Summary:
Unlimitted number of calls to getClobberingAccess can lead to high
compile times in pathological cases.
Switching EnableLicmCap flag from bool to int, and enabling to default 100.
(tested to be appropriate for current bechmarks)
We can revisit this value when enabling MemorySSA.
Reviewers: sanjoy, chandlerc, george.burgess.iv
Subscribers: jlebar, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57968
llvm-svn: 353897
Loop::setAlreadyUnrolled() and
LoopVectorizeHints::setLoopAlreadyUnrolled() both add loop metadata that
stops the same loop from being transformed multiple times. This patch
merges both implementations.
In doing so we fix 3 potential issues:
* setLoopAlreadyUnrolled() kept the llvm.loop.vectorize/interleave.*
metadata even though it will not be used anymore. This already caused
problems such as http://llvm.org/PR40546. Change the behavior to the
one of setAlreadyUnrolled which deletes this loop metadata.
* setAlreadyUnrolled() used to create a new LoopID by calling
MDNode::get with nullptr as the first operand, then replacing it by
the returned references using replaceOperandWith. It is possible
that MDNode::get would instead return an existing node (due to
de-duplication) that then gets modified. To avoid, use a fresh
TempMDNode that does not get uniqued with anything else before
replacing it with replaceOperandWith.
* LoopVectorizeHints::matchesHintMetadataName() only compares the
suffix of the attribute to set the new value for. That is, when
called with "enable", would erase attributes such as
"llvm.loop.unroll.enable", "llvm.loop.vectorize.enable" and
"llvm.loop.distribute.enable" instead of the one to replace.
Fortunately, function was only called with "isvectorized".
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57566
llvm-svn: 353738
Summary:
If there is no clobbering access for a store inside the loop, that store
can only be hoisted if there are no interfearing loads.
A more general verification introduced here: there are no loads that are
not optimized to an access outside the loop.
Addresses PR40586.
Reviewers: george.burgess.iv
Subscribers: sanjoy, jlebar, Prazek, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57967
llvm-svn: 353734
`CallBase` class rather than `CallSite` wrappers.
I pushed this change down through most of the statepoint infrastructure,
completely removing the use of CallSite where I could reasonably do so.
I ended up making a couple of cut-points: generic call handling
(instcombine, TLI, SDAG). As soon as it hit truly generic handling with
users outside the immediate code, I simply transitioned into or out of
a `CallSite` to make this a reasonable sized chunk.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56122
llvm-svn: 353660
Check that when SimplifyCFG is flattening a 'br', all their debug intrinsic instructions are removed, including any dbg.label referencing a label associated with the basic blocks being removed.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57444
llvm-svn: 353511
Summary: Assumption cache's self-updating mechanism does not correctly handle the case when blocks are extracted from the function by the CodeExtractor. As a result function's assumption cache may have stale references to the llvm.assume calls that were moved to the outlined function. This patch fixes this problem by removing extracted llvm.assume calls from the function’s assumption cache.
Reviewers: hfinkel, vsk, fhahn, davidxl, sanjoy
Reviewed By: hfinkel, vsk
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57215
llvm-svn: 353500
Summary:
Experimentally we found that promotion to scalars carries less benefits
than sinking and hoisting in LICM. When using MemorySSA, we build an
AliasSetTracker on demand in order to reuse the current infrastructure.
We only build it if less than AccessCapForMSSAPromotion exist in the
loop, a cap that is by default set to 250. This value ensures there are
no runtime regressions, and there are small compile time gains for
pathological cases. A much lower value (20) was found to yield a single
regression in the llvm-test-suite and much higher benefits for compile
times. Conservatively we set the current cap to a high value, but we will
explore lowering it when MemorySSA is enabled by default.
Reviewers: sanjoy, chandlerc
Subscribers: nemanjai, jlebar, Prazek, george.burgess.iv, jfb, jsji, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56625
llvm-svn: 353339
DomTreeUpdater depends on headers from Analysis, but is in IR. This is a
layering violation since Analysis depends on IR. Relocate this code from IR
to Analysis to fix the layering violation.
llvm-svn: 353265
Some use cases are appearing where salvaging is needed that does not
correspond to an instruction being deleted -- for example an instruction
being sunk, or a Value not being available in a block being isel'd.
