Summary:
This is analogous to r256079, which removed an overly strong assertion, and
r256812, which simplified the code by replacing three conditionals by one.
Reviewers: reames
Subscribers: sanjoy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16019
llvm-svn: 257250
This patch teaches rewrite-statepoints-for-gc to relocate vector-of-pointers directly rather than trying to split them. This builds on the recent lowering/IR changes to allow vector typed gc.relocates.
The motivation for this is that we recently found a bug in the vector splitting code where depending on visit order, a vector might not be relocated at some safepoint. Specifically, the bug is that the splitting code wasn't updating the side tables (live vector) of other safepoints. As a result, a vector which was live at two safepoints might not be updated at one of them. However, if you happened to visit safepoints in post order over the dominator tree, everything worked correctly. Weirdly, it turns out that post order is actually an incredibly common order to visit instructions in in practice. Frustratingly, I have not managed to write a test case which actually hits this. I can only reproduce it in large IR files produced by actual applications.
Rather than continue to make this code more complicated, we can remove all of the complexity by just representing the relocation of the entire vector natively in the IR.
At the moment, the new functionality is hidden behind a flag. To use this code, you need to pass "-rs4gc-split-vector-values=0". Once I have a chance to stress test with this option and get feedback from other users, my plan is to flip the default and remove the original splitting code. I would just remove it now, but given the rareness of the bug, I figured it was better to leave it in place until the new approach has been stress tested.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15982
llvm-svn: 257244
This remove the need for locking when deleting a function.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15988
From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com>
llvm-svn: 257139
At the moment, this is essentially a diangostic option so that I can start collecting failing test cases, but we will eventually migrate to removing the vector splitting code entirely.
llvm-svn: 257015
Summary:
Previously there were three conditionals, checking for global
variables, undef values and everything constant except these two, all three
returning the same value. This commit replaces them by one conditional.
Reviewers: reames
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15818
llvm-svn: 256812
Summary:
This commit renames GCRelocateOperands to GCRelocateInst and makes it an
intrinsic wrapper, similar to e.g. MemCpyInst. Also, all users of
GCRelocateOperands were changed to use the new intrinsic wrapper instead.
Reviewers: sanjoy, reames
Subscribers: reames, sanjoy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15762
llvm-svn: 256811
Summary:
Previously, only the outer (last) bitcast was rematerialized, resulting in a
use of the unrelocated inner (first) bitcast after the statepoint. See the
test case for an example.
Reviewers: igor-laevsky, reames
Subscribers: reames, alex, llvm-commits, sanjoy
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15789
llvm-svn: 256520
Summary: This patch changes gc.statepoint intrinsic's return type to token type instead of i32 type. Using token types could prevent LLVM to merge different gc.statepoint nodes into PHI nodes and cause further problems with gc relocations. The patch also changes the way on how gc.relocate and gc.result look for their corresponding gc.statepoint on unwind path. The current implementation uses the selector value extracted from a { i8*, i32 } landingpad as a hook to find the gc.statepoint, while the patch directly uses a token type landingpad (http://reviews.llvm.org/D15405) to find the gc.statepoint.
Reviewers: sanjoy, JosephTremoulet, pgavlin, igor-laevsky, mjacob
Subscribers: reames, mjacob, sanjoy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15662
llvm-svn: 256443
Reasons:
1) The existing form was a form of false generality. None of the implemented GCStrategies use anything other than a type. Its becoming more and more clear we're going to need some type of strong GC pointer in the type system and we shouldn't pretend otherwise at this point.
2) The API was awkward when applied to vectors-of-pointers. The old one could have been made to work, but calling isGCManagedPointer(Ty->getScalarType()) is much cleaner than the Value alternatives.
3) The rewriting implementation effectively assumes the type based predicate as well. We should be consistent.
llvm-svn: 256312
Previously, "%" + name of the value was printed for each derived and base
pointer. This is correct for instructions, but wrong for e.g. globals.
llvm-svn: 256305
Summary:
These were deprecated 11 months ago when a generic
llvm.experimental.gc.result intrinsic, which works for all types, was added.
