GCC 4.7's libstdc++ doesn't have std::map::emplace, but it does have
std::unordered_map::emplace, and the use case here doesn't appear to
need ordering. The container has been changed in a separate/precursor
patch, and now this patch should hopefully build cleanly even with
GCC 4.7.
& then I realized the order of the container did matter, so extra
handling of ordering was added in r231189.
Original commit message:
This makes LiveRange non-copyable, and LiveInterval is already
non-movable (due to the explicit dtor), so now it's non-copyable and
non-movable.
Fix the one case where we were relying on the (deprecated in C++11)
implicit copy ctor of LiveInterval (which happened to work because the
ctor created an object with a null segmentSet, so double-deleting the
null pointer was fine).
llvm-svn: 231192
The order of this container was needed at one point - so, at that point
create a temporary array of pointers, sort those, then iterate them.
This keeps lookup efficient (& the lesser issue, of allowing the use of
emplace... ), object identity preserved, and ordered iteration in the
one place that requires it.
While this has no functional change, I realize it does mean allocating
an extra data structure and performing a sort - so if this looks suspect
to anyone regarding perf characteristics, I'm all ears.
llvm-svn: 231189
There is a known bug where the register coalescer fails to merge
subranges when multiple ranges end up in the "overflow" bit 32 of the
lanemasks. A proper fix for this is complicated so for now this is a
workaround which lets the register coalescer drop the subregister
liveness information (we just loose some precision by that) and
continue.
llvm-svn: 231186
Apparently something does care about ordering of LiveIntervals... so
revert all that stuff (r231175, r231176, r231177) & take some time to
re-evaluate.
llvm-svn: 231184
RewriteStatepointsForGC pass emits an alloca for each GC pointer which will be relocated. It then inserts stores after def and all relocations, and inserts loads before each use as well. In the end, mem2reg is used to update IR with relocations in SSA form.
However, there is a problem with inserting stores for values defined by invoke instructions. The code didn't expect a def was a terminator instruction, and inserting instructions after these terminators resulted in malformed IR.
This patch fixes this problem by handling invoke instructions as a special case. If the def is an invoke instruction, the store will be inserted at the beginning of the normal destination block. Since return value from invoke instruction does not dominate the unwind destination block, no action is needed there.
Patch by: Chen Li
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7923
llvm-svn: 231183
The intrinsic is no longer generated by the front-end. Remove the intrinsic and
auto-upgrade it to a vector shuffle.
Reviewed by Nadav
This is related to rdar://problem/18742778.
llvm-svn: 231182
GCC 4.7's libstdc++ doesn't have std::map::emplace, but it does have
std::unordered_map::emplace, and the use case here doesn't appear to
need ordering. The container has been changed in a separate/precursor
patch, and now this patch should hopefully build cleanly even with
GCC 4.7.
Original commit message:
This makes LiveRange non-copyable, and LiveInterval is already
non-movable (due to the explicit dtor), so now it's non-copyable and
non-movable.
Fix the one case where we were relying on the (deprecated in C++11)
implicit copy ctor of LiveInterval (which happened to work because the
ctor created an object with a null segmentSet, so double-deleting the
null pointer was fine).
llvm-svn: 231176
This use case doesn't appear to benefit from ordering, and
std::unordered_map has the advantage that it supports emplace (the
LiveInterval values really shouldn't be copyable or movable & they won't
be in a near-future patch).
llvm-svn: 231175
Summary:
This makes it more obvious that the enum definition and the
"StandardName" array is in sync. Mechanically refactored w/ a
python script.
Test Plan: still compiles
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7845
llvm-svn: 231172
This makes LiveRange non-copyable, and LiveInterval is already
non-movable (due to the explicit dtor), so now it's non-copyable and
non-movable.
Fix the one case where we were relying on the (deprecated in C++11)
implicit copy ctor of LiveInterval (which happened to work because the
ctor created an object with a null segmentSet, so double-deleting the
null pointer was fine).
llvm-svn: 231168
Introduce -mllvm -sanitizer-coverage-8bit-counters=1
which adds imprecise thread-unfriendly 8-bit coverage counters.
The run-time library maps these 8-bit counters to 8-bit bitsets in the same way
AFL (http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/afl/technical_details.txt) does:
counter values are divided into 8 ranges and based on the counter
value one of the bits in the bitset is set.
The AFL ranges are used here: 1, 2, 3, 4-7, 8-15, 16-31, 32-127, 128+.
These counters provide a search heuristic for single-threaded
coverage-guided fuzzers, we do not expect them to be useful for other purposes.
Depending on the value of -fsanitize-coverage=[123] flag,
these counters will be added to the function entry blocks (=1),
every basic block (=2), or every edge (=3).
Use these counters as an optional search heuristic in the Fuzzer library.
Add a test where this heuristic is critical.
llvm-svn: 231166
Ultimately, we'll need to leave something behind to indicate which
alloca will hold the exception, but we can figure that out when it comes
time to emit the __CxxFrameHandler3 catch handler table.
llvm-svn: 231164
Selection conditions may be vectors or scalars. Make sure InstCombine
doesn't indiscriminately assume that a select which is value dependent
on another select have identical select condition types.