Enable more fine grained control over how salavging occurs by splitting
the logic into helper functions, separating things that are specific to
working on DbgVariableIntrinsics from those specific to interpreting IR
and building DIExpressions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57696
llvm-svn: 353156
Recommit r352791 after tweaking DerivedTypes.h slightly, so that gcc
doesn't choke on it, hopefully.
Original Message:
The FunctionCallee type is effectively a {FunctionType*,Value*} pair,
and is a useful convenience to enable code to continue passing the
result of getOrInsertFunction() through to EmitCall, even once pointer
types lose their pointee-type.
Then:
- update the CallInst/InvokeInst instruction creation functions to
take a Callee,
- modify getOrInsertFunction to return FunctionCallee, and
- update all callers appropriately.
One area of particular note is the change to the sanitizer
code. Previously, they had been casting the result of
`getOrInsertFunction` to a `Function*` via
`checkSanitizerInterfaceFunction`, and storing that. That would report
an error if someone had already inserted a function declaraction with
a mismatching signature.
However, in general, LLVM allows for such mismatches, as
`getOrInsertFunction` will automatically insert a bitcast if
needed. As part of this cleanup, cause the sanitizer code to do the
same. (It will call its functions using the expected signature,
however they may have been declared.)
Finally, in a small number of locations, callers of
`getOrInsertFunction` actually were expecting/requiring that a brand
new function was being created. In such cases, I've switched them to
Function::Create instead.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57315
llvm-svn: 352827
This reverts commit f47d6b38c7a61d50db4566b02719de05492dcef1 (r352791).
Seems to run into compilation failures with GCC (but not clang, where
I tested it). Reverting while I investigate.
llvm-svn: 352800
The FunctionCallee type is effectively a {FunctionType*,Value*} pair,
and is a useful convenience to enable code to continue passing the
result of getOrInsertFunction() through to EmitCall, even once pointer
types lose their pointee-type.
Then:
- update the CallInst/InvokeInst instruction creation functions to
take a Callee,
- modify getOrInsertFunction to return FunctionCallee, and
- update all callers appropriately.
One area of particular note is the change to the sanitizer
code. Previously, they had been casting the result of
`getOrInsertFunction` to a `Function*` via
`checkSanitizerInterfaceFunction`, and storing that. That would report
an error if someone had already inserted a function declaraction with
a mismatching signature.
However, in general, LLVM allows for such mismatches, as
`getOrInsertFunction` will automatically insert a bitcast if
needed. As part of this cleanup, cause the sanitizer code to do the
same. (It will call its functions using the expected signature,
however they may have been declared.)
Finally, in a small number of locations, callers of
`getOrInsertFunction` actually were expecting/requiring that a brand
new function was being created. In such cases, I've switched them to
Function::Create instead.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57315
llvm-svn: 352791
Summary:
COFF requires that COMDAT name match that of the leader. When we promote
and rename an internal leader in ThinLTO due to an import, ensure we
subsequently rename the associated COMDAT. Similar to D31963 which did
this during ThinLTO module splitting.
Fixes PR40414.
Reviewers: pcc, inglorion
Subscribers: mehdi_amini, dexonsmith, dmajor, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57395
llvm-svn: 352763
Introduces a pass that provides default lowering strategy for the
`experimental.widenable.condition` intrinsic, replacing all its uses with
`i1 true`.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56096
Reviewed By: reames
llvm-svn: 352739
Summary:
Profile sample files include the number of times each entry or inlined
call site is sampled. This is translated into the entry count metadta
on functions.
When sample data is being read, if a call site that was inlined
in the sample program is considered cold and not inlined, then
the entry count of the out-of-line functions does not reflect
the current compilation.
In this patch, we note call sites where the function was not inlined
and as a last action of the sample profile loading, we update the
called function's entry count to reflect the calls from these
call sites which are not included in the profile file.
