| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|---|
|
Handle call instruction replacements and deletions in order to preserve
valid state of the call site info of the MachineFunction.
NOTE: If the call site info is enabled for a new target, the assertion from
the MachineFunction::DeleteMachineInstr() should help to locate places
where the updateCallSiteInfo() should be called in order to preserve valid
state of the call site info.
([10/13] Introduce the debug entry values.)
Co-authored-by: Ananth Sowda <asowda@cisco.com>
Co-authored-by: Nikola Prica <nikola.prica@rt-rk.com>
Co-authored-by: Ivan Baev <ibaev@cisco.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61062
llvm-svn: 364536
|
|
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
|
|
Summary:
Currently X-Ray Instrumentation pass has a dependency on MachineLoopInfo
(and thus on MachineDominatorTree as well) and we have to compute them
even if X-Ray is not used. This patch changes it to a lazy computation
to save compile time by avoiding these redundant computations.
Reviewers: dberris, kubamracek
Subscribers: llvm-commits, hiraditya
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44666
llvm-svn: 327999
|
|
The Function can never be nullptr so we can return a reference.
llvm-svn: 320884
|
|
All these headers already depend on CodeGen headers so moving them into
CodeGen fixes the layering (since CodeGen depends on Target, not the
other way around).
llvm-svn: 318490
|
|
This header includes CodeGen headers, and is not, itself, included by
any Target headers, so move it into CodeGen to match the layering of its
implementation.
llvm-svn: 317647
|
|
Summary: Conditional returns were not taken into consideration at all. Implement them by turning them into jumps and normal returns. This means there is a slightly higher performance penalty for conditional returns, but this is the best we can do, and it still disturbs little of the rest.
Reviewers: dberris, echristo
Subscribers: sanjoy, nemanjai, hiraditya, kbarton, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38102
llvm-svn: 314005
|
|
Summary:
This fixes code-gen for XRay in PPC. The regression wasn't caught by
codegen tests which we add in this change.
What happened was the following:
- For tail exits, we used to unconditionally prepend the returns/exits
with a pseudo-instruction that gets lowered to the instrumentation
sled (and leave the actual return/exit instruction as-is).
- Changes to the XRay instrumentation pass caused the tail exits to
suddenly also emit the tail exit pseudo-instruction, since the check
for whether a return instruction was also a call instruction meant it
was a tail exit instruction.
- None of the tests caught the regression either due to non-existent
tests, or the tests being disabled/removed for continuous breakage.
This change re-introduces some of the basic tests and verifies that
we're back to a state that allows the back-end to generate appropriate
XRay instrumented binaries for PPC in the presence of tail exits.
Reviewers: echristo, timshen
Subscribers: nemanjai, kbarton, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37570
llvm-svn: 312772
|
|
llvm-svn: 308052
|
|
Summary:
Currently XRay compares its threshold against `Function::size()` . However, `Function::size()` returns the number of basic blocks (as I understand, such as cycle bodies, if/else bodies, switch-case bodies, etc.), rather than the number of instructions.
The name of the parameter `-fxray-instruction-threshold=N`, as well as XRay documentation at http://llvm.org/docs/XRay.html , suggests that instructions should be counted, rather than the number of basic blocks.
I see two options:
1. Count the number of MachineInstr`s in MachineFunction : this gives better estimate for the number of assembly instructions on the target. So a user can check in disassembly that the threshold works more or less correctly.
2. Count the number of Instruction`s in a Function : AFAIK, this gives correct number of IR instructions, which the user can check in IR listing. However, this number may be far (several times for small functions) from the number of assembly instructions finally emitted.
Option 1 is implemented in this patch because I think that having the closer estimate for the number of assembly instructions emitted is more important than to have a clear definition of the metric.
Reviewers: dberris, rengolin
Reviewed By: dberris
Subscribers: llvm-commits, iid_iunknown
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34027
llvm-svn: 305072
|
|
warnings; other minor fixes (NFC).
llvm-svn: 304839
|
|
I did this a long time ago with a janky python script, but now
clang-format has built-in support for this. I fed clang-format every
line with a #include and let it re-sort things according to the precise
LLVM rules for include ordering baked into clang-format these days.