This fixes PR22773.
llvm-svn: 231156
From:
int M, total;
void foo() {
int i;
for (i = 0; i < M; i++) {
total = total + i / 2;
}
}
This is the kernel loop:
.LBB0_2: # %for.body
=>This Inner Loop Header: Depth=1
movl %edx, %esi
movl %ecx, %edx
shrl $31, %edx
addl %ecx, %edx
sarl %edx
addl %esi, %edx
incl %ecx
cmpl %eax, %ecx
jl .LBB0_2
--------------------------
The first mov insn "movl %edx, %esi" could be removed if we change "addl %esi, %edx" to "addl %edx, %esi".
The IR before TwoAddressInstructionPass is:
BB#2: derived from LLVM BB %for.body
Predecessors according to CFG: BB#1 BB#2
%vreg3<def> = COPY %vreg12<kill>; GR32:%vreg3,%vreg12
%vreg2<def> = COPY %vreg11<kill>; GR32:%vreg2,%vreg11
%vreg7<def,tied1> = SHR32ri %vreg3<tied0>, 31, %EFLAGS<imp-def,dead>; GR32:%vreg7,%vreg3
%vreg8<def,tied1> = ADD32rr %vreg3<tied0>, %vreg7<kill>, %EFLAGS<imp-def,dead>; GR32:%vreg8,%vreg3,%vreg7
%vreg9<def,tied1> = SAR32r1 %vreg8<kill,tied0>, %EFLAGS<imp-def,dead>; GR32:%vreg9,%vreg8
%vreg4<def,tied1> = ADD32rr %vreg9<kill,tied0>, %vreg2<kill>, %EFLAGS<imp-def,dead>; GR32:%vreg4,%vreg9,%vreg2
%vreg5<def,tied1> = INC64_32r %vreg3<kill,tied0>, %EFLAGS<imp-def,dead>; GR32:%vreg5,%vreg3
CMP32rr %vreg5, %vreg0, %EFLAGS<imp-def>; GR32:%vreg5,%vreg0
%vreg11<def> = COPY %vreg4; GR32:%vreg11,%vreg4
%vreg12<def> = COPY %vreg5<kill>; GR32:%vreg12,%vreg5
JL_4 <BB#2>, %EFLAGS<imp-use,kill>
Now TwoAddressInstructionPass will choose vreg9 to be tied with vreg4. However, it doesn't see that there is copy from vreg4 to vreg11 and another copy from vreg11 to vreg2 inside the loop body. To remove those copies, it is necessary to choose vreg2 to be tied with vreg4 instead of vreg9. This code pattern commonly appears when there is reduction operation in a loop.
So check for a reversed copy chain and if we encounter one then we can commute the add instruction so we can avoid a copy.
Patch by Wei Mi.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D7806
llvm-svn: 231148
Summary:
This does not conceptually belongs here. Instead provide a shortcut
getModule() that provides access to the DataLayout.
Reviewers: chandlerc, echristo
Reviewed By: echristo
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D8027
From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com>
llvm-svn: 231147
I removed the copy ctor, thinking that'd be the end of it - these
iterators should be perfectly assignable even from disjoint ranges (as
any iterator would be) - exkcept that the member was const.
Unconstify it.
llvm-svn: 231146
The assertion was just checking a class invariant that's pretty easy to
verify by inspection (no mutating operations, and the two non-copy ctors
already ensure the state is maintained) so remove the explicit copy ctor
in favor of the default, thus allowing the use of the default copy
assignment operator without hitting the C++11 deprecation here.
llvm-svn: 231143
There's no reason to disallow assigning an iterator from one range to an
iterator that previously iterated over a disjoint range. This then
follows the Rule of Zero, allowing implicit copy construction to be used
without hitting the case that's deprecated in C++11.
llvm-svn: 231142
There doesn't seem to be any need to assert that iterator assignment is
between iterators over the same node - if you want to reuse an iterator
variable to iterate another node, that's perfectly acceptable. Just
don't mix comparisons between iterators into disjoint sequences, as
usual.
llvm-svn: 231138
Accidentally committed a few more of these cleanup changes than
intended. Still breaking these out & tidying them up.
This reverts commit r231135.
llvm-svn: 231136
There doesn't seem to be any need to assert that iterator assignment is
between iterators over the same node - if you want to reuse an iterator
variable to iterate another node, that's perfectly acceptable. Just
don't mix comparisons between iterators into disjoint sequences, as
usual.
llvm-svn: 231135
There doesn't seem to be any need to assert that iterator assignment is
between iterators over the same node - if you want to reuse an iterator
variable to iterate another node, that's perfectly acceptable. Just
don't mix comparisons between iterators into disjoint sequences, as
usual.
llvm-svn: 231134
This type could be made copyable (= default a protected copy ctor in the
base class, and preferably make the derived class final to avoid risks
of providing a slicing copy operation to further derived classes) but it
seemed easier to avoid that complexity for a dump function that I assume
(by symmetry with ResourcePriorityQueue's dump, which was actively
buggy) not often used.
llvm-svn: 231133
Previously we had only Linux using DTPOFF for these; all X86 ELF
targets should. Fixes a side issue mentioned in PR21077.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D8011
llvm-svn: 231130
