| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|---|
|
Patch by Reshabh Sharma!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D43861
llvm-svn: 326352
|
|
Summary:
First step in adding MemorySSA as dependency for loop pass manager.
Adding the dependency under a flag.
New pass manager: MSSA pointer in LoopStandardAnalysisResults can be null.
Legacy and new pass manager: Use cl::opt EnableMSSALoopDependency. Disabled by default.
Reviewers: sanjoy, davide, gberry
Subscribers: mehdi_amini, Prazek, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40274
llvm-svn: 318772
|
|
This fixes PR34832.
llvm-svn: 314938
|
|
Summary:
And now that we no longer have to explicitly free() the Loop instances, we can
(with more ease) use the destructor of LoopBase to do what LoopBase::clear() was
doing.
Reviewers: chandlerc
Subscribers: mehdi_amini, mcrosier, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38201
llvm-svn: 314375
|
|
The patch committed in r293017, as discussed on the list, doesn't really
make sense but was causing an actual issue to go away.
The issue turns out to be that in one place the extra template arguments
were dropped from the OuterAnalysisManagerProxy. This in turn caused the
types used in one set of places to access the key to be completely
different from the types used in another set of places for both Loop and
CGSCC cases where there are extra arguments.
I have literally no idea how anything seemed to work with this bug in
place. It blows my mind. But it did except for mingw64 in a DLL build.
I've added a really handy static assert that helps ensure we don't break
this in the future. It immediately diagnoses the issue with a compile
failure and a very clear error message. Much better that staring at
backtraces on a build bot. =]
llvm-svn: 294267
|
|
r291662.
I found root class should be instantiated for variadic tempate to instantiate static member explicitly.
This will fix failures in mingw DLL build.
llvm-svn: 293017
|
|
loops in a function.
These are relatively confusing to talk about and compute correctly so it
seems really good to write down their implementation in one place. I've
replaced one place we needed this in the loop PM infrastructure and
I have another place in a pending patch that wants it.
We can't quite use this for the core loop PM walk because there we're
sometimes working on a sub-forest.
I'll add the expected unittests before committing this but wanted to
make sure folks were happy with these names / comments.
Credit goes to Richard Smith for the idea for naming the order where siblings
are in reverse program order but the tree traversal remains preorder.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28932
llvm-svn: 292569
|
|
mark it as never invalidated in the new PM.
The old PM already required this to work, and after a discussion with
Hal this seems to really be the only sensible answer. The cache
gracefully degrades as the IR is mutated, and most things which do this
should already be incrementally updating the cache.
This gets rid of a bunch of logic preserving and testing the
invalidation of this analysis.
llvm-svn: 292039
|
|
the latter to the Transforms library.
While the loop PM uses an analysis to form the IR units, the current
plan is to have the PM itself establish and enforce both loop simplified
form and LCSSA. This would be a layering violation in the analysis
library.
Fundamentally, the idea behind the loop PM is to *transform* loops in
addition to running passes over them, so it really seemed like the most
natural place to sink this was into the transforms library.
We can't just move *everything* because we also have loop analyses that
rely on a subset of the invariants. So this patch splits the the loop
infrastructure into the analysis management that has to be part of the
analysis library, and the transform-aware pass manager.
This also required splitting the loop analyses' printer passes out to
the transforms library, which makes sense to me as running these will
transform the code into LCSSA in theory.
I haven't split the unittest though because testing one component
without the other seems nearly intractable.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28452
llvm-svn: 291662
|
