that library consumers access the instcombine pass directly, they also
(transitively) access the worklist. Also, it would need to be used
directly in order to have a useful utility if we ever want that.
This should fix some warnings since I moved this code. Sorry for the
trouble.
llvm-svn: 227025
Warning by gcc:
'llvm::InstCombinePass' declared with greater visibility than the type of its field 'llvm::InstCombinePass::Worklist' [-Wattributes]
llvm-svn: 227013
This just lifts the logic into a static helper function, sinks the
legacy pass to be a trivial wrapper of that helper fuction, and adds
a trivial wrapper for the new PM as well. Not much to see here.
I switched a test case to run in both modes, but we have to strip the
dead prototypes separately as that pass isn't in the new pass manager
(yet).
llvm-svn: 226999
This is exciting as this is a much more involved port. This is
a complex, existing transformation pass. All of the core logic is shared
between both old and new pass managers. Only the access to the analyses
is separate because the actual techniques are separate. This also uses
a bunch of different and interesting analyses and is the first time
where we need to use an analysis across an IR layer.
This also paves the way to expose instcombine utility functions. I've
got a static function that implements the core pass logic over
a function which might be mildly interesting, but more interesting is
likely exposing a routine which just uses instructions *already in* the
worklist and combines until empty.
I've switched one of my favorite instcombine tests to run with both as
well to make sure this keeps working.
llvm-svn: 226987
manager to support the actual uses of it. =]
When I ported instcombine to the new pass manager I discover that it
didn't work because TLI wasn't available in the right places. This is
a somewhat surprising and/or subtle aspect of the new pass manager
design that came up before but I think is useful to be reminded of:
While the new pass manager *allows* a function pass to query a module
analysis, it requires that the module analysis is already run and cached
prior to the function pass manager starting up, possibly with
a 'require<foo>' style utility in the pass pipeline. This is an
intentional hurdle because using a module analysis from a function pass
*requires* that the module analysis is run prior to entering the
function pass manager. Otherwise the other functions in the module could
be in who-knows-what state, etc.
A somewhat surprising consequence of this design decision (at least to
me) is that you have to design a function pass that leverages
a module analysis to do so as an optional feature. Even if that means
your function pass does no work in the absence of the module analysis,
you have to handle that possibility and remain conservatively correct.
This is a natural consequence of things being able to invalidate the
module analysis and us being unable to re-run it. And it's a generally
good thing because it lets us reorder passes arbitrarily without
breaking correctness, etc.
This ends up causing problems in one case. What if we have a module
analysis that is *definitionally* impossible to invalidate. In the
places this might come up, the analysis is usually also definitionally
trivial to run even while other transformation passes run on the module,
regardless of the state of anything. And so, it follows that it is
natural to have a hard requirement on such analyses from a function
pass.
It turns out, that TargetLibraryInfo is just such an analysis, and
InstCombine has a hard requirement on it.
The approach I've taken here is to produce an analysis that models this
flexibility by making it both a module and a function analysis. This
exposes the fact that it is in fact safe to compute at any point. We can
even make it a valid CGSCC analysis at some point if that is useful.
However, we don't want to have a copy of the actual target library info
state for each function! This state is specific to the triple. The
somewhat direct and blunt approach here is to turn TLI into a pimpl,
with the state and mutators in the implementation class and the query
routines primarily in the wrapper. Then the analysis can lazily
construct and cache the implementations, keyed on the triple, and
on-demand produce wrappers of them for each function.
One minor annoyance is that we will end up with a wrapper for each
function in the module. While this is a bit wasteful (one pointer per
function) it seems tolerable. And it has the advantage of ensuring that
we pay the absolute minimum synchronization cost to access this
information should we end up with a nice parallel function pass manager
in the future. We could look into trying to mark when analysis results
are especially cheap to recompute and more eagerly GC-ing the cached
results, or we could look at supporting a variant of analyses whose
results are specifically *not* cached and expected to just be used and
discarded by the consumer. Either way, these seem like incremental
enhancements that should happen when we start profiling the memory and
CPU usage of the new pass manager and not before.
