This optimization is really just replacing allocas wholesale with
globals, there is no scalarization.
The underlying motivation for this patch is to simplify the SROA pass
and focus it on splitting and promoting allocas.
llvm-svn: 162271
This patch removes ~70 lines in InstCombineLoadStoreAlloca.cpp and makes both functions a bit more aggressive than before :)
In theory, we can be more aggressive when removing an alloca than a malloc, because an alloca pointer should never escape, but we are not taking advantage of this anyway
llvm-svn: 159952
merge all zero-sized alloca's into one, fixing c43204g from the Ada ACATS
conformance testsuite. What happened there was that a variable sized object
was being allocated on the stack, "alloca i8, i32 %size". It was then being
passed to another function, which tested that the address was not null (raising
an exception if it was) then manipulated %size bytes in it (load and/or store).
The optimizers cleverly managed to deduce that %size was zero (congratulations
to them, as it isn't at all obvious), which made the alloca zero size, causing
the optimizers to replace it with null, which then caused the check mentioned
above to fail, and the exception to be raised, wrongly. Note that no loads
and stores were actually being done to the alloca (the loop that does them is
executed %size times, i.e. is not executed), only the not-null address check.
llvm-svn: 159202
GEPs, bit casts, and stores reaching it but no other instructions. These
often show up during the iterative processing of the inliner, SROA, and
DCE. Once we hit this point, we can completely remove the alloca. These
were actually showing up in the final, fully optimized code in a bunch
of inliner tests I've been working on, and notably they show up after
LLVM finishes optimizing away all function calls involved in
hash_combine(a, b).
llvm-svn: 154285
alignment. If that's the case, then we want to make sure that we don't increase
the alignment of the store instruction. Because if we increase it to be "more
aligned" than the pointer, code-gen may use instructions which require a greater
alignment than the pointer guarantees.
<rdar://problem/11043589>
llvm-svn: 152907
load and store reference same memory location, the memory location
is represented by getelementptr with two uses (load and store) and
the getelementptr's base is alloca with single use. At this point,
instructions from alloca to store can be removed.
(this pattern is generated when bitfield is accessed.)
For example,
%u = alloca %struct.test, align 4 ; [#uses=1]
%0 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.test* %u, i32 0, i32 0;[#uses=2]
%1 = load i8* %0, align 4 ; [#uses=1]
%2 = and i8 %1, -16 ; [#uses=1]
%3 = or i8 %2, 5 ; [#uses=1]
store i8 %3, i8* %0, align 4
llvm-svn: 127565
create a testcase where this matters. The select+load transformation only
occurs when isSafeToLoadUnconditionally is true, and in those situations,
instcombine also changes the underlying objects to be aligned. This seems
like a good idea regardless, and I've verified that it doesn't pessimize
the subsequent realignment.
llvm-svn: 94850