I've reverted a number of files where the results of sorting includes
isn't healthy. Either places where we have legacy code relying on
particular include ordering (where possible, I'll fix these separately)
or where we have particular formatting around #include lines that
I didn't want to disturb in this patch.
This patch is *entirely* mechanical. If you get merge conflicts or
anything, just ignore the changes in this patch and run clang-format
over your #include lines in the files.
Sorry for any noise here, but it is important to keep these things
stable. I was seeing an increasing number of patches with irrelevant
re-ordering of #include lines because clang-format was used. This patch
at least isolates that churn, makes it easy to skip when resolving
conflicts, and gets us to a clean baseline (again).
llvm-svn: 304787
|
|
Summary:
This is an implementation of the loop detection logic that XRay needs to
determine whether a function might take time at runtime. Without this
heuristic, XRay will tend to not instrument short functions that have
loops that might have runtime dependent on inputs or external values.
While this implementation doesn't do any further analysis than just
figuring out whether there is a loop in the MachineFunction being
code-gen'ed, we're paving the way for being able to perform more
sophisticated analysis of the function in the future (for example to
determine whether the trip count for the loop might be constant, and
make a decision on that instead). This enables us to cover more
functions with the default heuristics, and potentially identify ones
that have variable runtime latency just by looking for the presence of
loops.
Reviewers: chandlerc, rnk, pelikan
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32274
llvm-svn: 302103
|
|
Summary: Adds support for xray instrumentation on mips for both 32-bit and 64-bit.
Reviewed by sdardis, dberris
Differential: D27697
llvm-svn: 295164
|
|
Summary:
powerpc64 big-endian is not supported, but I believe that most logic can
be shared, except for xray_powerpc64.cc.
Also add a function InvalidateInstructionCache to xray_util.h, which is
copied from llvm/Support/Memory.cpp. I'm not sure if I need to add a unittest,
and I don't know how.
Reviewers: dberris, echristo, iteratee, kbarton, hfinkel
Subscribers: mehdi_amini, nemanjai, mgorny, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29742
llvm-svn: 294781
|
|
Rename from addOperand to just add, to match the other method that has been
added to MachineInstrBuilder for adding more than just 1 operand.
See https://reviews.llvm.org/D28057 for the whole discussion.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28556
llvm-svn: 291891
|
|
The original version of the code in XRayInstrumentation.cpp assumed that
functions may not have empty machine basic blocks (or that the first one
couldn't be). This change addresses that by special-casing that specific
situation.
We provide two .mir test-cases to make sure we're handling this
appropriately.
Fixes llvm.org/PR31424.
Reviewers: chandlerc
Subscribers: varno, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27913
llvm-svn: 290091
|
|
llvm-svn: 287898
|
|
This patch adds XRay support in LLVM for AArch64 targets.
This patch is one of a series:
Clang: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26415
compiler-rt: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26413
Author: rSerge
Reviewers: rengolin, dberris
Subscribers: amehsan, aemerson, llvm-commits, iid_iunknown
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26412
llvm-svn: 287209
|
|
This patch adds simplified support for tail calls on ARM with XRay instrumentation.
Known issue: compiled with generic flags: `-O3 -g -fxray-instrument -Wall
-std=c++14 -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections` (this list doesn't include my
specific flags like --target=armv7-linux-gnueabihf etc.), the following program
#include <cstdio>
#include <cassert>
#include <xray/xray_interface.h>
[[clang::xray_always_instrument]] void __attribute__ ((noinline)) fC() {
std::printf("In fC()\n");
}
[[clang::xray_always_instrument]] void __attribute__ ((noinline)) fB() {
std::printf("In fB()\n");
fC();
}
[[clang::xray_always_instrument]] void __attribute__ ((noinline)) fA() {
std::printf("In fA()\n");
fB();
}
// Avoid infinite recursion in case the logging function is instrumented (so calls logging
// function again).
[[clang::xray_never_instrument]] void simplyPrint(int32_t functionId, XRayEntryType xret)
{
printf("XRay: functionId=%d type=%d.\n", int(functionId), int(xret));
}
int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
__xray_set_handler(simplyPrint);
printf("Patching...\n");
__xray_patch();
fA();
printf("Unpatching...\n");
__xray_unpatch();
fA();
return 0;
}
gives the following output:
Patching...
