Relanded since the buildbot issue was unrelated to this commit.
When hoisting simple values out from a loop, and an optsize attribute, a
convergent call, or an invoke instruction hindered the pass from
unswitching the loop, the pass would return an incorrect Modified
status.
This was caught using the check introduced by D80916.
Reviewed By: asbirlea
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86085
This reverts commit dfd447c22043b0a64bf1d146735ca33f926bd22d.
After I pushed this commit, llvm-sphinx-docs started failing, due to:
Warning, treated as error:
extension 'recommonmark' has no setup() function;
is it really a Sphinx extension module?
I don't see how this commit may have caused that, but I'm still
reverting it since I don't know how to proceed with that
troubleshooting.
When hoisting simple values out from a loop, and an optsize attribute, a
convergent call, or an invoke instruction hindered the pass from
unswitching the loop, the pass would return an incorrect Modified
status.
This was caught using the check introduced by D80916.
Reviewed By: asbirlea
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86085
As mentioned in
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-July/143395.html,
loop-unswitch has not been ported to the NPM. Instead people are using
simple-loop-unswitch.
Pin all tests in Transforms/LoopUnswitch to legacy PM and replace all
other uses of loop-unswitch with simple-loop-unswitch.
One test that didn't fit into the above was
2014-06-21-congruent-constant.ll which seems to only pass with
loop-unswitch. That is also pinned to legacy PM.
Now all tests containing "-loop-unswitch" anywhere in the test succeed with
NPM turned on by default.
Reviewed By: ychen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85360
To match NewPM pass name, and also for readability.
Also rename rpo-functionattrs -> rpo-function-attrs while we're here.
Reviewed By: arsenm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84694
Summary:
There is currently a correctness issue when unrolling loops containing
callbr's where their indirect targets are being updated correctly to the
newly created labels, but their operands are not. This manifests in
unrolled loops where the second and subsequent copies of callbr
instructions have blockaddresses of the label from the first instance of
the unrolled loop, which would result in nonsensical runtime control
flow.
For now, conservatively do not unroll the loop. In the future, I think
we can pursue unrolling such loops provided we transform the cloned
callbr's operands correctly.
Such a transform and its legalities are being discussed in:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D64101
Link: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42489
Link: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/clang-built-linux/z-hRWP9KqPI
Reviewers: fhahn, hfinkel, efriedma
Reviewed By: fhahn, hfinkel, efriedma
Subscribers: efriedma, hiraditya, zzheng, dmgreen, llvm-commits, pirama, kees, nathanchance, E5ten, craig.topper, chandlerc, glider, void, srhines
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64368
llvm-svn: 366130
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).
This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.
llvm-svn: 358546
Summary:
Update MemorySSA in old LoopUnswitch pass.
Actual dependency and update is disabled by default.
Subscribers: sanjoy, jlebar, Prazek, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45301
llvm-svn: 341984
Loop unswitching makes substantial changes to a loop that can also affect cached
SCEV info in its outer loops as well, but it only cares to invalidate SCEV cache for the
innermost loop in case of full unswitching and does not invalidate anything at all in
case of trivial unswitching. As result, we may end up with incorrect data in cache.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46045
Reviewed By: mzolotukhin
llvm-svn: 333072
The commit rL308422 introduces a restriction for folding unconditional
branches. Specifically if empty block with unconditional branch leads to
header of the loop then elimination of this basic block is prohibited.
However it seems this condition is redundantly strict.
If elimination of this basic block does not introduce more back edges
then we can eliminate this block.
The patch implements this relax of restriction.
The test profile/Linux/counter_promo_nest.c in compiler-rt project
is updated to meet this change.
Reviewers: efriedma, mcrosier, pacxx, hsung, davidxl
Reviewed By: pacxx
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42691
llvm-svn: 324572
The patch causes the failure of the test
compiler-rt/test/profile/Linux/counter_promo_nest.c
To unblock buildbot, revert the patch while investigation is in progress.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42691
llvm-svn: 324214
The commit rL308422 introduces a restriction for folding unconditional
branches. Specifically if empty block with unconditional branch leads to
header of the loop then elimination of this basic block is prohibited.
However it seems this condition is redundantly strict.
If elimination of this basic block does not introduce more back edges
then we can eliminate this block.