Reviewers: sanjoy, reames
Subscribers: sanjoy, chenli, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15719
llvm-svn: 256262
Summary:
Previously, RS4GC crashed in CreateGCRelocates() because it assumed
that every base is also in the array of live variables, which isn't true if a
live variable has a constant base.
This change fixes the crash by making sure CreateGCRelocates() won't try to
relocate a live variable with a constant base. This would be unnecessary
anyway because anything with a constant base won't move.
Reviewers: reames
Subscribers: llvm-commits, sanjoy
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15556
llvm-svn: 256252
As shown by the included test case, it's reasonable to end up with constant references during base pointer calculation. The code actually handled this case just fine, we only had the assert to help isolate problems under the belief that constant references shouldn't be present in IR generated by managed frontends. This turned out to be wrong on two fronts: 1) Manual Jacobs is working on a language with constant references, and b) we found a case where the optimizer does create them in practice.
llvm-svn: 256079
Inspired by the bug reported in 25846. Whatever we end up doing about that one, the value handle change is a generally good one since it will help catch this type of mistake more quickly.
Patch by: Manuel Jacob
llvm-svn: 255984
A large number of loop utility functions take a `Pass *` and reach
into it to find out which analyses to preserve. There are a number of
problems with this:
- The APIs have access to pretty well any Pass state they want, so
it's hard to tell what they may or may not do.
- Other APIs have copied these and pass around a `Pass *` even though
they don't even use it. Some of these just hand a nullptr to the API
since the callers don't even have a pass available.
- Passes in the new pass manager don't work like the current ones, so
the APIs can't be used as is there.
Instead, we should explicitly thread the analysis results that we
actually care about through these APIs. This is both simpler and more
reusable.
llvm-svn: 255669
We should remove noalias along with dereference and dereference_or_null attributes
because statepoint could potentially touch the entire heap including noalias objects.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D14032
llvm-svn: 251333
`normalizeForInvokeSafepoint` in RewriteStatepointsForGC.cpp, as it is
written today, deals with `gc.relocate` and `gc.result` uses of a
statepoint equally well. This change documents this fact and adds a
test case.
There is no functional change here -- only documentation of existing
functionality.
llvm-svn: 250784
The `"statepoint-id"` and `"statepoint-num-patch-bytes"` attributes are
used solely to determine properties of the `gc.statepoint` being
created. Once the `gc.statepoint` is in place, these should be removed.
llvm-svn: 250491
Summary:
This is a step towards using operand bundles to carry deopt state till
RewriteStatepointsForGC. The change adds a flag to
RewriteStatepointsForGC that teaches it to pick up deopt state from a
`"deopt"` operand bundle attached to the `call` or `invoke` it is
wrapping.
The command line flag added, `-rs4gc-use-deopt-bundles`, will only exist
for a short while. Once we are able to pipe deopt bundle state through
the full optimization pipeline without problems, we will "constant fold"
`-rs4gc-use-deopt-bundles` to `true`.
Reviewers: swaroop.sridhar, reames
Subscribers: llvm-commits, sanjoy
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13372
llvm-svn: 250489
Remove remaining `ilist_iterator` implicit conversions from
LLVMScalarOpts.
This change exposed some scary behaviour in
lib/Transforms/Scalar/SCCP.cpp around line 1770. This patch changes a
call from `Function::begin()` to `&Function::front()`, since the return
was immediately being passed into another function that takes a
`Function*`. `Function::front()` started to assert, since the function
was empty. Note that `Function::end()` does not point at a legal
`Function*` -- it points at an `ilist_half_node` -- so the other
function was getting garbage before. (I added the missing check for
`Function::isDeclaration()`.)
Otherwise, no functionality change intended.
llvm-svn: 250211
Summary:
These non-semantic changes will help make a later change adding
support for deopt operand bundles more streamlined.
Reviewers: reames, swaroop.sridhar
Subscribers: sanjoy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13491
llvm-svn: 249779
Summary: Use `const auto &` instead of `auto` in `makeStatepointExplicit`.
