diff options
author | Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de> | 2023-04-21 12:02:28 +0200 |
---|---|---|
committer | Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de> | 2023-04-21 13:25:39 +0200 |
commit | 53dddbfeb213ac4ec39f550aa81eaa4264375d2c (patch) | |
tree | 46ef921ab054da15f9642e9e96727c19975a664e | |
parent | 773cc925e84b248afa4ed01bf444be0935d33861 (diff) | |
download | gcc-53dddbfeb213ac4ec39f550aa81eaa4264375d2c.zip gcc-53dddbfeb213ac4ec39f550aa81eaa4264375d2c.tar.gz gcc-53dddbfeb213ac4ec39f550aa81eaa4264375d2c.tar.bz2 |
Use correct CFG orders for DF worklist processing
This adjusts the remaining three RPO computes in DF. The DF_FORWARD
problems should use a RPO on the forward graph, the DF_BACKWARD
problems should use a RPO on the inverted graph.
Conveniently now inverted_rev_post_order_compute computes a RPO.
We still use post_order_compute and reverse its order for its
side-effect of deleting unreachable blocks.
This resuls in an overall reduction on visited blocks on cc1files by 5.2%.
Because on the reverse CFG most regions are irreducible, there's
few cases the number of visited blocks increases. For the set
of cc1files I have this is for et-forest.i, graph.i, hwint.i,
tree-ssa-dom.i, tree-ssa-loop-ch.i and tree-ssa-threadedge.i. For
tree-ssa-dse.i it's off-noise and I've more closely investigated
and figured it is really bad luck due to the irreducibility.
* df-core.cc (df_analyze): Compute RPO on the reverse graph
for DF_BACKWARD problems.
(loop_post_order_compute): Rename to ...
(loop_rev_post_order_compute): ... this, compute a RPO.
(loop_inverted_post_order_compute): Rename to ...
(loop_inverted_rev_post_order_compute): ... this, compute a RPO.
(df_analyze_loop): Use RPO on the forward graph for DF_FORWARD
problems, RPO on the inverted graph for DF_BACKWARD.
-rw-r--r-- | gcc/df-core.cc | 36 |
1 files changed, 20 insertions, 16 deletions
diff --git a/gcc/df-core.cc b/gcc/df-core.cc index 2712364..d4812b0 100644 --- a/gcc/df-core.cc +++ b/gcc/df-core.cc @@ -1259,14 +1259,18 @@ df_analyze (void) free (df->postorder); free (df->postorder_inverted); - df->postorder = XNEWVEC (int, last_basic_block_for_fn (cfun)); - df->n_blocks = post_order_compute (df->postorder, true, true); /* For DF_FORWARD use a RPO on the forward graph. Since we want to have unreachable blocks deleted use post_order_compute and reverse the order. */ df->postorder_inverted = XNEWVEC (int, n_basic_blocks_for_fn (cfun)); - for (int i = 0; i < df->n_blocks; ++i) - df->postorder_inverted[i] = df->postorder[df->n_blocks - 1 - i]; + df->n_blocks = post_order_compute (df->postorder_inverted, true, true); + for (int i = 0; i < df->n_blocks / 2; ++i) + std::swap (df->postorder_inverted[i], + df->postorder_inverted[df->n_blocks - 1 - i]); + /* For DF_BACKWARD use a RPO on the reverse graph. */ + df->postorder = XNEWVEC (int, n_basic_blocks_for_fn (cfun)); + int n = inverted_rev_post_order_compute (cfun, df->postorder); + gcc_assert (n == df->n_blocks); for (int i = 0; i < df->n_blocks; i++) bitmap_set_bit (current_all_blocks, df->postorder[i]); @@ -1305,11 +1309,11 @@ df_analyze (void) Returns the number of blocks which is always loop->num_nodes. */ static int -loop_post_order_compute (int *post_order, class loop *loop) +loop_rev_post_order_compute (int *post_order, class loop *loop) { edge_iterator *stack; int sp; - int post_order_num = 0; + int post_order_num = loop->num_nodes - 1; /* Allocate stack for back-tracking up CFG. */ stack = XNEWVEC (edge_iterator, loop->num_nodes + 1); @@ -1342,13 +1346,13 @@ loop_post_order_compute (int *post_order, class loop *loop) time, check its successors. */ stack[sp++] = ei_start (dest->succs); else - post_order[post_order_num++] = dest->index; + post_order[post_order_num--] = dest->index; } else { if (ei_one_before_end_p (ei) && src != loop_preheader_edge (loop)->src) - post_order[post_order_num++] = src->index; + post_order[post_order_num--] = src->index; if (!ei_one_before_end_p (ei)) ei_next (&stack[sp - 1]); @@ -1359,19 +1363,19 @@ loop_post_order_compute (int *post_order, class loop *loop) free (stack); - return post_order_num; + return loop->num_nodes; } /* Compute the reverse top sort order of the inverted sub-CFG specified by LOOP. Returns the number of blocks which is always loop->num_nodes. */ static int -loop_inverted_post_order_compute (int *post_order, class loop *loop) +loop_inverted_rev_post_order_compute (int *post_order, class loop *loop) { basic_block bb; edge_iterator *stack; int sp; - int post_order_num = 0; + int post_order_num = loop->num_nodes - 1; /* Allocate stack for back-tracking up CFG. */ stack = XNEWVEC (edge_iterator, loop->num_nodes + 1); @@ -1408,13 +1412,13 @@ loop_inverted_post_order_compute (int *post_order, class loop *loop) time, check its predecessors. */ stack[sp++] = ei_start (pred->preds); else - post_order[post_order_num++] = pred->index; + post_order[post_order_num--] = pred->index; } else { if (flow_bb_inside_loop_p (loop, bb) && ei_one_before_end_p (ei)) - post_order[post_order_num++] = bb->index; + post_order[post_order_num--] = bb->index; if (!ei_one_before_end_p (ei)) ei_next (&stack[sp - 1]); @@ -1424,7 +1428,7 @@ loop_inverted_post_order_compute (int *post_order, class loop *loop) } free (stack); - return post_order_num; + return loop->num_nodes; } @@ -1438,8 +1442,8 @@ df_analyze_loop (class loop *loop) df->postorder = XNEWVEC (int, loop->num_nodes); df->postorder_inverted = XNEWVEC (int, loop->num_nodes); - df->n_blocks = loop_post_order_compute (df->postorder, loop); - int n = loop_inverted_post_order_compute (df->postorder_inverted, loop); + df->n_blocks = loop_rev_post_order_compute (df->postorder_inverted, loop); + int n = loop_inverted_rev_post_order_compute (df->postorder, loop); gcc_assert ((unsigned) df->n_blocks == loop->num_nodes); gcc_assert ((unsigned) n == loop->num_nodes); |