm-svn: 144636
-
Jay Foad authored
llvm-svn: 144635
-
Jay Foad authored
llvm-svn: 144634
-
Evan Cheng authored
Set SeenStore to true to prevent loads from being moved; also eliminates a non-deterministic behavior. llvm-svn: 144628
-
Chandler Carruth authored
block sequence when recovering from unanalyzable control flow constructs, *always* use the function sequence. I'm not sure why I ever went down the path of trying to use the loop sequence, it is fundamentally not the correct sequence to use. We're trying to preserve the incoming layout in the cases of unreasonable control flow, and that is only encoded at the function level. We already have a filter to select *exactly* the sub-set of blocks within the function that we're trying to form into a chain. The resulting code layout is also significantly better because of this. In several places we were ending up with completely unreasonable control flow constructs due to the ordering chosen by the loop structure for its internal storage. This change removes a completely wasteful vector of basic blocks, saving memory allocation in the common case even though it costs us CPU in the fairly rare case of unnatural loops. Finally, it fixes the latest crasher reduced out of GCC's single source. Thanks again to Benjamin Kramer for the reduction, my bugpoint skills failed at it. llvm-svn: 144627
-
Jakob Stoklund Olesen authored
Two new TargetInstrInfo hooks lets the target tell ExecutionDepsFix about instructions with partial register updates causing false unwanted dependencies. The ExecutionDepsFix pass will break the false dependencies if the updated register was written in the previoius N instructions. The small loop added to sse-domains.ll runs twice as fast with dependency-breaking instructions inserted. llvm-svn: 144602
-
Jakob Stoklund Olesen authored
Keep track of the last instruction to define each register individually instead of per DomainValue. This lets us track more accurately when a register was last written. Also track register ages across basic blocks. When entering a new basic block, use the least stale predecessor def as a worst case estimate for register age. The register age is used to arbitrate between conflicting domains. The most recently defined register wins. llvm-svn: 144601
-
- Nov 14, 2011
-
-
Evan Cheng authored
llvm-svn: 144569
-
Evan Cheng authored
"kill". This looks like a bug upstream. Since that's going to take some time to understand, loosen the assertion and disable the optimization when multiple kills are seen. llvm-svn: 144568
-
Evan Cheng authored
instructions of the two-address operands) in order to avoid inserting copies. This fixes the few regressions introduced when the two-address hack was disabled (without regressing the improvements). rdar://10422688 llvm-svn: 144559
-
Jakob Stoklund Olesen authored
I broke this in r144515, it affected most ARM testers. <rdar://problem/10441389> llvm-svn: 144547
-
Chandler Carruth authored
cleans up all the chains allocated during the processing of each function so that for very large inputs we don't just grow memory usage without bound. llvm-svn: 144533
-
Chandler Carruth authored
tests when I forcibly enabled block placement. It is apparantly possible for an unanalyzable block to fallthrough to a non-loop block. I don't actually beleive this is correct, I believe that 'canFallThrough' is returning true needlessly for the code construct, and I've left a bit of a FIXME on the verification code to try to track down why this is coming up. Anyways, removing the assert doesn't degrade the correctness of the algorithm. llvm-svn: 144532
-
Chandler Carruth authored
this pass. We're leaving already merged blocks on the worklist, and scanning them again and again only to determine each time through that indeed they aren't viable. We can instead remove them once we're going to have to scan the worklist. This is the easy way to implement removing them. If this remains on the profile (as I somewhat suspect it will), we can get a lot more clever here, as the worklist's order is essentially irrelevant. We can use swapping and fold the two loops to reduce overhead even when there are many blocks on the worklist but only a few of them are removed. llvm-svn: 144531
-
Chandler Carruth authored
time it is queried to compute the probability of a single successor. This makes computing the probability of every successor of a block in sequence... really really slow. ;] This switches to a linear walk of the successors rather than a quadratic one. One of several quadratic behaviors slowing this pass down. I'm not really thrilled with moving the sum code into the public interface of MBPI, but I don't (at the moment) have ideas for a better interface. My direction I'm thinking in for a better interface is to have MBPI actually retain much more state and make *all* of these queries cheap. That's a lot of work, and would require invasive changes. Until then, this seems like the least bad (ie, least quadratic) solution. Suggestions welcome. llvm-svn: 144530
-
Chandler Carruth authored
correctly handle blocks whose successor weights sum to more than UINT32_MAX. This is slightly less efficient, but the entire thing is already linear on the number of successors. Calling it within any hot routine is a mistake, and indeed no one is calling it. It also simplifies the code. llvm-svn: 144527
-
Chandler Carruth authored
the sum of the edge weights not overflowing uint32, and crashed when they did. This is generally safe as BranchProbabilityInfo tries to provide this guarantee. However, the CFG can get modified during codegen in a way that grows the *sum* of the edge weights. This doesn't seem unreasonable (imagine just adding more blocks all with the default weight of 16), but it is hard to come up with a case that actually triggers 32-bit overflow. Fortuately, the single-source GCC build is good at this. The solution isn't very pretty, but its no worse than the previous code. We're already summing all of the edge weights on each query, we can sum them, check for an overflow, compute a scale, and sum them again. I've included a *greatly* reduced test case out of the GCC source that triggers it. It's a pretty lame test, as it clearly is just barely triggering the overflow. I'd like to have something that is much more definitive, but I don't understand the fundamental pattern that triggers an explosion in the edge weight sums. The buggy code is duplicated within this file. I'll colapse them into a single implementation in a subsequent commit. llvm-svn: 144526
-
Jakob Stoklund Olesen authored
llvm-svn: 144517
-
Chandler Carruth authored
get loop info structures associated with them, and so we need some way to make forward progress selecting and placing basic blocks. The technique used here is pretty brutal -- it just scans the list of blocks looking for the first unplaced candidate. It keeps placing blocks like this until the CFG becomes tractable. The cost is somewhat unfortunate, it requires allocating a vector of all basic block pointers eagerly. I have some ideas about how to simplify and optimize this, but I'm trying to get the logic correct first. Thanks to Benjamin Kramer for the reduced test case out of GCC. Sadly there are other bugs that GCC is tickling that I'm reducing and working on now. llvm-svn: 144516
-
Jakob Stoklund Olesen authored
It's more natural to use the actual end points. llvm-svn: 144515
-
- Nov 13, 2011
-
-
Chandler Carruth authored
when I was reading through the code for style. llvm-svn: 144513
-
Jakob Stoklund Olesen authored
This makes no difference for normal defs, but early clobber dead defs now look like: [Slot_EarlyClobber; Slot_Dead) instead of: [Slot_EarlyClobber; Slot_Register). Live ranges for normal dead defs look like: [Slot_Register; Slot_Dead) as before. llvm-svn: 144512
-
Jakob Stoklund Olesen authored
llvm-svn: 144507
-
Chandler Carruth authored
when we fail to place all the blocks of a loop. Currently this is happening for unnatural loops, and this logic helps more immediately point to the problem. llvm-svn: 144504
-