Revert http://reviews.llvm.org/D19926 as it breaks tests.

llvm-svn: 268681

Simplify CFG before assigning discriminator.

Summary: We need to clean up CFG before assigning discriminator to minimize the impact of optimization on debug info.

Reviewers: davidxl, dblaikie, dnov

Simplify CFG before assigning discriminator.

Summary: We need to clean up CFG before assigning discriminator to minimize the impact of optimization on debug info.

Reviewers: davidxl, dblaikie, dnovillo

Subscribers: dnovillo, danielcdh, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19926

llvm-svn: 268675

show more ...

Add opt-bisect support to additional passes that can be skipped

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19882

llvm-svn: 268457

Re-commit optimization bisect support (r267022) without new pass manager support.

The original commit was reverted because of a buildbot problem with LazyCallGraph::SCC handling (not related to the

Re-commit optimization bisect support (r267022) without new pass manager support.

The original commit was reverted because of a buildbot problem with LazyCallGraph::SCC handling (not related to the OptBisect handling).

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19172

llvm-svn: 267231

show more ...

Revert "Initial implementation of optimization bisect support."

This reverts commit r267022, due to an ASan failure:

http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/job/clang-stage2-cmake-RgSan_check/1549

llvm-s

Revert "Initial implementation of optimization bisect support."

This reverts commit r267022, due to an ASan failure:

http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/job/clang-stage2-cmake-RgSan_check/1549

llvm-svn: 267115

show more ...

Initial implementation of optimization bisect support.

This patch implements a optimization bisect feature, which will allow optimizations to be selectively disabled at compile time in order to trac

Initial implementation of optimization bisect support.

This patch implements a optimization bisect feature, which will allow optimizations to be selectively disabled at compile time in order to track down test failures that are caused by incorrect optimizations.

The bisection is enabled using a new command line option (-opt-bisect-limit). Individual passes that may be skipped call the OptBisect object (via an LLVMContext) to see if they should be skipped based on the bisect limit. A finer level of control (disabling individual transformations) can be managed through an addition OptBisect method, but this is not yet used.

The skip checking in this implementation is based on (and replaces) the skipOptnoneFunction check. Where that check was being called, a new call has been inserted in its place which checks the bisect limit and the optnone attribute. A new function call has been added for module and SCC passes that behaves in a similar way.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19172

llvm-svn: 267022

show more ...

[SimlifyCFG] Prevent passes from destroying canonical loop structure, especially for nested loops

When eliminating or merging almost empty basic blocks, the existence of non-trivial PHI nodes
is

[SimlifyCFG] Prevent passes from destroying canonical loop structure, especially for nested loops

When eliminating or merging almost empty basic blocks, the existence of non-trivial PHI nodes
is currently used to recognize potential loops of which the block is the header and keep the block.
However, the current algorithm fails if the loops' exit condition is evaluated only with volatile
values hence no PHI nodes in the header. Especially when such a loop is an outer loop of a nested
loop, the loop is collapsed into a single loop which prevent later optimizations from being
applied (e.g., transforming nested loops into simplified forms and loop vectorization).

The patch augments the existing PHI node-based check by adding a pre-test if the BB actually
belongs to a set of loop headers and not eliminating it if yes.

llvm-svn: 264697

show more ...

Revert "[SimlifyCFG] Prevent passes from destroying canonical loop structure, especially for nested loops"

This reverts commit r264596.

It does not compile.

llvm-svn: 264604

[SimlifyCFG] Prevent passes from destroying canonical loop structure, especially for nested loops

When eliminating or merging almost empty basic blocks, the existence of non-trivial PHI nodes
is cur

[SimlifyCFG] Prevent passes from destroying canonical loop structure, especially for nested loops

When eliminating or merging almost empty basic blocks, the existence of non-trivial PHI nodes
is currently used to recognize potential loops of which the block is the header and keep the block.
However, the current algorithm fails if the loops' exit condition is evaluated only with volatile
values hence no PHI nodes in the header. Especially when such a loop is an outer loop of a nested
loop, the loop is collapsed into a single loop which prevent later optimizations from being
applied (e.g., transforming nested loops into simplified forms and loop vectorization).

