An input !foreach expression such as !foreach(a, lst, !add(a, 1))
would be re-emitted by llvm-tblgen -print-records with the first
argument in quotes, giving !foreach("a", lst, !add(a, 1)), which isn't
valid TableGen input syntax.
Reviewers: nhaehnle
Reviewed By: nhaehnle
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46352
llvm-svn: 331351
It turned out that readonly argmemonly is not enough.
store 42, %p
%b = barrier(%p)
store 43, %b
the first store is dead, but because barrier was marked as
reading argument memory, it was considered alive. With
inaccessiblememonly it doesn't read the argument, but
it also can't be CSEd.
based on: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32006
llvm-svn: 331338
Summary:
This is a follow up to rL331182. A PHI node can be split up into
several MIR PHI nodes when being selected. When there is a
dbg.value intrinsic that uses the result of such a PHI node we
need to select several DBG_VALUE instructions, with fragment
expressions, in order to do a correct selection.
Reviewers: rnk, aprantl, vsk
Reviewed By: vsk
Subscribers: mattd, llvm-commits, JDevlieghere, aprantl, gbedwell, rnk
Tags: #debug-info
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46329
llvm-svn: 331337
Summary:
This brings the filenames in accordance to the style guide and LLVM
conventions for C++ filenames.
As suggested by rnk@ in D46068.
Reviewers: rnk
Subscribers: mgorny, mgrang, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46301
llvm-svn: 331321
The logic remains the same. Eventually, I see the RCU acting as its own separate stage in the instruction pipeline.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46331
llvm-svn: 331316
and (or (lshr X, C), ...), 1 --> (X & C') != 0
I initially thought about implementing the minimal pattern in instcombine as mentioned here:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37098#c6
...but we need to do better to catch the more general sequence from the motivating test
(more than 2 bits in the compare). And a test-suite run with statistics showed that this
pattern only happened 2 times currently. It would potentially happen more often if
reassociation worked better (D45842), but it's probably still not too frequent?
This is small enough that I didn't see a need to create a whole new class/file within
AggressiveInstCombine. There are likely other relatively small matchers like what was
discussed in D44266 that would slide under foldUnusualPatterns() (name suggestions welcome).
We could potentially also consolidate matchers for ctpop, bswap, etc under here.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45986
llvm-svn: 331311
As mentioned in D45986, there's a potential ordering dependency
between instcombine and aggressive-instcombine for detecting these,
so I'm adding a few tests to confirm that the expected folds occur
using -O3 (because aggressive-instcombine only runs at -O3 currently).
llvm-svn: 331308
While running the lit tests for the most recent version of D45916
(https://reviews.llvm.org/D45916), I found that a couple tests for this pass
suddenly started segfaulting. Since the outliner wasn't actually doing anything
to the code in either of these tests I got curious.
I found that the pass doesn’t completely create the machine-level constructs
necessary to actually add a MachineFunction and MachineBasicBlock to the
module. This patch adds in those missing bits. After this, adding the
outliner before this pass won’t cause it to segfault.
You can recreate this behaviour by adding the MachineOutliner directly before
the pass and having it return false immediately.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D46330
llvm-svn: 331307
This adds a some more tests, and adds some notes to tests which are using
a suboptimal lowering.
The constants with suboptimal lowerings seem to be relatively rare in
practice, but it might be a fun project to work on improvements.
llvm-svn: 331304
The logic for this combine is almost identical to the logic for a
(sext (sextload x)) combine.
This commit factors out the logic so it can be shared by both combines,
and corrects the SDLoc assigned in the zext version of the combine.
Prior to this patch, for the given test case, we would apply the
location associated with the udiv instruction to instructions which
perform the load.
Part of: llvm.org/PR37262
llvm-svn: 331303
Prior to this patch, for the given test case, we would apply the
location associated with the sdiv instruction to instructions which
perform the load.
Part of: llvm.org/PR37262.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46222
llvm-svn: 331302
In DAGCombiner, we try to simplify this pattern:
([s|z]ext (load ...))
Conceptually, a new extload which is created while splitting the load
should have the same debug location as the load.
Making this change affects the IROrder of the new load, causing some
test case churn.
