the loops in a function, and teach LICM to work in the presance of
LCSSA.
Previously, LCSSA was a loop pass. That made passes requiring it also be
loop passes and unable to depend on function analysis passes easily. It
also caused outer loops to have a different "canonical" form from inner
loops during analysis. Instead, we go into LCSSA form and preserve it
through the loop pass manager run.
Note that this has the same problem as LoopSimplify that prevents
enabling its verification -- loop passes which run at the end of the loop
pass manager and don't preserve these are valid, but the subsequent loop
pass runs of outer loops that do preserve this pass trigger too much
verification and fail because the inner loop no longer verifies.
The other problem this exposed is that LICM was completely unable to
handle LCSSA form. It didn't preserve it and it actually would give up
on moving instructions in many cases when they were used by an LCSSA phi
node. I've taught LICM to support detecting LCSSA-form PHI nodes and to
hoist and sink around them. This may actually let LICM fire
significantly more because we put everything into LCSSA form to rotate
the loop before running LICM. =/ Now LICM should handle that fine and
preserve it correctly. The down side is that LICM has to require LCSSA
in order to preserve it. This is just a fact of life for LCSSA. It's
entirely possible we should completely remove LCSSA from the optimizer.
The test updates are essentially accomodating LCSSA phi nodes in the
output of LICM, and the fact that we now completely sink every
instruction in ashr-crash below the loop bodies prior to unrolling.
With this change, LCSSA is computed only three times in the pass
pipeline. One of them could be removed (and potentially a SCEV run and
a separate LoopPassManager entirely!) if we had a LoopPass variant of
InstCombine that ran InstCombine on the loop body but refused to combine
away LCSSA PHI nodes. Currently, this also prevents loop unrolling from
being in the same loop pass manager is rotate, LICM, and unswitch.
There is one thing that I *really* don't like -- preserving LCSSA in
LICM is quite expensive. We end up having to re-run LCSSA twice for some
loops after LICM runs because LICM can undo LCSSA both in the current
loop and the parent loop. I don't really see good solutions to this
other than to completely move away from LCSSA and using tools like
SSAUpdater instead.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@200067 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Sweep the codebase for common typos. Includes some changes to visible function
names that were misspelt.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@200018 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Argument promotion can replace an argument of a call with an alloca. This
requires clearing the tail marker as it is very likely that the callee is now
using an alloca in the caller.
This fixes pr14710.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@199909 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
function and a FunctionPass.
This has many benefits. The motivating use case was to be able to
compute function analysis passes *after* running LoopSimplify (to avoid
invalidating them) and then to run other passes which require
LoopSimplify. Specifically passes like unrolling and vectorization are
critical to wire up to BranchProbabilityInfo and BlockFrequencyInfo so
that they can be profile aware. For the LoopVectorize pass the only
things in the way are LoopSimplify and LCSSA. This fixes LoopSimplify
and LCSSA is next on my list.
There are also a bunch of other benefits of doing this:
- It is now very feasible to make more passes *preserve* LoopSimplify
because they can simply run it after changing a loop. Because
subsequence passes can assume LoopSimplify is preserved we can reduce
the runs of this pass to the times when we actually mutate a loop
structure.
- The new pass manager should be able to more easily support loop passes
factored in this way.
- We can at long, long last observe that LoopSimplify is preserved
across SCEV. This *halves* the number of times we run LoopSimplify!!!
Now, getting here wasn't trivial. First off, the interfaces used by
LoopSimplify are all over the map regarding how analysis are updated. We
end up with weird "pass" parameters as a consequence. I'll try to clean
at least some of this up later -- I'll have to have it all clean for the
new pass manager.
Next up I discovered a really frustrating bug. LoopUnroll *claims* to
preserve LoopSimplify. That's actually a lie. But the way the
LoopPassManager ends up running the passes, it always ran LoopSimplify
on the unrolled-into loop, rectifying this oversight before any
verification could kick in and point out that in fact nothing was
preserved. So I've added code to the unroller to *actually* simplify the
surrounding loop when it succeeds at unrolling.
The only functional change in the test suite is that we now catch a case
that was previously missed because SCEV and other loop transforms see
their containing loops as simplified and thus don't miss some
opportunities. One test case has been converted to check that we catch
this case rather than checking that we miss it but at least don't get
the wrong answer.
