it is completely optional, and sink the logic for handling the preserved
analysis set into it.
This allows us to implement the delegation logic desired in the proxy
module analysis for the function analysis manager where if the proxy
itself is preserved we assume the set of functions hasn't changed and we
do a fine grained invalidation by walking the functions in the module
and running the invalidate for them all at the manager level and letting
it try to invalidate any passes.
This in turn makes it blindingly obvious why we should hoist the
invalidate trait and have two collections of results. That allows
handling invalidation for almost all analyses without indirect calls and
it allows short circuiting when the preserved set is all.
llvm-svn: 195338
type and detect whether or not it provides an 'invalidate' member the
analysis manager should use.
This lets the overwhelming common case of *not* caring about custom
behavior when an analysis is invalidated be the the obvious default
behavior with no code written by the author of an analysis. Only when
they write code specifically to handle invalidation does it get used.
Both cases are actually covered by tests here. The test analysis uses
the default behavior, and the proxy module analysis actually has custom
behavior on invalidation that is firing correctly. (In fact, this is the
analysis which was the primary motivation for having custom invalidation
behavior in the first place.)
llvm-svn: 195332
This proxy will fill the role of proxying invalidation events down IR
unit layers so that when a module changes we correctly invalidate
function analyses. Currently this is a very coarse solution -- any
change blows away the entire thing -- but the next step is to make
invalidation handling more nuanced so that we can propagate specific
amounts of invalidation from one layer to the next.
The test is extended to place a module pass between two function pass
managers each of which have preserved function analyses which get
correctly invalidated by the module pass that might have changed what
functions are even in the module.
llvm-svn: 195304
This adds a new set-like type which represents a set of preserved
analysis passes. The set is managed via the opaque PassT::ID() void*s.
The expected convenience templates for interacting with specific passes
are provided. It also supports a symbolic "all" state which is
represented by an invalid pointer in the set. This state is nicely
saturating as it comes up often. Finally, it supports intersection which
is used when finding the set of preserved passes after N different
transforms.
The pass API is then changed to return the preserved set rather than
a bool. This is much more self-documenting than the previous system.
Returning "none" is a conservatively correct solution just like
returning "true" from todays passes and not marking any passes as
preserved. Passes can also be dynamically preserved or not throughout
the run of the pass, and whatever gets returned is the binding state.
Finally, preserving "all" the passes is allowed for no-op transforms
that simply can't harm such things.
Finally, the analysis managers are changed to instead of blindly
invalidating all of the analyses, invalidate those which were not
preserved. This should rig up all of the basic preservation
functionality. This also correctly combines the preservation moving up
from one IR-layer to the another and the preservation aggregation across
N pass runs. Still to go is incrementally correct invalidation and
preservation across IR layers incrementally during N pass runs. That
will wait until we have a device for even exposing analyses across IR
layers.
While the core of this change is obvious, I'm not happy with the current
testing, so will improve it to cover at least some of the invalidation
that I can test easily in a subsequent commit.
llvm-svn: 195241
The FunctionPassManager is now itself a function pass. When run over
a function, it runs all N of its passes over that function. This is the
1:N mapping in the pass dimension only. This allows it to be used in
either a ModulePassManager or potentially some other manager that
works on IR units which are supersets of Functions.
This commit also adds the obvious adaptor to map from a module pass to
a function pass, running the function pass across every function in the
module.
The test has been updated to use this new pattern.
llvm-svn: 195192
a module-specific interface. This is the first of many steps necessary
to generalize the infrastructure such that we can support both
a Module-to-Function and Module-to-SCC-to-Function pass manager
nestings.
After a *lot* of attempts that never worked and didn't even make it to
a committable state, it became clear that I had gotten the layering
design of analyses flat out wrong. Four days later, I think I have most
of the plan for how to correct this, and I'm starting to reshape the
code into it. This is just a baby step I'm afraid, but starts separating
the fundamentally distinct concepts of function analysis passes and
module analysis passes so that in subsequent steps we can effectively
layer them, and have a consistent design for the eventual SCC layer.
As part of this, I've started some interface changes to make passes more
regular. The module pass accepts the module in the run method, and some
of the constructor parameters are gone. I'm still working out exactly
where constructor parameters vs. method parameters will be used, so
I expect this to fluctuate a bit.
This actually makes the invalidation less "correct" at this phase,
because now function passes don't invalidate module analysis passes, but
that was actually somewhat of a misfeature. It will return in a better
factored form which can scale to other units of IR. The documentation
has gotten less verbose and helpful.
llvm-svn: 195189
AnalysisManager. All this method did was assert something and we have
a perfectly good way to trigger that assert from the query path.
llvm-svn: 194947
more smarts in it. This is where most of the interesting logic that used
to live in the implicit-scheduling-hackery of the old pass manager will
live.
Like the previous commits, note that this is a very early prototype!
I expect substantial changes before this is ready to use.
The core of the design is the following:
- We have an AnalysisManager which can be used across a series of
passes over a module.
- The code setting up a pass pipeline registers the analyses available
with the manager.
- Individual transform passes can check than an analysis manager
provides the analyses they require in order to fail-fast.
- There is *no* implicit registration or scheduling.
- Analysis passes are different from other passes: they produce an
analysis result that is cached and made available via the analysis
manager.
- Cached results are invalidated automatically by the pass managers.
- When a transform pass requests an analysis result, either the analysis
is run to produce the result or a cached result is provided.
There are a few aspects of this design that I *know* will change in
subsequent commits:
- Currently there is no "preservation" system, that needs to be added.
- All of the analysis management should move up to the analysis library.
- The analysis management needs to support at least SCC passes. Maybe
loop passes. Living in the analysis library will facilitate this.
- Need support for analyses which are *both* module and function passes.
- Need support for pro-actively running module analyses to have cached
results within a function pass manager.
- Need a clear design for "immutable" passes.
- Need support for requesting cached results when available and not
re-running the pass even if that would be necessary.
- Need more thorough testing of all of this infrastructure.
There are other aspects that I view as open questions I'm hoping to
resolve as I iterate a bit on the infrastructure, and especially as
I start writing actual passes against this.
- Should we have separate management layers for function, module, and
SCC analyses? I think "yes", but I'm not yet ready to switch the code.
Adding SCC support will likely resolve this definitively.
- How should the 'require' functionality work? Should *that* be the only
way to request results to ensure that passes always require things?
- How should preservation work?
- Probably some other things I'm forgetting. =]
Look forward to more patches in shorter order now that this is in place.
llvm-svn: 194538
This is still just a skeleton. I'm trying to pull together the
experimentation I've done into committable chunks, and this is the first
coherent one. Others will follow in hopefully short order that move this
more toward a useful initial implementation. I still expect the design
to continue evolving in small ways as I work through the different
requirements and features needed here though.
Keep in mind, all of this is off by default.
Currently, this mostly exercises the use of a polymorphic smart pointer
and templates to hide the polymorphism for the pass manager from the
pass implementation. The next step will be more significant, adding the
first framework of analysis support.
llvm-svn: 194325
