GEPs, bit casts, and stores reaching it but no other instructions. These
often show up during the iterative processing of the inliner, SROA, and
DCE. Once we hit this point, we can completely remove the alloca. These
were actually showing up in the final, fully optimized code in a bunch
of inliner tests I've been working on, and notably they show up after
LLVM finishes optimizing away all function calls involved in
hash_combine(a, b).
llvm-svn: 154285
This allows us to keep passing reduced masks to SimplifyDemandedBits, but
know about all the bits if SimplifyDemandedBits fails. This allows instcombine
to simplify cases like the one in the included testcase.
llvm-svn: 154011
alignment. If that's the case, then we want to make sure that we don't increase
the alignment of the store instruction. Because if we increase it to be "more
aligned" than the pointer, code-gen may use instructions which require a greater
alignment than the pointer guarantees.
<rdar://problem/11043589>
llvm-svn: 152907
Renamed methods caseBegin, caseEnd and caseDefault with case_begin, case_end, and case_default.
Added some notes relative to case iterators.
llvm-svn: 152532
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20120130/136146.html
Implemented CaseIterator and it solves almost all described issues: we don't need to mix operand/case/successor indexing anymore. Base iterator class is implemented as a template since it may be initialized either from "const SwitchInst*" or from "SwitchInst*".
ConstCaseIt is just a read-only iterator.
CaseIt is read-write iterator; it allows to change case successor and case value.
Usage of iterator allows totally remove resolveXXXX methods. All indexing convertions done automatically inside the iterator's getters.
Main way of iterator usage looks like this:
SwitchInst *SI = ... // intialize it somehow
for (SwitchInst::CaseIt i = SI->caseBegin(), e = SI->caseEnd(); i != e; ++i) {
BasicBlock *BB = i.getCaseSuccessor();
ConstantInt *V = i.getCaseValue();
// Do something.
}
If you want to convert case number to TerminatorInst successor index, just use getSuccessorIndex iterator's method.
If you want initialize iterator from TerminatorInst successor index, use CaseIt::fromSuccessorIndex(...) method.
There are also related changes in llvm-clients: klee and clang.
llvm-svn: 152297
This transformation is not safe in some pathological cases (signed icmp of pointers should be an
extremely rare thing, but it's valid IR!). Add an explanatory comment.
Kudos to Duncan for pointing out this edge case (and not giving up explaining it until I finally got it).
llvm-svn: 151055
- Ignore pointer casts.
- Also expand GEPs that aren't constantexprs when they have one use or only constant indices.
- We now compile "&foo[i] - &foo[j]" into "i - j".
llvm-svn: 150961
The purpose of refactoring is to hide operand roles from SwitchInst user (programmer). If you want to play with operands directly, probably you will need lower level methods than SwitchInst ones (TerminatorInst or may be User). After this patch we can reorganize SwitchInst operands and successors as we want.
What was done:
1. Changed semantics of index inside the getCaseValue method:
getCaseValue(0) means "get first case", not a condition. Use getCondition() if you want to resolve the condition. I propose don't mix SwitchInst case indexing with low level indexing (TI successors indexing, User's operands indexing), since it may be dangerous.
2. By the same reason findCaseValue(ConstantInt*) returns actual number of case value. 0 means first case, not default. If there is no case with given value, ErrorIndex will returned.
3. Added getCaseSuccessor method. I propose to avoid usage of TerminatorInst::getSuccessor if you want to resolve case successor BB. Use getCaseSuccessor instead, since internal SwitchInst organization of operands/successors is hidden and may be changed in any moment.
4. Added resolveSuccessorIndex and resolveCaseIndex. The main purpose of these methods is to see how case successors are really mapped in TerminatorInst.
4.1 "resolveSuccessorIndex" was created if you need to level down from SwitchInst to TerminatorInst. It returns TerminatorInst's successor index for given case successor.
4.2 "resolveCaseIndex" converts low level successors index to case index that curresponds to the given successor.
Note: There are also related compatability fix patches for dragonegg, klee, llvm-gcc-4.0, llvm-gcc-4.2, safecode, clang.
llvm-svn: 149481
Changing arguments from being passed as fixed to varargs is unsafe, as
the ABI may require they be handled differently (stack vs. register, for
example).
Remove two tests which rely on the bitcast being folded into the direct
call, which is exactly the transformation that's unsafe.
llvm-svn: 149457
Problem: LLVM needs more function attributes than currently available (32 bits).
One such proposed attribute is "address_safety", which shows that a function is being checked for address safety (by AddressSanitizer, SAFECode, etc).
Solution:
- extend the Attributes from 32 bits to 64-bits
- wrap the object into a class so that unsigned is never erroneously used instead
- change "unsigned" to "Attributes" throughout the code, including one place in clang.
- the class has no "operator uint64 ()", but it has "uint64_t Raw() " to support packing/unpacking.
- the class has "safe operator bool()" to support the common idiom: if (Attributes attr = getAttrs()) useAttrs(attr);
- The CTOR from uint64_t is marked explicit, so I had to add a few explicit CTOR calls
- Add the new attribute "address_safety". Doing it in the same commit to check that attributes beyond first 32 bits actually work.
- Some of the functions from the Attribute namespace are worth moving inside the class, but I'd prefer to have it as a separate commit.
Tested:
"make check" on Linux (32-bit and 64-bit) and Mac (10.6)
built/run spec CPU 2006 on Linux with clang -O2.
This change will break clang build in lib/CodeGen/CGCall.cpp.
The following patch will fix it.
llvm-svn: 148553
This has the obvious advantage of being commutable and is always a win on x86 because
const - x wastes a register there. On less weird architectures this may lead to
a regression because other arithmetic doesn't fuse with it anymore. I'll address that
problem in a followup.
llvm-svn: 147254
Chandler Carruth