The other minor annoyance is that if we end up using the TLI in both
a module pass and a function pass, those will be produced by two
separate analyses, and thus will point to separate copies of the
implementation state. While a minor issue, I dislike this and would like
to find a way to cleanly allow a single analysis instance to be used
across multiple IR unit managers. But I don't have a good solution to
this today, and I don't want to hold up all of the work waiting to come
up with one. This too seems like a reasonable thing to incrementally
improve later.
llvm-svn: 226981
a more direct approach: a type-erased glorified function pointer. Now we
can pass a function pointer into this for the easy case and we can even
pass a lambda into it in the interesting case in the instruction
combiner.
I'll be using this shortly to simplify the interfaces to InstCombiner,
but this helps pave the way and seems like a better design for the
libcall simplifier utility.
llvm-svn: 226640
a DominatorTree argument as that is the analysis that it wants to
update.
This removes the last non-loop utility function in Utils/ which accepts
a raw Pass argument.
llvm-svn: 226537
and updated.
This may appear to remove handling for things like alias analysis when
splitting critical edges here, but in fact no callers of SplitEdge
relied on this. Similarly, all of them wanted to preserve LCSSA if there
was any update of the loop info. That makes the interface much simpler.
With this, all of BasicBlockUtils.h is free of Pass arguments and
prepared for the new pass manager. This is tho majority of utilities
that relied on pass arguments.
llvm-svn: 226459
APIs and replace it and numerous booleans with an option struct.
The critical edge splitting API has a really large surface of flags and
so it seems worth burning a small option struct / builder. This struct
can be constructed with the various preserved analyses and then flags
can be flipped in a builder style.
The various users are now responsible for directly passing along their
analysis information. This should be enough for the critical edge
splitting to work cleanly with the new pass manager as well.
This API is still pretty crufty and could be cleaned up a lot, but I've
focused on this change just threading an option struct rather than
a pass through the API.
llvm-svn: 226456
SplitLandingPadPredecessors and remove the Pass argument from its
interface.
Another step to the utilities being usable with both old and new pass
managers.
llvm-svn: 226426
rather than relying on the pass object.
This one is a bit annoying, but will pay off. First, supporting this one
will make the next one much easier, and for utilities like LoopSimplify,
this is moving them (slowly) closer to not having to pass the pass
object around throughout their APIs.
llvm-svn: 226396
interface, removing Pass from its interface.
This also makes those analyses optional so that passes which don't even
preserve these (or use them) can skip the logic entirely.
llvm-svn: 226394
optionally updated by MergeBlockIntoPredecessors.
No functionality changed, just refactoring to clear the way for the new
pass manager.
llvm-svn: 226392
accepting a Pass and querying it for analyses.
This is necessary to allow the utilities to work both with the old and
new pass managers, and I also think this makes the interface much more
clear and helps the reader know what analyses the utility can actually
handle. I plan to repeat this process iteratively to clean up all the
pass utilities.
llvm-svn: 226386
IRCE eliminates range checks of the form
0 <= A * I + B < Length
by splitting a loop's iteration space into three segments in a way
that the check is completely redundant in the middle segment. As an
example, IRCE will convert
len = < known positive >
for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
if (0 <= i && i < len) {
do_something();
} else {
throw_out_of_bounds();
}
}
to
len = < known positive >
limit = smin(n, len)
// no first segment
for (i = 0; i < limit; i++) {
if (0 <= i && i < len) { // this check is fully redundant
do_something();
} else {
throw_out_of_bounds();
}
}
for (i = limit; i < n; i++) {
if (0 <= i && i < len) {
do_something();
} else {
throw_out_of_bounds();
}
}
IRCE can deal with multiple range checks in the same loop (it takes
the intersection of the ranges that will make each of them redundant
individually).