The patch augments the existing PHI node-based check by adding a pre-test if the BB actually
belongs to a set of loop headers and not eliminating it if yes.

llvm-svn: 264596

show more ...

[PM] Make the AnalysisManager parameter to run methods a reference.

This was originally a pointer to support pass managers which didn't use
AnalysisManagers. However, that doesn't realistically come

[PM] Make the AnalysisManager parameter to run methods a reference.

This was originally a pointer to support pass managers which didn't use
AnalysisManagers. However, that doesn't realistically come up much and
the complexity of supporting it doesn't really make sense.

In fact, *many* parts of the pass manager were just assuming the pointer
was never null already. This at least makes it much more explicit and
clear.

llvm-svn: 263219

show more ...

PM: Fix an inverted condition in simplifyFunctionCFG

I mentioned the issue here in code review way back in September and
was sure we'd fixed it, but apparently we forgot:

http://lists.llvm.org/pi

PM: Fix an inverted condition in simplifyFunctionCFG

I mentioned the issue here in code review way back in September and
was sure we'd fixed it, but apparently we forgot:

http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20150921/301850.html

In any case, as soon as you try to use this pass in anything but the
most basic pipeline everything falls apart. Fix the condition.

llvm-svn: 257935

show more ...

Scalar: Remove remaining ilist iterator implicit conversions

Remove remaining `ilist_iterator` implicit conversions from
LLVMScalarOpts.

This change exposed some scary behaviour in
lib/Transforms/S

Scalar: Remove remaining ilist iterator implicit conversions

Remove remaining `ilist_iterator` implicit conversions from
LLVMScalarOpts.

This change exposed some scary behaviour in
lib/Transforms/Scalar/SCCP.cpp around line 1770. This patch changes a
call from `Function::begin()` to `&Function::front()`, since the return
was immediately being passed into another function that takes a
`Function*`. `Function::front()` started to assert, since the function
was empty. Note that `Function::end()` does not point at a legal
`Function*` -- it points at an `ilist_half_node` -- so the other
function was getting garbage before. (I added the missing check for
`Function::isDeclaration()`.)

Otherwise, no functionality change intended.

llvm-svn: 250211

show more ...

Add GlobalsAA as preserved to a bunch of transforms

GlobalsAA must by definition be preserved in function passes, but the passmanager doesn't know that. Make each pass explicitly preserve GlobalsAA.

Add GlobalsAA as preserved to a bunch of transforms

GlobalsAA must by definition be preserved in function passes, but the passmanager doesn't know that. Make each pass explicitly preserve GlobalsAA.

llvm-svn: 247263

show more ...

fix typos; NFC

llvm-svn: 240592

don't repeat function names in comments; NFC

llvm-svn: 240591

Revert r240137 (Fixed/added namespace ending comments using clang-tidy. NFC)

Apparently, the style needs to be agreed upon first.

llvm-svn: 240390

Fixed/added namespace ending comments using clang-tidy. NFC

The patch is generated using this command:

tools/clang/tools/extra/clang-tidy/tool/run-clang-tidy.py -fix \
-checks=-*,llvm-namespace-c

Fixed/added namespace ending comments using clang-tidy. NFC

The patch is generated using this command:

tools/clang/tools/extra/clang-tidy/tool/run-clang-tidy.py -fix \
-checks=-*,llvm-namespace-comment -header-filter='llvm/.*|clang/.*' \
llvm/lib/


Thanks to Eugene Kosov for the original patch!

llvm-svn: 240137

show more ...

[ARM] Pass a callback to FunctionPass constructors to enable skipping execution
on a per-function basis.

Previously some of the passes were conditionally added to ARM's pass pipeline
based on the ta

[ARM] Pass a callback to FunctionPass constructors to enable skipping execution
on a per-function basis.

Previously some of the passes were conditionally added to ARM's pass pipeline
based on the target machine's subtarget. This patch makes changes to add those
passes unconditionally and execute them conditonally based on the predicate
functor passed to the pass constructors. This enables running different sets of
passes for different functions in the module.

rdar://problem/20542263

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D8717

llvm-svn: 239325

show more ...

DataLayout is mandatory, update the API to reflect it with references.

Summary:
Now that the DataLayout is a mandatory part of the module, let's start
cleaning the codebase. This patch is a first at

DataLayout is mandatory, update the API to reflect it with references.