Note that I have #if-ed out all of the verification logic in
LoopSimplify! This is a temporary workaround while extracting these bits
from the LoopPassManager. Currently, there is no way to have a pass in
the LoopPassManager which preserves LoopSimplify along with one which
does not. The LPM will try to verify on each loop in the nest that
LoopSimplify holds but the now-Function-pass cannot distinguish what
loop is being verified and so must try to verify all of them. The inner
most loop is clearly no longer simplified as there is a pass which
didn't even *attempt* to preserve it. =/ Once I get LCSSA out (and maybe
LoopVectorize and some other fixes) I'll be able to re-enable this check
and catch any places where we are still failing to preserve
LoopSimplify. If this causes problems I can back this out and try to
commit *all* of this at once, but so far this seems to work and allow
much more incremental progress.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@199884 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This logic hadn't been updated to handle FastMathFlags, and it took me a while to detect it because it doesn't show up in a simple search for CreateFAdd.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@199629 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
intrinsics.
Reported on the list by Evan with a couple of attempts to fix, but it
took a while to dig down to the root cause. There are two overlapping
bugs here, both centering around the circumstance of discovering
a memcpy operand which is known to be completely outside the bounds of
the alloca.
First, we need to kill the *other* side of the memcpy if it was added to
this alloca. Otherwise we'll factor it into our slicing and try to
rewrite it even though we know for a fact that it is dead. This is made
more tricky because we can visit the sides in either order. So we have
to both kill the other side and skip instructions marked as dead. The
latter really should be goodness in every case, but here is a matter of
correctness.
Second, we need to actually remove the *uses* of the alloca by the
memcpy when queuing it for later deletion. Otherwise it may still be
using the alloca when we go to promote it (if the rewrite re-uses the
existing alloca instruction). Do this by factoring out the
use-clobbering used when for nixing a Phi argument and re-using it
across the operands of a to-be-deleted instruction.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@199590 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
a reduction.
Really. Under certain circumstances (the use list of an instruction has to be
set up right - hence the extra pass in the test case) we would not recognize
when a value in a potential reduction cycle was used multiple times by the
reduction cycle.
Fixes PR18526.
radar://15851149
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@199570 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
There has been an old FIXME to find the right cut-off for when it's worth
analyzing and potentially transforming a switch to a lookup table.
The switches always have two or more cases. I could not measure any speed-up
by transforming a switch with two cases. A switch with three cases gets a nice
speed-up, and I couldn't measure any compile-time regression, so I think this
is the right threshold.
In a Clang self-host, this causes 480 new switches to be transformed,
and reduces the final binary size with 8 KB.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@199294 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
case when the lookup table doesn't have any holes.
This means we can build a lookup table for switches like this:
switch (x) {
case 0: return 1;
case 1: return 2;
case 2: return 3;
case 3: return 4;
default: exit(1);
}
The default case doesn't yield a constant result here, but that doesn't matter,
since a default result is only necessary for filling holes in the lookup table,
and this table doesn't have any holes.
This makes us transform 505 more switches in a clang bootstrap, and shaves 164 KB
off the resulting clang binary.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@199025 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
1- Use the line_iterator class to read profile files.
2- Allow comments in profile file. Lines starting with '#'
are completely ignored while reading the profile.
3- Add parsing support for discriminators and indirect call samples.
Our external profiler can emit more profile information that we are
currently not handling. This patch does not add new functionality to
support this information, but it allows profile files to provide it.
I will add actual support later on (for at least one of these
features, I need support for DWARF discriminators in Clang).
A sample line may contain the following additional information:
Discriminator. This is used if the sampled program was compiled with
DWARF discriminator support
(http://wiki.dwarfstd.org/index.php?title=Path_Discriminators). This
is currently only emitted by GCC and we just ignore it.
Potential call targets and samples. If present, this line contains a
call instruction. This models both direct and indirect calls. Each
called target is listed together with the number of samples. For
example,
130: 7 foo:3 bar:2 baz:7
The above means that at relative line offset 130 there is a call
instruction that calls one of foo(), bar() and baz(). With baz()
being the relatively more frequent call target.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2355
4- Simplify format of profile input file.
This implements earlier suggestions to simplify the format of the
sample profile file. The symbol table is not necessary and function
profiles do not need to know the number of samples in advance.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2419
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@198973 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This adds a propagation heuristic to convert instruction samples
into branch weights. It implements a similar heuristic to the one
implemented by Dehao Chen on GCC.