Currently IRCE does not do any profitability analysis. That is a
TODO.
Please note that the status of this pass is *experimental*, and it is
not part of any default pass pipeline. Having said that, I will love
to get feedback and general input from people interested in trying
this out.
This pass was originally r226201. It was reverted because it used C++
features not supported by MSVC 2012.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6693
llvm-svn: 226238
The change used C++11 features not supported by MSVC 2012. I will fix
the change to use things supported MSVC 2012 and recommit shortly.
llvm-svn: 226216
IRCE eliminates range checks of the form
0 <= A * I + B < Length
by splitting a loop's iteration space into three segments in a way
that the check is completely redundant in the middle segment. As an
example, IRCE will convert
len = < known positive >
for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
if (0 <= i && i < len) {
do_something();
} else {
throw_out_of_bounds();
}
}
to
len = < known positive >
limit = smin(n, len)
// no first segment
for (i = 0; i < limit; i++) {
if (0 <= i && i < len) { // this check is fully redundant
do_something();
} else {
throw_out_of_bounds();
}
}
for (i = limit; i < n; i++) {
if (0 <= i && i < len) {
do_something();
} else {
throw_out_of_bounds();
}
}
IRCE can deal with multiple range checks in the same loop (it takes
the intersection of the ranges that will make each of them redundant
individually).
Currently IRCE does not do any profitability analysis. That is a
TODO.
Please note that the status of this pass is *experimental*, and it is
not part of any default pass pipeline. Having said that, I will love
to get feedback and general input from people interested in trying
this out.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6693
llvm-svn: 226201
While the term "Target" is in the name, it doesn't really have to do
with the LLVM Target library -- this isn't an abstraction which LLVM
targets generally need to implement or extend. It has much more to do
with modeling the various runtime libraries on different OSes and with
different runtime environments. The "target" in this sense is the more
general sense of a target of cross compilation.
This is in preparation for porting this analysis to the new pass
manager.
No functionality changed, and updates inbound for Clang and Polly.
llvm-svn: 226078
utils/sort_includes.py.
I clearly haven't done this in a while, so more changed than usual. This
even uncovered a missing include from the InstrProf library that I've
added. No functionality changed here, just mechanical cleanup of the
include order.
llvm-svn: 225974
It turns out, all callsites of the simplifier are guarded by a check for
CallInst::getCalledFunction (i.e., to make sure the callee is direct).
This check wasn't done when trying to further optimize a simplified fortified
libcall, introduced by a refactoring in r225640.
Fix that, add a testcase, and document the requirement.
llvm-svn: 225895
Put them in a separate function, so we can reuse them to further
simplify fortified libcalls as well.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6540
llvm-svn: 225639
a cache of assumptions for a single function, and an immutable pass that
manages those caches.
The motivation for this change is two fold. Immutable analyses are
really hacks around the current pass manager design and don't exist in
the new design. This is usually OK, but it requires that the core logic
of an immutable pass be reasonably partitioned off from the pass logic.
This change does precisely that. As a consequence it also paves the way
for the *many* utility functions that deal in the assumptions to live in
both pass manager worlds by creating an separate non-pass object with
its own independent API that they all rely on. Now, the only bits of the
system that deal with the actual pass mechanics are those that actually
need to deal with the pass mechanics.
Once this separation is made, several simplifications become pretty
obvious in the assumption cache itself. Rather than using a set and
callback value handles, it can just be a vector of weak value handles.
The callers can easily skip the handles that are null, and eventually we
can wrap all of this up behind a filter iterator.
For now, this adds boiler plate to the various passes, but this kind of
boiler plate will end up making it possible to port these passes to the
new pass manager, and so it will end up factored away pretty reasonably.
llvm-svn: 225131
Take two disjoint Loops L1 and L2.