The patch implements this relax of restriction.
Reviewers: efriedma, mcrosier, pacxx, hsung, davidxl
Reviewed By: pacxx
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42691
llvm-svn: 324208
This is to fix PR34257. rL309059 takes an early return when FindLIVLoopCondition
fails to find a loop invariant condition. This is wrong and it will disable loop
unswitch for select. The patch fixes the bug.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36985
llvm-svn: 312045
This is a workaround for the bug described in PR31652 and
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-July/115497.html. The temporary
solution is to add a function EqualityPropUnSafe. In EqualityPropUnSafe, for
some simple patterns we can know the equality comparison may contains undef,
so we regard such comparison as unsafe and will not do loop-unswitching for
them. We also need to disable the select simplification when one of select
operand is undef and its result feeds into equality comparison.
The patch cannot clear the safety issue caused by the bug, but it can suppress
the issue from happening to some extent.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35811
llvm-svn: 309059
Summary:
When simplifying unconditional branches from empty blocks, we pre-test if the
BB belongs to a set of loop headers and keep the block to prevent passes from
destroying canonical loop structure. However, the current algorithm fails if
the destination of the branch is a loop header. Especially when such a loop's
latch block is folded into loop header it results in additional backedges and
LoopSimplify turns it into a nested loop which prevent later optimizations
from being applied (e.g., loop unrolling and loop interleaving).
This patch augments the existing algorithm by further checking if the
destination of the branch belongs to a set of loop headers and defer
eliminating it if yes to LateSimplifyCFG.
Fixes PR33605: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33605
Reviewers: efriedma, mcrosier, pacxx, hsung, davidxl
Reviewed By: efriedma
Subscribers: ashutosh.nema, gberry, javed.absar, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35411
llvm-svn: 308422
This was reverted in r306252, but I already had the bug fixed and was
just trying to form a test case.
The original commit factored the logic for forming dedicated exits
inside of LoopSimplify into a helper that could be used elsewhere and
with an approach that required fewer intermediate data structures. See
that commit for full details including the change to the statistic, etc.
The code looked fine to me and my reviewers, but in fact didn't handle
indirectbr correctly -- it left the 'InLoopPredecessors' vector dirty.
If you have code that looks *just* right, you can end up leaking these
predecessors into a subsequent rewrite, and crash deep down when trying
to update PHI nodes for predecessors that don't exist.
I've added an assert that makes the bug much more obvious, and then
changed the code to reliably clear the vector so we don't get this bug
again in some other form as the code changes.
I've also added a test case that *does* manage to catch this while also
giving some nice positive coverage in the face of indirectbr.
The real code that found this came out of what I think is CPython's
interpreter loop, but any code with really "creative" interpreter loops
mixing indirectbr and other exit paths could manage to tickle the bug.
I was hard to reduce the original test case because in addition to
having a particular pattern of IR, the whole thing depends on the order
of the predecessors which is in turn depends on use list order. The test
case added here was designed so that in multiple different predecessor
orderings it should always end up going down the same path and tripping
the same bug. I hope. At least, it tripped it for me without
manipulating the use list order which is better than anything bugpoint
could do...
llvm-svn: 306257
I want to use the same logic as LoopSimplify to form dedicated exits in
another pass (SimpleLoopUnswitch) so I wanted to factor it out here.
I also noticed that there is a pretty significantly more efficient way
to implement this than the way the code in LoopSimplify worked. We don't
need to actually retain the set of unique exit blocks, we can just
rewrite them as we find them and use only a set to deduplicate.
This did require changing one part of LoopSimplify to not re-use the
unique set of exits, but it only used it to check that there was
a single unique exit. That part of the code is about to walk the exiting
blocks anyways, so it seemed better to rewrite it to use those exiting
blocks to compute this property on-demand.
I also had to ditch a statistic, but it doesn't seem terribly valuable.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34049
llvm-svn: 306081
(h/t to Chandler for pointing this out)
The test in question was not at all testing what it was supposed to
test. We do not //care// about placing `!make.implicit` in inner
constant branch (since it will be folded away anyway). We care about
placing `!make.implicit` in the outer branch that switches between
either version of the loop.
