Commit Graph

3 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
David Blaikie
7c9c6ed761 [opaque pointer type] Add textual IR support for explicit type parameter to load instruction
Essentially the same as the GEP change in r230786.

A similar migration script can be used to update test cases, though a few more
test case improvements/changes were required this time around: (r229269-r229278)

import fileinput
import sys
import re

pat = re.compile(r"((?:=|:|^)\s*load (?:atomic )?(?:volatile )?(.*?))(| addrspace\(\d+\) *)\*($| *(?:%|@|null|undef|blockaddress|getelementptr|addrspacecast|bitcast|inttoptr|\[\[[a-zA-Z]|\{\{).*$)")

for line in sys.stdin:
  sys.stdout.write(re.sub(pat, r"\1, \2\3*\4", line))

Reviewers: rafael, dexonsmith, grosser

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7649

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@230794 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2015-02-27 21:17:42 +00:00
Hans Wennborg
01e223e92e LowerSwitch: replace unreachable default with popular case destination
SimplifyCFG currently does this transformation, but I'm planning to remove that
to allow other passes, such as this one, to exploit the unreachable default.

This patch takes care to keep track of what case values are unreachable even
after the transformation, allowing for more efficient lowering.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6697

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@226934 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2015-01-23 20:43:51 +00:00
Jim Grosbach
dc2dc390f6 LowerSwitch: track bounding range for the condition tree.
When LowerSwitch transforms a switch instruction into a tree of ifs it
is actually performing a binary search into the various case ranges, to
see if the current value falls into one cases range of values.

So, if we have a program with something like this:

switch (a) {
case 0:
  do0();
  break;
case 1:
  do1();
  break;
case 2:
  do2();
  break;
default:
  break;
}

the code produced is something like this:

  if (a < 1) {
    if (a == 0) {
      do0();
    }
  } else {
    if (a < 2) {
      if (a == 1) {
        do1();
      }
    } else {
      if (a == 2) {
        do2();
      }
    }
  }

This code is inefficient because the check (a == 1) to execute do1() is
not needed.

The reason is that because we already checked that (a >= 1) initially by
checking that also  (a < 2) we basically already inferred that (a == 1)
without the need of an extra basic block spawned to check if actually (a
== 1).

The patch addresses this problem by keeping track of already
checked bounds in the LowerSwitch algorithm, so that when the time
arrives to produce a Leaf Block that checks the equality with the case
value / range the algorithm can decide if that block is really needed
depending on the already checked bounds .

For example, the above with "a = 1" would work like this:

the bounds start as LB: NONE , UB: NONE
as (a < 1) is emitted the bounds for the else path become LB: 1 UB:
NONE. This happens because by failing the test (a < 1) we know that the
value "a" cannot be smaller than 1 if we enter the else branch.
After the emitting the check (a < 2) the bounds in the if branch become
LB: 1 UB: 1. This is because by checking that "a" is smaller than 2 then
the upper bound becomes 2 - 1 = 1.

When it is time to emit the leaf block for "case 1:" we notice that 1
can be squeezed exactly in between the LB and UB, which means that if we
arrived to that block there is no need to emit a block that checks if (a
== 1).

Patch by: Marcello Maggioni <hayarms@gmail.com>

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@211038 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2014-06-16 16:55:20 +00:00