LoopSimplify fails to simplify some loops (e.g. when indirect branches
are involved). In such situations, it can happen that an exit for L1 is
the header of L2. Thus, when we create PHIs in one of such exits we are
also inserting PHIs in L2 header.
This could break LCSSA form for L2 because these inserted PHIs can also
have uses in L2 exits, which are never handled in the current
implementation. Provide a fix for this corner case and test that we
don't assert/crash on that.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6624
rdar://problem/19166231
llvm-svn: 224740
Instead of reusing the name `MapValue()` when mapping `Metadata`, use
`MapMetadata()`. The old name doesn't make much sense after the
`Metadata`/`Value` split.
llvm-svn: 224566
Split `Metadata` away from the `Value` class hierarchy, as part of
PR21532. Assembly and bitcode changes are in the wings, but this is the
bulk of the change for the IR C++ API.
I have a follow-up patch prepared for `clang`. If this breaks other
sub-projects, I apologize in advance :(. Help me compile it on Darwin
I'll try to fix it. FWIW, the errors should be easy to fix, so it may
be simpler to just fix it yourself.
This breaks the build for all metadata-related code that's out-of-tree.
Rest assured the transition is mechanical and the compiler should catch
almost all of the problems.
Here's a quick guide for updating your code:
- `Metadata` is the root of a class hierarchy with three main classes:
`MDNode`, `MDString`, and `ValueAsMetadata`. It is distinct from
the `Value` class hierarchy. It is typeless -- i.e., instances do
*not* have a `Type`.
- `MDNode`'s operands are all `Metadata *` (instead of `Value *`).
- `TrackingVH<MDNode>` and `WeakVH` referring to metadata can be
replaced with `TrackingMDNodeRef` and `TrackingMDRef`, respectively.
If you're referring solely to resolved `MDNode`s -- post graph
construction -- just use `MDNode*`.
- `MDNode` (and the rest of `Metadata`) have only limited support for
`replaceAllUsesWith()`.
As long as an `MDNode` is pointing at a forward declaration -- the
result of `MDNode::getTemporary()` -- it maintains a side map of its
uses and can RAUW itself. Once the forward declarations are fully
resolved RAUW support is dropped on the ground. This means that
uniquing collisions on changing operands cause nodes to become
"distinct". (This already happened fairly commonly, whenever an
operand went to null.)
If you're constructing complex (non self-reference) `MDNode` cycles,
you need to call `MDNode::resolveCycles()` on each node (or on a
top-level node that somehow references all of the nodes). Also,
don't do that. Metadata cycles (and the RAUW machinery needed to
construct them) are expensive.
- An `MDNode` can only refer to a `Constant` through a bridge called
`ConstantAsMetadata` (one of the subclasses of `ValueAsMetadata`).
As a side effect, accessing an operand of an `MDNode` that is known
to be, e.g., `ConstantInt`, takes three steps: first, cast from
`Metadata` to `ConstantAsMetadata`; second, extract the `Constant`;
third, cast down to `ConstantInt`.
The eventual goal is to introduce `MDInt`/`MDFloat`/etc. and have
metadata schema owners transition away from using `Constant`s when
the type isn't important (and they don't care about referring to
`GlobalValue`s).