Having said that, it is _correct_ to leave behind the `!make.implicit`
in the inner branch, but there is no need to do so.
llvm-svn: 299912
Currently the default C calling convention functions are treated
the same as compute kernels. Make this explicit so the default
calling convention can be changed to a non-kernel.
Converted with perl -pi -e 's/define void/define amdgpu_kernel void/'
on the relevant test directories (and undoing in one place that actually
wanted a non-kernel).
llvm-svn: 298444
Loop unswitching can be extremely harmful for a SIMT target. In case
if hoisted condition is not uniform a SIMT machine will execute both
clones of a loop sequentially. Therefor LoopUnswitch checks if the
condition is non-divergent.
Since DivergenceAnalysis adds an expensive PostDominatorTree analysis
not needed for non-SIMT targets a new option is added to avoid unneded
analysis initialization. The method getAnalysisUsage is called when
TargetTransformInfo is not yet available and we cannot use it here.
For that reason a new field DivergentTarget is added to PassManagerBuilder
to control the behavior and set this field from a target.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30796
llvm-svn: 298104
Summary: In case we do not know what the condition is in an unswitched loop, but we know its definitely NOT a known constant. We can perform simplifcations based on this information.
Reviewers: sanjoy, hfinkel, chenli, efriedma
Reviewed By: efriedma
Subscribers: david2050, llvm-commits, mzolotukhin
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28968
llvm-svn: 296041
Chandler mentioned at the last social that the need for BFI in the new pass manager was causing a slight hiccup for this pass. Given this code has been checked in, but off for over a year, it makes sense to just remove it for now.
Note that there's nothing wrong with the general idea - it's actually a quite good one - and once we have the infrastructure in place to implement this without the full recompuation on every loop, we absolutely should.
llvm-svn: 294715
Summary:
The iterative algorithm for Loop Unswitching may render some of the branches unreachable in the unswitched loops.
Given the exponential nature of the algorithm, this is quite an overhead.
This patch fixes this problem by selectively unswitching only those branches within a loop that are reachable from the loop header.
Reviewers: Michael Zolothukin, Anna Thomas, Weiming Zhao.
Subscribers: llvm-commits.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D26299
llvm-svn: 287925
Summary:
This is a straightforward extension of what LoopUnswitch does to
branches to guards. That is, we unswitch
```
for (;;) {
...
guard(loop_invariant_cond);
...
}
```
into
```
if (loop_invariant_cond) {
for (;;) {
...
// There is no need to emit guard(true)
...
}
} else {
for (;;) {
...
guard(false);
// SimplifyCFG will clean this up by adding an
// unreachable after the guard(false)
...
}
}
```
Reviewers: majnemer
Subscribers: mcrosier, llvm-commits, mzolotukhin
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21725
llvm-svn: 273801
Nearly all the changes to this pass have been done while maintaining and
updating other parts of LLVM. LLVM has had another pass, SROA, which
has superseded ScalarReplAggregates for quite some time.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21316
llvm-svn: 272737
When eliminating or merging almost empty basic blocks, the existence of non-trivial PHI nodes
is currently used to recognize potential loops of which the block is the header and keep the block.
However, the current algorithm fails if the loops' exit condition is evaluated only with volatile
values hence no PHI nodes in the header. Especially when such a loop is an outer loop of a nested
loop, the loop is collapsed into a single loop which prevent later optimizations from being
applied (e.g., transforming nested loops into simplified forms and loop vectorization).
The patch augments the existing PHI node-based check by adding a pre-test if the BB actually
belongs to a set of loop headers and not eliminating it if yes.
llvm-svn: 264697
When eliminating or merging almost empty basic blocks, the existence of non-trivial PHI nodes
is currently used to recognize potential loops of which the block is the header and keep the block.
However, the current algorithm fails if the loops' exit condition is evaluated only with volatile
values hence no PHI nodes in the header. Especially when such a loop is an outer loop of a nested
loop, the loop is collapsed into a single loop which prevent later optimizations from being
applied (e.g., transforming nested loops into simplified forms and loop vectorization).
The patch augments the existing PHI node-based check by adding a pre-test if the BB actually
belongs to a set of loop headers and not eliminating it if yes.
llvm-svn: 264596
While we have successfully implemented a funclet-oriented EH scheme on
top of LLVM IR, our scheme has some notable deficiencies:
- catchendpad and cleanupendpad are necessary in the current design
but they are difficult to explain to others, even to seasoned LLVM
experts.