The propagation proceeds in 3 phases:
1- Assignment of block weights. All the basic blocks in the function
are initial assigned the same weight as their most frequently
executed instruction.
2- Creation of equivalence classes. Since samples may be missing from
blocks, we can fill in the gaps by setting the weights of all the
blocks in the same equivalence class to the same weight. To compute
the concept of equivalence, we use dominance and loop information.
Two blocks B1 and B2 are in the same equivalence class if B1
dominates B2, B2 post-dominates B1 and both are in the same loop.
3- Propagation of block weights into edges. This uses a simple
propagation heuristic. The following rules are applied to every
block B in the CFG:
- If B has a single predecessor/successor, then the weight
of that edge is the weight of the block.
- If all the edges are known except one, and the weight of the
block is already known, the weight of the unknown edge will
be the weight of the block minus the sum of all the known
edges. If the sum of all the known edges is larger than B's weight,
we set the unknown edge weight to zero.
- If there is a self-referential edge, and the weight of the block is
known, the weight for that edge is set to the weight of the block
minus the weight of the other incoming edges to that block (if
known).
Since this propagation is not guaranteed to finalize for every CFG, we
only allow it to proceed for a limited number of iterations (controlled
by -sample-profile-max-propagate-iterations). It currently uses the same
GCC default of 100.
Before propagation starts, the pass builds (for each block) a list of
unique predecessors and successors. This is necessary to handle
identical edges in multiway branches. Since we visit all blocks and all
edges of the CFG, it is cleaner to build these lists once at the start
of the pass.
Finally, the patch fixes the computation of relative line locations.
The profiler emits lines relative to the function header. To discover
it, we traverse the compilation unit looking for the subprogram
corresponding to the function. The line number of that subprogram is the
line where the function begins. That becomes line zero for all the
relative locations.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@198972 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
for (i = 0; i < N; ++i)
A[i * Stride1] += B[i * Stride2];
We take loops like this and check that the symbolic strides 'Strided1/2' are one
and drop to the scalar loop if they are not.
This is currently disabled by default and hidden behind the flag
'enable-mem-access-versioning'.
radar://13075509
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@198950 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This doesn't seem to have actually broken anything. It was paranoia
on my part. Trying again now that bots are more stable.
This is a follow up of the r198338 commit that added truncates for
lcssa phi nodes. Sinking the truncates below the phis cleans up the
loop and simplifies subsequent analysis within the indvars pass.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@198678 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This is a follow up of the r198338 commit that added truncates for
lcssa phi nodes. Sinking the truncates below the phis cleans up the
loop and simplifies subsequent analysis within the indvars pass.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@198654 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Now with a fix for PR18384: ValueHandleBase::ValueIsDeleted.
We need to invalidate SCEV's loop info when we delete a block, even if no values are hoisted.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@198631 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This commit was the source of crasher PR18384:
While deleting: label %for.cond127
An asserting value handle still pointed to this value!
UNREACHABLE executed at llvm/lib/IR/Value.cpp:671!
Reverting to get the builders green, feel free to re-land after fixing up.
(Renato has a handy isolated repro if you need it.)
This reverts commit r198478.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@198503 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
getSCEV for an ashr instruction creates an intermediate zext
expression when it truncates its operand.
The operand is initially inside the loop, so the narrow zext
expression has a non-loop-invariant loop disposition.
LoopSimplify then runs on an outer loop, hoists the ashr operand, and
properly invalidate the SCEVs that are mapped to value.
The SCEV expression for the ashr is now an AddRec with the hoisted
value as the now loop-invariant start value.
The LoopDisposition of this wide value was properly invalidated during
LoopSimplify.
However, if we later get the ashr SCEV again, we again try to create
the intermediate zext expression. We get the same SCEV that we did
earlier, and it is still cached because it was never mapped to a
Value. When we try to create a new AddRec we abort because we're using
the old non-loop-invariant LoopDisposition.
I don't have a solution for this other than to clear LoopDisposition
when LoopSimplify hoists things.