In the meantime, I've added transitional API to the `mdconst`
namespace that matches semantics with the old code, in order to
avoid adding the error-prone three-step equivalent to every call
site. If your old code was:
MDNode *N = foo();
bar(isa <ConstantInt>(N->getOperand(0)));
baz(cast <ConstantInt>(N->getOperand(1)));
bak(cast_or_null <ConstantInt>(N->getOperand(2)));
bat(dyn_cast <ConstantInt>(N->getOperand(3)));
bay(dyn_cast_or_null<ConstantInt>(N->getOperand(4)));
you can trivially match its semantics with:
MDNode *N = foo();
bar(mdconst::hasa <ConstantInt>(N->getOperand(0)));
baz(mdconst::extract <ConstantInt>(N->getOperand(1)));
bak(mdconst::extract_or_null <ConstantInt>(N->getOperand(2)));
bat(mdconst::dyn_extract <ConstantInt>(N->getOperand(3)));
bay(mdconst::dyn_extract_or_null<ConstantInt>(N->getOperand(4)));
and when you transition your metadata schema to `MDInt`:
MDNode *N = foo();
bar(isa <MDInt>(N->getOperand(0)));
baz(cast <MDInt>(N->getOperand(1)));
bak(cast_or_null <MDInt>(N->getOperand(2)));
bat(dyn_cast <MDInt>(N->getOperand(3)));
bay(dyn_cast_or_null<MDInt>(N->getOperand(4)));
- A `CallInst` -- specifically, intrinsic instructions -- can refer to
metadata through a bridge called `MetadataAsValue`. This is a
subclass of `Value` where `getType()->isMetadataTy()`.
`MetadataAsValue` is the *only* class that can legally refer to a
`LocalAsMetadata`, which is a bridged form of non-`Constant` values
like `Argument` and `Instruction`. It can also refer to any other
`Metadata` subclass.
(I'll break all your testcases in a follow-up commit, when I propagate
this change to assembly.)
llvm-svn: 223802
Introduce the ``llvm.instrprof_increment`` intrinsic and the
``-instrprof`` pass. These provide the infrastructure for writing
counters for profiling, as in clang's ``-fprofile-instr-generate``.
The implementation of the instrprof pass is ported directly out of the
CodeGenPGO classes in clang, and with the followup in clang that rips
that code out to use these new intrinsics this ends up being NFC.
Doing the instrumentation this way opens some doors in terms of
improving the counter performance. For example, this will make it
simple to experiment with alternate lowering strategies, and allows us
to try handling profiling specially in some optimizations if we want
to.
Finally, this drastically simplifies the frontend and puts all of the
lowering logic in one place.
llvm-svn: 223672
If LowerGEP is enabled, it can lower a GEP with multiple indices into GEPs with a single index
or arithmetic operations. Lowering GEPs can always extract structure indices. Lowering GEPs can
also give use more optimization opportunities. It can benefit passes like CSE, LICM and CGP.
Reviewed in http://reviews.llvm.org/D5864
llvm-svn: 222328
Summary:
move the code from BreakCriticalEdges::runOnFunction()
into a separate utility function llvm::SplitAllCriticalEdges()
so that it can be used independently.
No functionality change intended.
Test Plan: check-llvm
Reviewers: nlewycky
Reviewed By: nlewycky
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6313
llvm-svn: 222288
Summary:
This change moves asan-coverage instrumentation
into a separate Module pass.
The other part of the change in clang introduces a new flag
-fsanitize-coverage=N.
Another small patch will update tests in compiler-rt.
With this patch no functionality change is expected except for the flag name.
The following changes will make the coverage instrumentation work with tsan/msan
Test Plan: Run regression tests, chromium.
Reviewers: nlewycky, samsonov
Reviewed By: nlewycky, samsonov
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6152
llvm-svn: 221718
This introduces the symbol rewriter. This is an IR->IR transformation that is
implemented as a CodeGenPrepare pass. This allows for the transparent
adjustment of the symbols during compilation.
It provides a clean, simple, elegant solution for symbol inter-positioning. This
technique is often used, such as in the various sanitizers and performance
analysis.
The control of this is via a custom YAML syntax map file that indicates source
to destination mapping, so as to avoid having the compiler to know the exact
details of the source to destination transformations.
llvm-svn: 221548
When a call to a double-precision libm function has fast-math semantics
(via function attribute for now because there is no IR-level FMF on calls),
we can avoid fpext/fptrunc operations and use the float version of the call
if the input and output are both float.
We already do this optimization using a command-line option; this patch just
adds the ability for fast-math to use the existing functionality.
I moved the cl::opt from InstructionCombining into SimplifyLibCalls because
it's only ever used internally to that class.
