a bit surprising, as the class is almost entirely abstracted away from
any particular IR, however it encodes the comparsion predicates which
mutate ranges as ICmp predicate codes. This is reasonable as they're
used for both instructions and constants. Thus, it belongs in the IR
library with instructions and constants.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@202838 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This reapplies r197438 and fixes the link-time circular dependency between
IR and Support. The fix consists in moving the diagnostic support into IR.
The patch adds a new LLVMContext::diagnose that can be used to communicate to
the front-end, if any, that something of interest happened.
The diagnostics are supported by a new abstraction, the DiagnosticInfo class.
The base class contains the following information:
- The kind of the report: What this is about.
- The severity of the report: How bad this is.
This patch also adds 2 classes:
- DiagnosticInfoInlineAsm: For inline asm reporting. Basically, this diagnostic
will be used to switch to the new diagnostic API for LLVMContext::emitError.
- DiagnosticStackSize: For stack size reporting. Comes as a replacement of the
hard coded warning in PEI.
This patch also features dynamic diagnostic identifiers. In other words plugins
can use this infrastructure for their own diagnostics (for more details, see
getNextAvailablePluginDiagnosticKind).
This patch introduces a new DiagnosticHandlerTy and a new DiagnosticContext in
the LLVMContext that should be set by the front-end to be able to map these
diagnostics in its own system.
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2376
<rdar://problem/15515174>
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@197508 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
more smarts in it. This is where most of the interesting logic that used
to live in the implicit-scheduling-hackery of the old pass manager will
live.
Like the previous commits, note that this is a very early prototype!
I expect substantial changes before this is ready to use.
The core of the design is the following:
- We have an AnalysisManager which can be used across a series of
passes over a module.
- The code setting up a pass pipeline registers the analyses available
with the manager.
- Individual transform passes can check than an analysis manager
provides the analyses they require in order to fail-fast.
- There is *no* implicit registration or scheduling.
- Analysis passes are different from other passes: they produce an
analysis result that is cached and made available via the analysis
manager.
- Cached results are invalidated automatically by the pass managers.
- When a transform pass requests an analysis result, either the analysis
is run to produce the result or a cached result is provided.
There are a few aspects of this design that I *know* will change in
subsequent commits:
- Currently there is no "preservation" system, that needs to be added.
- All of the analysis management should move up to the analysis library.
- The analysis management needs to support at least SCC passes. Maybe
loop passes. Living in the analysis library will facilitate this.
- Need support for analyses which are *both* module and function passes.
- Need support for pro-actively running module analyses to have cached
results within a function pass manager.
- Need a clear design for "immutable" passes.
- Need support for requesting cached results when available and not
re-running the pass even if that would be necessary.
- Need more thorough testing of all of this infrastructure.
There are other aspects that I view as open questions I'm hoping to
resolve as I iterate a bit on the infrastructure, and especially as
I start writing actual passes against this.
- Should we have separate management layers for function, module, and
SCC analyses? I think "yes", but I'm not yet ready to switch the code.
Adding SCC support will likely resolve this definitively.
- How should the 'require' functionality work? Should *that* be the only
way to request results to ensure that passes always require things?
- How should preservation work?
- Probably some other things I'm forgetting. =]
Look forward to more patches in shorter order now that this is in place.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@194538 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
give the files a legacy prefix in the right directory. Use forwarding
headers in the old locations to paper over the name change for most
clients during the transitional period.
No functionality changed here! This is just clearing some space to
reduce renaming churn later on with a new system.
Even when the new stuff starts to go in, it is going to be hidden behind
a flag and off-by-default as it is still WIP and under development.
This patch is specifically designed so that very little out-of-tree code
has to change. I'm going to work as hard as I can to keep that the case.
Only direct forward declarations of the PassManager class are impacted
by this change.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@194324 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Aside from moving the actual files, this patch only updates the build
system and the source file comments under lib/... that are relevant.
I'll be updating other docs and other files in smaller subsequnet
commits.
While I've tried to test this, but it is entirely possible that there
will still be some build system fallout.
Also, note that I've not changed the library name itself: libLLVMCore.a
is still the library name. I'd be interested in others' opinions about
whether we should rename this as well (I think we should, just not sure
what it might break)
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@171359 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
