Current tail duplication integrated in bb layout is designed to increase the fallthrough from a BB's predecessor to its successor, but we have observed cases that duplication doesn't increase fallthrough, or it brings too much size overhead.
To overcome these two issues in function canTailDuplicateUnplacedPreds I add two checks:
make sure there is at least one duplication in current work set.
the number of duplication should not exceed the number of successors.
The modification in hasBetterLayoutPredecessor fixes a bug that potential predecessor must be at the bottom of a chain.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64376
When choosing the best successor for a block, ordinarily we would have preferred
a block that preserves the CFG unless there is a strong probability the other
direction. For small blocks that can be duplicated we now skip that requirement
as well, subject to some simple frequency calculations.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28583
llvm-svn: 293716
This reverts commit ada6595a526d71df04988eb0a4b4fe84df398ded.
This needs a simple probability check because there are some cases where it is
not profitable.
llvm-svn: 291695
When choosing the best successor for a block, ordinarily we would have preferred
a block that preserves the CFG unless there is a strong probability the other
direction. For small blocks that can be duplicated we now skip that requirement
as well.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27742
llvm-svn: 291609
The order in which branches appear in ImmBranches is approximately their
order within the function body. By visiting later branches first, we reduce
the distance between earlier forward branches and their targets, making it
more likely that the cbn?z optimization, which can only apply to forward
branches, will succeed for those earlier branches.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9185
llvm-svn: 235640
