The primary advantage is that loop optimizations will be applied in a
stable order. This helps debugging and unit test creation. It is also
a better overall implementation without pathologically bad performance
on deep functions.
On large functions (llvm-stress --size=200000 | opt -loops)
Before: 0.1263s
After: 0.0225s
On deep functions (after tweaking llvm-stress, thanks Nadav):
Before: 0.2281s
After: 0.0227s
See r158790 for more comments.
The loop tree is now consistently generated in forward order, but loop
passes are applied in reverse order over the program. If we have a
loop optimization that prefers forward order, that can easily be
achieved by adding a different type of LoopPassManager.
llvm-svn: 159183
instruction lower optimization" in the pre-RA scheduler.
The optimization, rather the hack, was done before MI use-list was available.
Now we should be able to implement it in a better way, perhaps in the
two-address pass until a MI scheduler is available.
Now that the scheduler has to backtrack to handle call sequences. Adding
artificial scheduling constraints is just not safe. Furthermore, the hack
is not taking all the other scheduling decisions into consideration so it's just
as likely to pessimize code. So I view disabling this optimization goodness
regardless of PR11314.
llvm-svn: 144267
explicitly split into stride-and-offset pairs. Also, add the
ability to track multiple post-increment loops on the same expression.
This refines the concept of "normalizing" SCEV expressions used for
to post-increment uses, and introduces a dedicated utility routine for
normalizing and denormalizing expressions.
This fixes the expansion of expressions which are post-increment users
of more than one loop at a time. More broadly, this takes LSR another
step closer to being able to reason about more than one loop at a time.
llvm-svn: 100699