Reviewers: danielcdh, wmi, Kader, modocache
Reviewed By: wmi
Subscribers: davidxl, eraman, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52845
llvm-svn: 352001
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
Summary:
Second iteration of D56433 which got reverted in rL350719. The problem
in the previous version was that we dropped the thunk calling the tsan init
function. The new version keeps the thunk which should appease dyld, but is not
actually OK wrt. the current semantics of function passes. Hence, add a
helper to insert the functions only on the first time. The helper
allows hooking into the insertion to be able to append them to the
global ctors list.
Reviewers: chandlerc, vitalybuka, fedor.sergeev, leonardchan
Subscribers: hiraditya, bollu, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56538
llvm-svn: 351314
Utility function `DeleteDeadBlock` expects that all predecessors of a block being
deleted are already deleted, with the exception of single-block loop. It makes it
hard to use for deletion of a set of blocks that may contain cyclic dependencies.
The is no correct order of invocations of this function that does not produce
dangling pointers on already deleted blocks.
This patch introduces a generalized version of this function `DeleteDeadBlocks`
that allows us to remove multiple blocks at once, even if there are cycles among
them. The only requirement is that no block being deleted should have a predecessor
that is not being deleted.
The logic of `DeleteDeadBlocks` is following:
for each block
create relevant DT updates;
remove all instructions (replace with undef if needed);
replace terminator with unreacheable;
apply DT updates;
for each block
delete block;
Therefore, `DeleteDeadBlock` becomes a particular case of
the general algorithm called for a single block.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56120
Reviewed By: skatkov
llvm-svn: 351045
Currently when a select has a constant value in one branch and the select feeds
a conditional branch (via a compare/ phi and compare) we unfold the select
statement. This results in threading the conditional branch later on. Similar
opportunity exists when a select (with a constant in one branch) feeds a
switch (via a phi node). The patch unfolds select under this condition.
A testcase is provided.
llvm-svn: 350931
Summary:
The original patch addressed the use of BlockRPONumber by forcing a sequence point when accessing that map in a conditional. In short we found cases where that map was being accessed with blocks that had not yet been added to that structure. For context, I've kept the wall of text below, to what we are trying to fix, by always ensuring a updated BlockRPONumber.
== Backstory ==
I was investigating an ICE (segfault accessing a DenseMap item). This failure happened non-deterministically, with no apparent reason and only on a Windows build of LLVM (from October 2018).
After looking into the crashes (multiple core files) and running DynamoRio, the cores and DynamoRio (DR) log pointed to the same code in `GVN::performScalarPRE()`. The values in the map are unsigned integers, the keys are `llvm::BasicBlock*`. Our test case that triggered this warning and periodic crash is rather involved. But the problematic line looks to be:
GVN.cpp: Line 2197
```
if (BlockRPONumber[P] >= BlockRPONumber[CurrentBlock] &&
```
To test things out, I cooked up a patch that accessed the items in the map outside of the condition, by forcing a sequence point between accesses. DynamoRio stopped warning of the issue, and the test didn't seem to crash after 1000+ runs.
My investigation was on an older version of LLVM, (source from October this year). What it looks like was occurring is the following, and the assembly from the latest pull of llvm in December seems to confirm this might still be an issue; however, I have not witnessed the crash on more recent builds. Of course the asm in question is generated from the host compiler on that Windows box (not clang), but it hints that we might want to consider how we access the BlockRPONumber map in this conditional (line 2197, listed above). In any case, I don't think the host compiler is wrong, rather I think it is pointing out a possibly latent bug in llvm.
1) There is no sequence point for the `>=` operation.
2) A call to a `DenseMapBase::operator[]` can have the side effect of the map reallocating a larger store (more Buckets, via a call to `DenseMap::grow`).
3) It seems perfectly legal for a host compiler to generate assembly that stores the result of a call to `operator[]` on the stack (that's what my host compile of GVN.cpp is doing) . A second call to `operator[]` //might// encourage the map to 'grow' thus making any pointers to the map's store invalid. The `>=` compares the first and second values. If the first happens to be a pointer produced from operator[], it could be invalid when dereferenced at the time of comparison.
