The legacy PM is deprecated, so update a bunch of lit tests running
opt to use the new PM syntax when specifying the pipeline.
In this patch focus has been put on test cases for ConstantMerge,
ConstraintElimination, CorrelatedValuePropagation, GlobalDCE,
GlobalOpt, SCCP, TailCallElim and PredicateInfo.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D114516
This is a second attempt to fix the EXPENSIVE_CHECKS issue that was mentioned In D91661#2875179 by @jroelofs.
(The first attempt was in D105983)
D91661 more or less completely reverted D49126 and by doing so also removed the cleanup logic of the created declarations and calls.
This patch is a replacement for D91661 (which must itself be reverted first). It replaces the custom declaration creation with the
generic version and shows the test impact. It also tracks the number of NamedValues to detect if a new prototype was added instead
of looking at the available users of a prototype.
Reviewed By: jroelofs
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106147
This reverts commit 77080a1eb6061df2dcfae8ac84b85ad4d1e02031.
This change introduced issues detected with EXPENSIVE_CHECKS. Reverting to restore the
needed function cleanup. A next patch will then just improve on the name mangling.
Now that intrinsic name mangling can cope with unnamed types, the custom name mangling in PredicateInfo (introduced by D49126) can be removed.
(See D91250, D48541)
Reviewed By: fhahn
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D91661
Branch/assume conditions in PredicateInfo are currently handled in
a rather ad-hoc manner, with some arbitrary limitations. For example,
an `and` of two `icmp`s will be handled, but an `and` of an `icmp`
and some other condition will not. That also includes the case where
more than two conditions and and'ed together.
This patch makes the handling more general by looking through and/ors
up to a limit and considering all kinds of conditions (though operands
will only be taken for cmps of course).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94447
We do not need the SmallPtrSet to avoid adding duplicates to
OpsToRename, because we already keep a ValueInfo mapping. If we see an
op for the first time, Infos will be empty and we can also add it to
OpsToRename.
We process operands by visiting BBs depth-first and then iterate over
all instructions & users, so the order should be deterministic.
Therefore we can skip one round of sorting, which we purely needed for
guaranteeing a deterministic order when iterating over the SmallPtrSet.
Reviewers: efriedma, davide
Reviewed By: efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64816
llvm-svn: 367028
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).
This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.
llvm-svn: 358546
This is a workaround and it would be better to fix this generally, but
doing it generally is quite tricky. See D48541 and PR38117.
Doing it in PredicateInfo directly allows us to use the type address to
differentiate different unnamed types, because neither the created
declarations nor the ssa_copy calls should be visible after
PredicateInfo got destroyed.
Reviewers: efriedma, davide
Reviewed By: efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D49126
llvm-svn: 337828
Summary:
Sort OpsToRename before iterating to make iteration order deterministic.
Thanks to Daniel Berlin for the sorting logic.
Reviewers: dberlin, RKSimon, efriedma, davide
Reviewed By: dberlin, davide
Subscribers: sanjoy, davide, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33265
llvm-svn: 304447
Summary:
Depends on D29606 and D29682
Makes us pass GVN's edge.ll (we also will pass a few other testcases
they just need cleaning up).
Thoughts on the Predicate* hiearchy of classes especially welcome :)
(it's not clear to me how best to organize it, and currently, the getBlock* seems ... uglier than maybe wasting a field somewhere or something).
Reviewers: davide
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29747
llvm-svn: 295889
Summary:
This adds support for placing predicateinfo such that it affects critical edges.
This fixes the issues mentioned by Nuno on the mailing list.
Depends on D29519
Reviewers: davide, nlopes
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29606
llvm-svn: 294921
Summary:
This patch adds a utility to build extended SSA (see "ABCD: eliminating
array bounds checks on demand"), and an intrinsic to support it. This
is then used to get functionality equivalent to propagateEquality in
GVN, in NewGVN (without having to replace instructions as we go). It
would work similarly in SCCP or other passes. This has been talked
about a few times, so i built a real implementation and tried to
productionize it.
Copies are inserted for operands used in assumes and conditional
branches that are based on comparisons (see below for more)
Every use affected by the predicate is renamed to the appropriate
intrinsic result.
E.g.
%cmp = icmp eq i32 %x, 50
br i1 %cmp, label %true, label %false
true:
ret i32 %x
false:
ret i32 1
will become
%cmp = icmp eq i32, %x, 50
br i1 %cmp, label %true, label %false
true:
; Has predicate info
; branch predicate info { TrueEdge: 1 Comparison: %cmp = icmp eq i32 %x, 50 }
%x.0 = call @llvm.ssa_copy.i32(i32 %x)
ret i32 %x.0
false:
ret i23 1
(you can use -print-predicateinfo to get an annotated-with-predicateinfo dump)
This enables us to easily determine what operations are affected by a
given predicate, and how operations affected by a chain of
predicates.
Reviewers: davide, sanjoy
Subscribers: mgorny, llvm-commits, Prazek
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29519
Update for review comments
Fix a bug Nuno noticed where we are giving information about and/or on edges where the info is not useful and easy to use wrong
Update for review comments
llvm-svn: 294351