Reviewers: reames, swaroop.sridhar
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13454
llvm-svn: 249776
I don't think this assert adds much value, and removing it and related
variables avoids an "unused variable" warning in release builds.
llvm-svn: 249511
Summary:
A series of cosmetic cleanup changes to RewriteStatepointsForGC:
- Rename variables to LLVM style
- Remove some redundant asserts
- Remove an unsued `Pass *` parameter
- Remove unnecessary variables
- Use C++11 idioms where applicable
- Pass CallSite by value, not reference
Reviewers: reames, swaroop.sridhar
Subscribers: llvm-commits, sanjoy
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13370
llvm-svn: 249508
The assertion was weaker than it should be and gave the impression we're growing the number of base defining values being considered during the fixed point interation. That's not true. The tighter form of the assert is useful documentation.
llvm-svn: 247221
This change is simply enhancing the existing inference algorithm to handle insertelement instructions by conservatively inserting a new instruction to propagate the vector of associated base pointers. In the process, I'm ripping out the peephole optimizations which mostly helped cover the fact this hadn't been done.
Note that most of the newly inserted nodes will be nearly immediately removed by the post insertion optimization pass introduced in 246718. Arguably, we should be trying harder to avoid the malloc traffic here, but I'd rather get the code correct, then worry about compile time.
Unlike previous extensions of the algorithm to handle more case, I discovered the existing code was causing miscompiles in some cases. In particular, we had an implicit assumption that the peephole covered *all* insert element instructions, so if we had a value directly based on a insert element the peephole didn't cover, we proceeded as if it were a base anyways. Not good. I believe we had the same issue with shufflevector which is why I adjusted the predicate for them as well.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12583
llvm-svn: 247210
Previously, the base pointer algorithm wasn't deterministic. The core fixed point was (of course), but we were inserting new nodes and optimizing them in an order which was unspecified and variable. We'd somewhat hacked around this for testing by sorting by value name, but that doesn't solve the general determinism problem.
Instead, we can use the order of traversal over the def/use graph to give us a single consistent ordering. Today, this is a DFS order, but the exact order doesn't mater provided it's deterministic for a given input.
(Q: It is safe to rely on a deterministic order of operands right?)
Note that this only fixes the determinism within a single inference step. The inference step is currently invoked many times in a non-deterministic order. That's a future change in the sequence. :)
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12640
llvm-svn: 247208
As a first step towards a new implementation of the base pointer inference algorithm, introduce an abstraction for BDVs, strengthen the assertions around them, and rewrite the BDV relation code in terms of the abstraction which includes an explicit notion of whether the BDV is also a base. The later is motivated by the fact we had a bug where insertelement was always assumed to be a base pointer even though the BDV code knew it wasn't. The strengthened assertions in this patch would have caught that bug.
The next step will be to separate the DefiningValueMap into a BDV use list cache (entirely within findBasePointers) and a base pointer cache. Having the former will allow me to use a deterministic visit order when visiting BDVs in the inference algorithm and remove a bunch of ordering related hacks. Before actually doing the last step, I'm likely going to extend the lattice with a 'BaseN' (seen only base inputs) state so that I can kill the post process optimization step.
Phabricator Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12608
llvm-svn: 246809
The visit order being used in the base pointer inference algorithm is currently non-deterministic. When working on http://reviews.llvm.org/D12583, I discovered that we were relying on a peephole optimization to get deterministic ordering in one of the test cases.
This change is intented to let me test and land http://reviews.llvm.org/D12583. The current code will not be long lived. I'm starting to investigate a rewrite of the algorithm which will combine the post-process step into the initial algorithm and make the visit order determistic. Before doing that, I wanted to make sure the existing code was complete and the test were stable. Hopefully, patches should be up for review for the new algorithm this week or early next.
llvm-svn: 246801
Fix a bug in change 246133. I didn't handle the case where we had a cycle in the use graph and could add an instruction we were about to erase back on to the worklist. Oddly, I have not been able to write a small test case for this, even with the AssertingVH added. I have confirmed the basic theory for the fix on a large failing example, but all attempts to reduce that to something appropriate for a test case have failed.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12575
llvm-svn: 246718
