Sooooo many of these had incorrect or strange main module includes.
I have manually inspected all of these, and fixed the main module
include to be the nearest plausible thing I could find. If you own or
care about any of these source files, I encourage you to take some time
and check that these edits were sensible. I can't have broken anything
(I strictly added headers, and reordered them, never removed), but they
may not be the headers you'd really like to identify as containing the
API being implemented.
Many forward declarations and missing includes were added to a header
files to allow them to parse cleanly when included first. The main
module rule does in fact have its merits. =]
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@169131 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
more information for dependences between
instructions that don't share a common loop.
Updated the test results appropriately.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@168965 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
there's no possible loo-independent dependence, then there's no
dependence.
Updated all test result appropriately.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@168719 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
If the Src and Dst are the same instruction,
no loop-independent dependence is possible,
so we force the PossiblyLoopIndependent flag to false.
The test case results are updated appropriately.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@168678 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
analysis. Better is to look for cases with useful GEPs and use them
when possible. When a pair of useful GEPs is not available, use the
raw SCEVs directly. This approach supports better analysis of pointer
dereferencing.
In parallel, all the test cases are updated appropriately.
Cases where we have a store to *B++ can now be analyzed!
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@168474 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
so that I can (someday) call SE->getSCEV without complaint.
No semantic change intended.
Patch from Preston Briggs <preston.briggs@gmail.com>.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@168391 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
DependenceAnalysis.cpp:1164:32: warning: implicit truncation from 'int' to bitfield changes value from -5 to 3
[-Wconstant-conversion]
Result.DV[Level].Direction &= ~Dependence::DVEntry::GT;
^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Patch from Preston Briggs <preston.briggs@gmail.com>.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@165784 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Patch from Preston Briggs <preston.briggs@gmail.com>.
This is an updated version of the dependence-analysis patch, including an MIV
test based on Banerjee's inequalities.
It's a fairly complete implementation of the paper
Practical Dependence Testing
Gina Goff, Ken Kennedy, and Chau-Wen Tseng
PLDI 1991
It cannot yet propagate constraints between coupled RDIV subscripts (discussed
in Section 5.3.2 of the paper).
It's organized as a FunctionPass with a single entry point that supports testing
for dependence between two instructions in a function. If there's no dependence,
it returns null. If there's a dependence, it returns a pointer to a Dependence
which can be queried about details (what kind of dependence, is it loop
independent, direction and distance vector entries, etc). I haven't included
every imaginable feature, but there's a good selection that should be adequate
for supporting many loop transformations. Of course, it can be extended as
necessary.
Included in the patch file are many test cases, commented with C code showing
the loops and array references.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@165708 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