Summary:
Now that the DataLayout is a mandatory part of the module, let's start
cleaning the codebase. This patch is a first attempt at doing that.

This patch is not exactly NFC as for instance some places were passing
a nullptr instead of the DataLayout, possibly just because there was a
default value on the DataLayout argument to many functions in the API.
Even though it is not purely NFC, there is no change in the
validation.

I turned as many pointer to DataLayout to references, this helped
figuring out all the places where a nullptr could come up.

I had initially a local version of this patch broken into over 30
independant, commits but some later commit were cleaning the API and
touching part of the code modified in the previous commits, so it
seemed cleaner without the intermediate state.

Test Plan:

Reviewers: echristo

Subscribers: llvm-commits

From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com>
llvm-svn: 231740

show more ...

Make DataLayout Non-Optional in the Module

Summary:
DataLayout keeps the string used for its creation.

As a side effect it is no longer needed in the Module.
This is "almost" NFC, the string is no

Make DataLayout Non-Optional in the Module

Summary:
DataLayout keeps the string used for its creation.

As a side effect it is no longer needed in the Module.
This is "almost" NFC, the string is no longer
canonicalized, you can't rely on two "equals" DataLayout
having the same string returned by getStringRepresentation().

Get rid of DataLayoutPass: the DataLayout is in the Module

The DataLayout is "per-module", let's enforce this by not
duplicating it more than necessary.
One more step toward non-optionality of the DataLayout in the
module.

Make DataLayout Non-Optional in the Module

Module->getDataLayout() will never returns nullptr anymore.

Reviewers: echristo

Subscribers: resistor, llvm-commits, jholewinski

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7992

From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com>
llvm-svn: 231270

show more ...

[multiversion] Thread a function argument through all the callers of the
getTTI method used to get an actual TTI object.

No functionality changed. This just threads the argument and ensures
code lik

[multiversion] Thread a function argument through all the callers of the
getTTI method used to get an actual TTI object.

No functionality changed. This just threads the argument and ensures
code like the inliner can correctly look up the callee's TTI rather than
using a fixed one.

The next change will use this to implement per-function subtarget usage
by TTI. The changes after that should eliminate the need for FTTI as that
will have become the default.

llvm-svn: 227730

show more ...

[PM] Port SimplifyCFG to the new pass manager.

This should be sufficient to replace the initial (minor) function pass
pipeline in Clang with the new pass manager. I'll probably add an (off
by defaul

[PM] Port SimplifyCFG to the new pass manager.

This should be sufficient to replace the initial (minor) function pass
pipeline in Clang with the new pass manager. I'll probably add an (off
by default) flag to do that just to ensure we can get extra testing.

llvm-svn: 227726

show more ...

[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic
type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an
extremely complex analysis group.

The end result is that the TTI

[PM] Change the core design of the TTI analysis to use a polymorphic
type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an
extremely complex analysis group.

The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased
implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build
one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR.

I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes,
including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most
specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These
aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning
some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form.

There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular
design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is
complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque,
confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it.
Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places
because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of
this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation.
The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and
analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here.

The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for
the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased
per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even
cache it.

Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the
interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future
work below.

The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going
to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity
in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively
with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed
them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't
seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and
virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as
discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere,
a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if
this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;]

Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the
huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was
the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts
of this. The follow up work should include at least:

1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return
a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics
and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface
of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return
a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline.
2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function.
This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is
sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager.
3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the
target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part
of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2.
4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is
easier to understand and less verbose to type erase.
5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is
easier to understand and less verbose to forward.
6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is
just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing
the TTI in each target.

Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on
this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting
it sorted out very quickly.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293

llvm-svn: 227669

show more ...

[PM] Split the AssumptionTracker immutable pass into two separate APIs:
a cache of assumptions for a single function, and an immutable pass that
manages those caches.

The motivation for this change

[PM] Split the AssumptionTracker immutable pass into two separate APIs:
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

show more ...

[SimplifyCFG] threshold for folding branches with common destination

Summary:
This patch adds a threshold that controls the number of bonus instructions
allowed for folding branches with common dest

[SimplifyCFG] threshold for folding branches with common destination

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

show more ...