The assembly generated from the Window's host compiler does show the result of the first access to the map via `operator[]` produces a pointer to an unsigned int. And that pointer is being stored on the stack. If a second call to the map (which does occur) causes the map to grow, that address (on the stack) is now invalid.
Reviewers: t.p.northover, efriedma
Reviewed By: efriedma
Subscribers: efriedma, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55974
llvm-svn: 350880
Summary:
Step 2 in using MemorySSA in LICM:
Use MemorySSA in LICM to do sinking and hoisting, all under "EnableMSSALoopDependency" flag.
Promotion is disabled.
Enable flag in LICM sink/hoist tests to test correctness of this change. Moved one test which
relied on promotion, in order to test all sinking tests.
Reviewers: sanjoy, davide, gberry, george.burgess.iv
Subscribers: llvm-commits, Prazek
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40375
llvm-svn: 350879
A straightforward port of tsan to the new PM, following the same path
as D55647.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56433
llvm-svn: 350647
At -O0, globalopt is not run during the compile step, and we can have a
chain of an alias having an immediate aliasee of another alias. The
summaries are constructed assuming aliases in a canonical form
(flattened chains), and as a result only the base object but no
intermediate aliases were preserved.
Fix by adding a pass that canonicalize aliases, which ensures each
alias is a direct alias of the base object.
Reviewers: pcc, davidxl
Subscribers: mehdi_amini, inglorion, eraman, steven_wu, dexonsmith, arphaman, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54507
llvm-svn: 350423
Lifetime markers which reference inputs to the extraction region are not
safe to extract. Example ('rhs' will be extracted):
```
entry:
+------------+
| x = alloca |
| y = alloca |
+------------+
/ \
lhs: rhs:
+-------------------+ +-------------------+
| lifetime_start(x) | | lifetime_start(x) |
| use(x) | | lifetime_start(y) |
| lifetime_end(x) | | use(x, y) |
| lifetime_start(y) | | lifetime_end(y) |
| use(y) | | lifetime_end(x) |
| lifetime_end(y) | +-------------------+
+-------------------+
```
Prior to extraction, the stack coloring pass sees that the slots for 'x'
and 'y' are in-use at the same time. After extraction, the coloring pass
infers that 'x' and 'y' are *not* in-use concurrently, because markers
from 'rhs' are no longer available to help decide otherwise.
This leads to a miscompile, because the stack slots actually are in-use
concurrently in the extracted function.
Fix this by moving lifetime start/end markers for memory regions defined
in the calling function around the call to the extracted function.
Fixes llvm.org/PR39671 (rdar://45939472).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55967
llvm-svn: 350420
Summary:
Keeping msan a function pass requires replacing the module level initialization:
That means, don't define a ctor function which calls __msan_init, instead just
declare the init function at the first access, and add that to the global ctors
list.
Changes:
- Pull the actual sanitizer and the wrapper pass apart.
- Add a newpm msan pass. The function pass inserts calls to runtime
library functions, for which it inserts declarations as necessary.
- Update tests.
Caveats:
- There is one test that I dropped, because it specifically tested the
definition of the ctor.
Reviewers: chandlerc, fedor.sergeev, leonardchan, vitalybuka
Subscribers: sdardis, nemanjai, javed.absar, hiraditya, kbarton, bollu, atanasyan, jsji
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55647
llvm-svn: 350305
The current llvm.mem.parallel_loop_access metadata has a problem in that
it uses LoopIDs. LoopID unfortunately is not loop identifier. It is
neither unique (there's even a regression test assigning the some LoopID
to multiple loops; can otherwise happen if passes such as LoopVersioning
make copies of entire loops) nor persistent (every time a property is
removed/added from a LoopID's MDNode, it will also receive a new LoopID;
this happens e.g. when calling Loop::setLoopAlreadyUnrolled()).
Since most loop transformation passes change the loop attributes (even
if it just to mark that a loop should not be processed again as
llvm.loop.isvectorized does, for the versioned and unversioned loop),
the parallel access information is lost for any subsequent pass.