I think the long-term strategy should be to perform LoopSimplify on
all loops before computing SCEV and before running any loop opts on
individual loops. It's possible we may want to rerun LoopSimplify on
individual loops, but it should rarely do anything, so rarely require
invalidating SCEV.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@198478 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
The loop rerolling pass was failing with an assertion failure from a
failed cast on loops like this:
void foo(int *A, int *B, int m, int n) {
for (int i = m; i < n; i+=4) {
A[i+0] = B[i+0] * 4;
A[i+1] = B[i+1] * 4;
A[i+2] = B[i+2] * 4;
A[i+3] = B[i+3] * 4;
}
}
The code was casting the SCEV-expanded code for the new
induction variable to a phi-node. When the loop had a non-constant
lower bound, the SCEV expander would end the code expansion with an
add insted of a phi node and the cast would fail.
It looks like the cast to a phi node was only needed to get the
induction variable value coming from the backedge to compute the end
of loop condition. This patch changes the loop reroller to compare
the induction variable to the number of times the backedge is taken
instead of the iteration count of the loop. In other words, we stop
the loop when the current value of the induction variable ==
IterationCount-1. Previously, the comparison was comparing the
induction variable value from the next iteration == IterationCount.
This problem only seems to occur on 32-bit targets. For some reason,
the loop is not rerolled on 64-bit targets.
PR18290
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@198425 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
cycles
This allows the value equality check to work even if we don't have a dominator
tree. Also add some more comments.
I was worried about compile time impacts and did not implement reachability but
used the dominance check in the initial patch. The trade-off was that the
dominator tree was required.
The llvm utility function isPotentiallyReachable cuts off the recursive search
after 32 visits. Testing did not show any compile time regressions showing my
worries unjustfied.
No compile time or performance regressions at O3 -flto -mavx on test-suite +
externals.
Addresses review comments from r198290.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@198400 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
When widening an IV to remove s/zext, we generally try to eliminate
the original narrow IV. However, LCSSA phi nodes outside the loop were
still using the original IV. Clean this up more aggressively to avoid
redundancy in generated code.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@198338 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
When there are cycles in the value graph we have to be careful interpreting
"Value*" identity as "value" equivalence. We interpret the value of a phi node
as the value of its operands.
When we check for value equivalence now we make sure that the "Value*" dominates
all cycles (phis).
%0 = phi [%noaliasval, %addr2]
%l = load %ptr
%addr1 = gep @a, 0, %l
%addr2 = gep @a, 0, (%l + 1)
store %ptr ...
Before this patch we would return NoAlias for (%0, %addr1) which is wrong
because the value of the load is from different iterations of the loop.
Tested on x86_64 -mavx at O3 and O3 -flto with no performance or compile time
regressions.
PR18068
radar://15653794
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@198290 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
widespread glibc bugs.
The glibc implementation of exp10 has a very serious precision bug in
version 2.15 (and older versions). This is still very widely used (the
current Ubuntu LTS for example uses it) and so it isn't reasonable to
make transforms that produce these functions. This fixes many
miscompiles introduced when we started transforming pow(10.0, ...) into
exp10, and it may have fixed other latent miscompiles where exp10
provided sufficient precision but exp10f did not.
This is all really horrible. The primary bug has been fixed for over
a year and glibc 2.18 works correctly for the test cases I have, but it
will be 2017 before the LTS using 2.15 is no longer supported by Ubuntu
(and thus reasonable for folks to be relying on). =[ We're either going
to need to live without these optimizations, or find a way to switch
behavior more dynamically than using simply the fact that the OS is
"Linux".
To make matters worse, there appears to be significant testing and
fixing of numerous other bugs in the exp10 family of functions right now
in glibc. While those haven't been causing problems I've seen in the
wild, it gives me concerns that we may need to wait until an even later
release of glibc before we can reliably transform code into exp10.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@198093 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Split sadd.with.overflow into add + sadd.with.overflow to allow
analysis and optimization. This should ideally be done after
InstCombine, which can perform code motion (eventually indvars should
run after all canonical instcombines). We want ISEL to recombine the
add and the check, at least on x86.
This is currently under an option for reducing live induction
variables: -liv-reduce. The next step is reducing liveness of IVs that
are live out of the overflow check paths. Once the related
optimizations are fully developed, reviewed and tested, I do expect
this to become default.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@197926 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
If the Scalarizer scalarized a vector PHI but could not scalarize
all uses of it, it would insert a series of insertelements to reconstruct
the vector PHI value from the scalar ones. The problem was that it would
emit these insertelements immediately after the PHI, even if there were
other PHIs after it.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@197909 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