In practice, the new location is never different from the location of
the [s|z]ext, at least not during check-llvm or a stage2 build.
Part of: llvm.org/PR37262
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46156
llvm-svn: 331301
Setting the right SDLoc on a newly-created zextload fixes a line table
bug which resulted in non-linear stepping behavior.
Several backend tests contained CHECK lines which relied on the IROrder
inherited from the wrong SDLoc. This patch breaks that dependence where
feasbile and regenerates test cases where not.
In some cases, changing a node's IROrder may alter register allocation
and spill behavior. This can affect performance. I have chosen not to
prevent this by applying a "known good" IROrder to SDLocs, as this may
hide a more general bug in the scheduler, or cause regressions on other
test inputs.
rdar://33755881, Part of: llvm.org/PR37262
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45995
llvm-svn: 331300
LLVM always puts function definition DIEs at the top level, but under
some circumstances GCC does not (at least in this case with member
functions of a function-local type).
To ensure that doesn't appear as though the local type's member function
is unduly inlined within the outer function - ensure the inline
discovery DIE parent walk stops at the first DW_TAG_subprogram.
llvm-svn: 331291
According to MSDN, Visual Studio 2015 included support for
std::is_final. Additionally, a bug in the Visual Studio compiler results
in the incorrect definition of __cplusplus. Due to the conditions in the
else case not holding either, we end up with no definition of
LLVM_IS_FINAL when building with MSVC. This has not yet been a problem
with LLVM/clang, however, the uses of LLVM_IS_FINAL is more prevalent in
swift, which uses the ADT library and causes issues when building lldb
with Visual Studio.
Workaround the issue by always assuming that the definition of
std::is_final is available with Visual Studio. Since we currently
require VS 2015+ for building LLVM, this condition should always hold
for the users in LLVM/clang (and for swift).
llvm-svn: 331282
Summary:
This fixes a build break with r331269.
test/Transforms/LoopVectorize/pr23997.ll
should be in:
test/Transforms/LoopVectorize/X86/pr23997.ll
llvm-svn: 331281
This is a follow-up to r331272.
We've been running doxygen with the autobrief option for a couple of
years now. This makes the \brief markers into our comments
redundant. Since they are a visual distraction and we don't want to
encourage more \brief markers in new code either, this patch removes
them all.
Patch produced by
for i in $(git grep -l '\@brief'); do perl -pi -e 's/\@brief //g' $i & done
https://reviews.llvm.org/D46290
llvm-svn: 331275
We've been running doxygen with the autobrief option for a couple of
years now. This makes the \brief markers into our comments
redundant. Since they are a visual distraction and we don't want to
encourage more \brief markers in new code either, this patch removes
them all.
Patch produced by
for i in $(git grep -l '\\brief'); do perl -pi -e 's/\\brief //g' $i & done
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46290
llvm-svn: 331272
Summary:
This is a fix for PR23997.
The loop vectorizer is not preserving the inbounds property of GEPs that it creates.
This is inhibiting some optimizations. This patch preserves the inbounds property in
the case where a load/store is being fed by an inbounds GEP.
Reviewers: mkuper, javed.absar, hsaito
Reviewed By: hsaito
Subscribers: dcaballe, hsaito, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46191
llvm-svn: 331269
phi is on lhs of a comparison op.
For the following testcase,
L1:
%t0 = add i32 %m, 7
%t3 = icmp eq i32* %t2, null
br i1 %t3, label %L3, label %L2
L2:
%t4 = load i32, i32* %t2, align 4
br label %L3
L3:
%t5 = phi i32 [ %t0, %L1 ], [ %t4, %L2 ]
%t6 = icmp eq i32 %t0, %t5
br i1 %t6, label %L4, label %L5
We know if we go through the path L1 --> L3, %t6 should always be true. However
currently, if the rhs of the eq comparison is phi, JumpThreading fails to
evaluate %t6 to true. And we know that Instcombine cannot guarantee always
canonicalizing phi to the left hand side of the comparison operation according
to the operand priority comparison mechanism in instcombine. The patch handles
the case when rhs of the comparison op is a phi.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46275
llvm-svn: 331266