This patch unlinks LoopIDs and parallel accesses.
llvm.mem.parallel_loop_access metadata on instruction is replaced by
llvm.access.group metadata. llvm.access.group points to a distinct
MDNode with no operands (avoiding the problem to ever need to add/remove
operands), called "access group". Alternatively, it can point to a list
of access groups. The LoopID then has an attribute
llvm.loop.parallel_accesses with all the access groups that are parallel
(no dependencies carries by this loop).
This intentionally avoid any kind of "ID". Loops that are clones/have
their attributes modifies retain the llvm.loop.parallel_accesses
attribute. Access instructions that a cloned point to the same access
group. It is not necessary for each access to have it's own "ID" MDNode,
but those memory access instructions with the same behavior can be
grouped together.
The behavior of llvm.mem.parallel_loop_access is not changed by this
patch, but should be considered deprecated.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52116
llvm-svn: 349725
Rename:
NoUnrolling to InterleaveOnlyWhenForced
and
AlwaysVectorize to !VectorizeOnlyWhenForced
Contrary to what the name 'AlwaysVectorize' suggests, it does not
unconditionally vectorize all loops, but applies a cost model to
determine whether vectorization is profitable to all loops. Hence,
passing false will disable the cost model, except when a loop is marked
with llvm.loop.vectorize.enable. The 'OnlyWhenForced' suffix (suggested
by @hfinkel in D55716) better matches this behavior.
Similarly, 'NoUnrolling' disables the profitability cost model for
interleaving (a term to distinguish it from unrolling by the
LoopUnrollPass); rename it for consistency.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55785
llvm-svn: 349513
When using clang with `-fno-unroll-loops` (implicitly added with `-O1`),
the LoopUnrollPass is not not added to the (legacy) pass pipeline. This
also means that it will not process any loop metadata such as
llvm.loop.unroll.enable (which is generated by #pragma unroll or
WarnMissedTransformationsPass emits a warning that a forced
transformation has not been applied (see
https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20181210/610833.html).
Such explicit transformations should take precedence over disabling
heuristics.
This patch unconditionally adds LoopUnrollPass to the optimizing
pipeline (that is, it is still not added with `-O0`), but passes a flag
indicating whether automatic unrolling is dis-/enabled. This is the same
approach as LoopVectorize uses.
The new pass manager's pipeline builder has no option to disable
unrolling, hence the problem does not apply.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55716
llvm-svn: 349509
Summary:
This patch computes the synthetic function entry count on the whole
program callgraph (based on module summary) and writes the entry counts
to the summary. After function importing, this count gets attached to
the IR as metadata. Since it adds a new field to the summary, this bumps
up the version.
Reviewers: tejohnson
Subscribers: mehdi_amini, inglorion, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D43521
llvm-svn: 349076
When multiple loop transformation are defined in a loop's metadata, their order of execution is defined by the order of their respective passes in the pass pipeline. For instance, e.g.
#pragma clang loop unroll_and_jam(enable)
#pragma clang loop distribute(enable)
is the same as
#pragma clang loop distribute(enable)
#pragma clang loop unroll_and_jam(enable)
and will try to loop-distribute before Unroll-And-Jam because the LoopDistribute pass is scheduled after UnrollAndJam pass. UnrollAndJamPass only supports one inner loop, i.e. it will necessarily fail after loop distribution. It is not possible to specify another execution order. Also,t the order of passes in the pipeline is subject to change between versions of LLVM, optimization options and which pass manager is used.
This patch adds 'followup' attributes to various loop transformation passes. These attributes define which attributes the resulting loop of a transformation should have. For instance,
!0 = !{!0, !1, !2}
!1 = !{!"llvm.loop.unroll_and_jam.enable"}
!2 = !{!"llvm.loop.unroll_and_jam.followup_inner", !3}
!3 = !{!"llvm.loop.distribute.enable"}
defines a loop ID (!0) to be unrolled-and-jammed (!1) and then the attribute !3 to be added to the jammed inner loop, which contains the instruction to distribute the inner loop.