- catchendpad and cleanupendpad are optimization barriers. They cannot
be split and force all potentially throwing call-sites to be invokes.
This has a noticable effect on the quality of our code generation.
- catchpad, while similar in some aspects to invoke, is fairly awkward.
It is unsplittable, starts a funclet, and has control flow to other
funclets.
- The nesting relationship between funclets is currently a property of
control flow edges. Because of this, we are forced to carefully
analyze the flow graph to see if there might potentially exist illegal
nesting among funclets. While we have logic to clone funclets when
they are illegally nested, it would be nicer if we had a
representation which forbade them upfront.
Let's clean this up a bit by doing the following:
- Instead, make catchpad more like cleanuppad and landingpad: no control
flow, just a bunch of simple operands; catchpad would be splittable.
- Introduce catchswitch, a control flow instruction designed to model
the constraints of funclet oriented EH.
- Make funclet scoping explicit by having funclet instructions consume
the token produced by the funclet which contains them.
- Remove catchendpad and cleanupendpad. Their presence can be inferred
implicitly using coloring information.
N.B. The state numbering code for the CLR has been updated but the
veracity of it's output cannot be spoken for. An expert should take a
look to make sure the results are reasonable.
Reviewers: rnk, JosephTremoulet, andrew.w.kaylor
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15139
llvm-svn: 255422
We had two code paths. One would create names like "foo.1" and the other
names like "foo1".
For globals it is important to use "foo.1" to help C++ name demangling.
For locals there is no strong reason to go one way or the other so I
kept the most common mangling (foo1).
llvm-svn: 253804
Doing so could cause the post-unswitching convergent ops to be
control-dependent on the unswitch condition where they were not before.
This check could be refined to allow unswitching where the convergent
operation was already control-dependent on the unswitch condition.
llvm-svn: 249874
Summary: This patch adds block frequency analysis to LoopUnswitch pass to recognize hot/cold regions. For cold regions the pass only performs trivial unswitches since they do not increase code size, and for hot regions everything works as before. This helps to minimize code growth in cold regions and be more aggressive in hot regions. Currently the default cold regions are blocks with frequencies below 20% of function entry frequency, and it can be adjusted via -loop-unswitch-cold-block-frequency flag. The entire feature is controlled via -loop-unswitch-with-block-frequency flag and it is off by default.
Reviewers: broune, silvas, dnovillo, reames
Subscribers: davidxl, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11605
llvm-svn: 248777
Patch by: simoncook
Unlike BitCasts, AddrSpaceCasts do not always produce an output the same size as its input, which was previously assumed. This fixes cases where two address spaces do not have the same size pointer, as an assertion failure would occur when trying to prove deferenceability. LoopUnswitch is used in the particular test, but LICM also exhibits the same problem.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13008
llvm-svn: 248422
Summary:
This patch improves trivial loop unswitch.
The current trivial loop unswitch only checks if loop header's terminator contains a trivial unswitch condition. But if the loop header only has one reachable successor (due to intentionally or unintentionally missed code simplification), we should consider the successor as part of the loop header. Therefore, instead of stopping at loop header's terminator, we should keep traversing its successors within loop until reach a *real* conditional branch or switch (whose condition can not be constant folded). This change will enable a single -loop-unswitch pass to unswitch multiple trivial conditions (unswitch one trivial condition could open opportunity to unswitch another one in the same loop), while the old implementation can unswitch only one per pass.
Reviewers: reames, broune
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11481
llvm-svn: 243203
Summary: The current code in LoopUnswtich::processCurrentLoop() mixes trivial loop unswitch and non-trivial loop unswitch together. It goes over all basic blocks in the loop and checks if a condition is trivial or non-trivial unswitch condition. However, trivial unswitch condition can only occur in the loop header basic block (where it controls whether or not the loop does something at all). This refactoring separate trivial loop unswitch and non-trivial loop unswitch. Before going over all basic blocks in the loop, it checks if the loop header contains a trivial unswitch condition. If so, unswitch it. Otherwise, go over all blocks like before but don't check trivial condition any more since they are not possible to be in the other blocks. This code has no functionality change.
Reviewers: meheff, reames, broune
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11276
llvm-svn: 242873
