replicating the code for every place it's needed, we instead generate a function
that does that for us. This function is local to the executable, so there
shouldn't be any writing violations.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@157564 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
making it stronger and more sane.
Delete the code from tblgen that produced the old code.
Besides being a path forward in intrinsic sanity, this also eliminates a bunch of
machine generated code that was compiled into Function.o
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@157545 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
definition in the map before calling itself to retrieve the
DIE for the declaration. Without this change, if this causes
getOrCreateSubprogramDIE to be recursively called on the definition,
it will create multiple DIEs for that definition. Fixes PR12831.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@157541 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
The only missing part is insert(), which uses a pair of parameters and I haven't
figured out how to convert it to rvalue references. It's now possible to use a
DenseMap with std::unique_ptr values :)
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@157539 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This is obviosly right but I don't see how to do this with proper vector
iterators without building a horrible mess of workarounds.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@157526 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
SimplifyCFG tends to form a lot of 2-3 case switches when merging branches. Move
the most likely condition to the front so it is checked first and the others can
be skipped. This is currently not as effective as it could be because SimplifyCFG
destroys profiling metadata when merging branches and switches. Merging branch
weight metadata is tricky though.
This code touches at most 3 cases so I didn't use a proper sorting algorithm.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@157521 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
then it doesn't alter the instructions composing it, however it would continue
to move the instructions to just before the expression root. Ensure it doesn't
move them either, so now it really does nothing if there is nothing to do. That
commit also ensured that nsw etc flags weren't cleared if the expression was not
being changed. Tweak this a bit so that it doesn't clear flags on the initial
part of a computation either if that part didn't change but later bits did.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@157518 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
are passed in. However, those arguments may be in a write-protected area, as far
as the runtime library is concerned. For instance, the data could be placed into
a 'linkedit' section, which isn't writable. Emit the code from
llvm_gcda_increment_indirect_counter directly into the function instead.
Note: The code for this is ugly, and can lead to bloat. We should look into
simplifying this code instead of having all of these branches.
<rdar://problem/11181370>
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@157505 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
to pass around a struct instead of a large set of individual values. This
cleans up the interface and allows more information to be added to the struct
for future targets without requiring changes to each and every target.
NV_CONTRIB
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@157479 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
with arbitrary topologies (previously it would give up when hitting a diamond
in the use graph for example). The testcase from PR12764 is now reduced from
a pile of additions to the optimal 1617*%x0+208. In doing this I changed the
previous strategy of dropping all uses for expression leaves to one of dropping
all but one use. This works out more neatly (but required a bunch of tweaks)
and is also safer: some recently fixed bugs during recursive linearization were
because the linearization code thinks it completely owns a node if it has no uses
outside the expression it is linearizing. But if the node was also in another
expression that had been linearized (and thus all uses of the node from that
expression dropped) then the conclusion that it is completely owned by the
expression currently being linearized is wrong. Keeping one use from within each
linearized expression avoids this kind of mistake.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@157467 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