Currently, in both pass managers, pass execution is in a fixed order and UnrollAndJamPass will not execute again after LoopDistribute. We hope to fix this in the future by allowing pass managers to run passes until a fixpoint is reached, use Polly to perform these transformations, or add a loop transformation pass which takes the order issue into account.
For mandatory/forced transformations (e.g. by having been declared by #pragma omp simd), the user must be notified when a transformation could not be performed. It is not possible that the responsible pass emits such a warning because the transformation might be 'hidden' in a followup attribute when it is executed, or it is not present in the pipeline at all. For this reason, this patche introduces a WarnMissedTransformations pass, to warn about orphaned transformations.
Since this changes the user-visible diagnostic message when a transformation is applied, two test cases in the clang repository need to be updated.
To ensure that no other transformation is executed before the intended one, the attribute `llvm.loop.disable_nonforced` can be added which should disable transformation heuristics before the intended transformation is applied. E.g. it would be surprising if a loop is distributed before a #pragma unroll_and_jam is applied.
With more supported code transformations (loop fusion, interchange, stripmining, offloading, etc.), transformations can be used as building blocks for more complex transformations (e.g. stripmining+stripmining+interchange -> tiling).
Reviewed By: hfinkel, dmgreen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D49281
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55288
llvm-svn: 348944
IR-printing AfterPass instrumentation might be called on a loop
that has just been invalidated. We should skip printing it to
avoid spurious asserts.
Reviewed By: chandlerc, philip.pfaffe
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54740
llvm-svn: 348887
This patch introduces a new instinsic `@llvm.experimental.widenable_condition`
that allows explicit representation for guards. It is an alternative to using
`@llvm.experimental.guard` intrinsic that does not contain implicit control flow.
We keep finding places where `@llvm.experimental.guard` is not supported or
treated too conservatively, and there are 2 reasons to that:
- `@llvm.experimental.guard` has memory write side effect to model implicit control flow,
and this sometimes confuses passes and analyzes that work with memory;
- Not all passes and analysis are aware of the semantics of guards. These passes treat them
as regular throwing call and have no idea that the condition of guard may be used to prove
something. One well-known place which had caused us troubles in the past is explicit loop
iteration count calculation in SCEV. Another example is new loop unswitching which is not
aware of guards. Whenever a new pass appears, we potentially have this problem there.
Rather than go and fix all these places (and commit to keep track of them and add support
in future), it seems more reasonable to leverage the existing optimizer's logic as much as possible.
The only significant difference between guards and regular explicit branches is that guard's condition
can be widened. It means that a guard contains (explicitly or implicitly) a `deopt` block successor,
and it is always legal to go there no matter what the guard condition is. The other successor is
a guarded block, and it is only legal to go there if the condition is true.
This patch introduces a new explicit form of guards alternative to `@llvm.experimental.guard`
intrinsic. Now a widenable guard can be represented in the CFG explicitly like this:
%widenable_condition = call i1 @llvm.experimental.widenable.condition()
%new_condition = and i1 %cond, %widenable_condition
br i1 %new_condition, label %guarded, label %deopt
guarded:
; Guarded instructions
deopt:
call type @llvm.experimental.deoptimize(<args...>) [ "deopt"(<deopt_args...>) ]
The new intrinsic `@llvm.experimental.widenable.condition` has semantics of an
`undef`, but the intrinsic prevents the optimizer from folding it early. This form
should exploit all optimization boons provided to `br` instuction, and it still can be
widened by replacing the result of `@llvm.experimental.widenable.condition()`
with `and` with any arbitrary boolean value (as long as the branch that is taken when
it is `false` has a deopt and has no side-effects).
For more motivation, please check llvm-dev discussion "[llvm-dev] Giving up using
implicit control flow in guards".
This patch introduces this new intrinsic with respective LangRef changes and a pass
that converts old-style guards (expressed as intrinsics) into the new form.
The naming discussion is still ungoing. Merging this to unblock further items. We can
later change the name of this intrinsic.
Reviewed By: reames, fedor.sergeev, sanjoy
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51207
llvm-svn: 348593