Modified the existing test cases to use the unsafe-fp-math attribute rather
than repeating all tests.
This patch should solve: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=17850
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5893
llvm-svn: 220390
These are named following the IEEE-754 names for these
functions, rather than the libm fmin / fmax to avoid
possible ambiguities. Some languages may implement something
resembling fmin / fmax which return NaN if either operand is
to propagate errors. These implement the IEEE-754 semantics
of returning the other operand if either is a NaN representing
missing data.
llvm-svn: 220341
If a square root call has an FP multiplication argument that can be reassociated,
then we can hoist a repeated factor out of the square root call and into a fabs().
In the simplest case, this:
y = sqrt(x * x);
becomes this:
y = fabs(x);
This patch relies on an earlier optimization in instcombine or reassociate to put the
multiplication tree into a canonical form, so we don't have to search over
every permutation of the multiplication tree.
Because there are no IR-level FastMathFlags for intrinsics (PR21290), we have to
use function-level attributes to do this optimization. This needs to be fixed
for both the intrinsics and in the backend.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5787
llvm-svn: 219944
A few minor changes to prevent @llvm.assume from interfering with loop
vectorization. First, treat @llvm.assume like the lifetime intrinsics, which
are scalarized (but don't otherwise interfere with the legality checking).
Second, ignore the cost of ephemeral instructions in the loop (these will go
away anyway during CodeGen).
Alignment assumptions and other uses of @llvm.assume can often end up inside of
loops that should be vectorized (this is not uncommon for assumptions generated
by __attribute__((align_value(n))), for example).
llvm-svn: 219741
Eliminate library calls and intrinsic calls to fabs when the input
is a squared value.
Note that no unsafe-math / fast-math assumptions are needed for
this optimization.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5777
llvm-svn: 219717
Summary:
This patch adds a threshold that controls the number of bonus instructions
allowed for folding branches with common destination. The original code allows
at most one bonus instruction. With this patch, users can customize the
threshold to allow multiple bonus instructions. The default threshold is still
1, so that the code behaves the same as before when users do not specify this
threshold.
The motivation of this change is that tuning this threshold significantly (up
to 25%) improves the performance of some CUDA programs in our internal code
base. In general, branch instructions are very expensive for GPU programs.
Therefore, it is sometimes worth trading more arithmetic computation for a more
straightened control flow. Here's a reduced example:
__global__ void foo(int a, int b, int c, int d, int e, int n,
const int *input, int *output) {
int sum = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
sum += (((i ^ a) > b) && (((i | c ) ^ d) > e)) ? 0 : input[i];
*output = sum;
}
The select statement in the loop body translates to two branch instructions "if
((i ^ a) > b)" and "if (((i | c) ^ d) > e)" which share a common destination.
With the default threshold, SimplifyCFG is unable to fold them, because
computing the condition of the second branch "(i | c) ^ d > e" requires two
bonus instructions. With the threshold increased, SimplifyCFG can fold the two
branches so that the loop body contains only one branch, making the code
conceptually look like:
sum += (((i ^ a) > b) & (((i | c ) ^ d) > e)) ? 0 : input[i];
Increasing the threshold significantly improves the performance of this
particular example. In the configuration where both conditions are guaranteed
to be true, increasing the threshold from 1 to 2 improves the performance by
18.24%. Even in the configuration where the first condition is false and the
second condition is true, which favors shortcuts, increasing the threshold from
1 to 2 still improves the performance by 4.35%.
We are still looking for a good threshold and maybe a better cost model than
just counting the number of bonus instructions. However, according to the above
numbers, we think it is at least worth adding a threshold to enable more
experiments and tuning. Let me know what you think. Thanks!