XRay: functionId=3 type=0.
In fA()
XRay: functionId=3 type=1.
XRay: functionId=2 type=0.
In fB()
XRay: functionId=2 type=1.
XRay: functionId=1 type=0.
XRay: functionId=1 type=1.
In fC()
Unpatching...
In fA()
In fB()
In fC()
So for function fC() the exit sled seems to be called too much before function
exit: before printing In fC().
Debugging shows that the above happens because printf from fC is also called as
a tail call. So first the exit sled of fC is executed, and only then printf is
jumped into. So it seems we can't do anything about this with the current
approach (i.e. within the simplification described in
https://reviews.llvm.org/D23988 ).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25030
llvm-svn: 284456
|
|
This is a port of XRay to ARM 32-bit, without Thumb support yet. The XRay instrumentation support is moving up to AsmPrinter.
This is one of 3 commits to different repositories of XRay ARM port. The other 2 are:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D23932 (Clang test)
https://reviews.llvm.org/D23933 (compiler-rt)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23931
llvm-svn: 281878
|
|
And associated commits, as they broke the Thumb bots.
This reverts commit r280935.
This reverts commit r280891.
This reverts commit r280888.
llvm-svn: 280967
|
|
llvm-svn: 280891
|
|
This is a port of XRay to ARM 32-bit, without Thumb support yet. The XRay instrumentation support is moving up to AsmPrinter.
This is one of 3 commits to different repositories of XRay ARM port. The other 2 are:
1. https://reviews.llvm.org/D23932 (Clang test)
2. https://reviews.llvm.org/D23933 (compiler-rt)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23931
llvm-svn: 280888
|
|
Summary:
This change promotes the 'isTailCall(...)' member function to
TargetInstrInfo as a query interface for determining on a per-target
basis whether a given MachineInstr is a tail call instruction. We build
upon this in the XRay instrumentation pass to emit special sleds for
tail call optimisations, where we emit the correct kind of sled.
The tail call sleds look like a mix between the function entry and
function exit sleds. Form-wise, the sled comes before the "jmp"
instruction that implements the tail call similar to how we do it for
the function entry sled. Functionally, because we know this is a tail
call, it behaves much like an exit sled -- i.e. at runtime we may use
the exit trampolines instead of a different kind of trampoline.
A follow-up change to recognise these sleds will be done in compiler-rt,
so that we can start intercepting these initially as exits, but also
have the option to have different log entries to more accurately reflect
that this is actually a tail call.
Reviewers: echristo, rSerge, majnemer
Subscribers: mehdi_amini, dberris, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23986
llvm-svn: 280334
|
|
Add a .mir test to catch this case, and fix the xray-instrumentation
pass to handle it appropriately.
llvm-svn: 280192
|
|
Summary:
Reviewers: dok
Subscribers: llvm-commits
llvm-svn: 275399
|
|
Summary:
In this patch we implement the following parts of XRay:
- Supporting a function attribute named 'function-instrument' which currently only supports 'xray-always'. We should be able to use this attribute for other instrumentation approaches.
- Supporting a function attribute named 'xray-instruction-threshold' used to determine whether a function is instrumented with a minimum number of instructions (IR instruction counts).
- X86-specific nop sleds as described in the white paper.
- A machine function pass that adds the different instrumentation marker instructions at a very late stage.
- A way of identifying which return opcode is considered "normal" for each architecture.
There are some caveats here:
1) We don't handle PATCHABLE_RET in platforms other than x86_64 yet -- this means if IR used PATCHABLE_RET directly instead of a normal ret, instruction lowering for that platform might do the wrong thing. We think this should be handled at instruction selection time to by default be unpacked for platforms where XRay is not availble yet.
2) The generated section for X86 is different from what is described from the white paper for the sole reason that LLVM allows us to do this neatly. We're taking the opportunity to deviate from the white paper from this perspective to allow us to get richer information from the runtime library.
Reviewers: sanjoy, eugenis, kcc, pcc, echristo, rnk
Subscribers: niravd, majnemer, atrick, rnk, emaste, bmakam, mcrosier, mehdi_amini, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19904
llvm-svn: 275367
|