Test Plan: Added one test case to check the threshold is in effect
Reviewers: nadav, eliben, meheff, resistor, hfinkel
Reviewed By: hfinkel
Subscribers: hfinkel, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5529
llvm-svn: 218711
This type isn't owned polymorphically (as demonstrated by making the
dtor protected and everything still compiling) so just address the
warning by protecting the base dtor and making the derived class final.
llvm-svn: 217990
This adds a ScalarEvolution-powered transformation that updates load, store and
memory intrinsic pointer alignments based on invariant((a+q) & b == 0)
expressions. Many of the simple cases we can get with ValueTracking, but we
still need something like this for the more complicated cases (such as those
with an offset) that require some algebra. Note that gcc's
__builtin_assume_aligned's optional third argument provides exactly for this
kind of 'misalignment' offset for which this kind of logic is necessary.
The primary motivation is to fixup alignments for vector loads/stores after
vectorization (and unrolling). This pass is added to the optimization pipeline
just after the SLP vectorizer runs (which, admittedly, does not preserve SE,
although I imagine it could). Regardless, I actually don't think that the
preservation matters too much in this case: SE computes lazily, and this pass
won't issue any SE queries unless there are any assume intrinsics, so there
should be no real additional cost in the common case (SLP does preserve DT and
LoopInfo).
llvm-svn: 217344
This change, which allows @llvm.assume to be used from within computeKnownBits
(and other associated functions in ValueTracking), adds some (optional)
parameters to computeKnownBits and friends. These functions now (optionally)
take a "context" instruction pointer, an AssumptionTracker pointer, and also a
DomTree pointer, and most of the changes are just to pass this new information
when it is easily available from InstSimplify, InstCombine, etc.
As explained below, the significant conceptual change is that known properties
of a value might depend on the control-flow location of the use (because we
care that the @llvm.assume dominates the use because assumptions have
control-flow dependencies). This means that, when we ask if bits are known in a
value, we might get different answers for different uses.
The significant changes are all in ValueTracking. Two main changes: First, as
with the rest of the code, new parameters need to be passed around. To make
this easier, I grouped them into a structure, and I made internal static
versions of the relevant functions that take this structure as a parameter. The
new code does as you might expect, it looks for @llvm.assume calls that make
use of the value we're trying to learn something about (often indirectly),
attempts to pattern match that expression, and uses the result if successful.
By making use of the AssumptionTracker, the process of finding @llvm.assume
calls is not expensive.
Part of the structure being passed around inside ValueTracking is a set of
already-considered @llvm.assume calls. This is to prevent a query using, for
example, the assume(a == b), to recurse on itself. The context and DT params
are used to find applicable assumptions. An assumption needs to dominate the
context instruction, or come after it deterministically. In this latter case we
only handle the specific case where both the assumption and the context
instruction are in the same block, and we need to exclude assumptions from
being used to simplify their own ephemeral values (those which contribute only
to the assumption) because otherwise the assumption would prove its feeding
comparison trivial and would be removed.
This commit adds the plumbing and the logic for a simple masked-bit propagation
(just enough to write a regression test). Future commits add more patterns
(and, correspondingly, more regression tests).
llvm-svn: 217342
This adds an immutable pass, AssumptionTracker, which keeps a cache of
@llvm.assume call instructions within a module. It uses callback value handles
to keep stale functions and intrinsics out of the map, and it relies on any
code that creates new @llvm.assume calls to notify it of the new instructions.
The benefit is that code needing to find @llvm.assume intrinsics can do so
directly, without scanning the function, thus allowing the cost of @llvm.assume
handling to be negligible when none are present.
The current design is intended to be lightweight. We don't keep track of
anything until we need a list of assumptions in some function. The first time
this happens, we scan the function. After that, we add/remove @llvm.assume
calls from the cache in response to registration calls and ValueHandle
callbacks.
There are no new direct test cases for this pass, but because it calls it
validation function upon module finalization, we'll pick up detectable
inconsistencies from the other tests that touch @llvm.assume calls.
This pass will be used by follow-up commits that make use of @llvm.assume.
llvm-svn: 217334
