Seperate the caching logic from the implementation of the lazy analysis. For the moment, the lazy analysis impl has a is-a relationship with the cache; this will change to a has-a relationship shortly. This was done as two steps merely to keep the changes simple and the diff understandable.
llvm-svn: 281266
Rewrite Visited[Cond] = getValueFromConditionImpl(..., Visited) statement which can lead to a memory corruption since getValueFromConditionImpl changes Visited map and invalidates the iterators.
llvm-svn: 278514
Take range metadata into account for conditions like this:
%length = load i32, i32* %length_ptr, !range !{i32 0, i32 2147483647}
%cmp = icmp ult i32 %a, %length
This is a common pattern for range checks where the length of the array is dynamically loaded.
Reviewed By: sanjoy
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23267
llvm-svn: 278496
Currently LVI can only gather value constraints from comparisons like:
* icmp <pred> Val, ...
* icmp ult (add Val, Offset), ...
In fact we can handle any predicate in latter comparisons.
Reviewed By: sanjoy
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23357
llvm-svn: 278493
Teach LVI how to gather information from conditions in the form of (cond1 && cond2). Our out-of-tree front-end emits range checks in this form.
Reviewed By: sanjoy
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D23200
llvm-svn: 278231
Instead of returning bool and setting LVILatticeValue reference argument return LVILattice value. Use overdefined value to denote the case when we didn't gather any information from the condition.
This change was separated from the review "[LVI] Handle conditions in the form of (cond1 && cond2)" (https://reviews.llvm.org/D23200#inline-199531). Once getValueFromCondition returns LVILatticeValue we can cache the result in Visited map.
llvm-svn: 278224
The problem was triggered by my recent change in CVP (D23059). Current code expected that integer constants are represented by constantrange LVILatticeVal and never represented as LVILatticeVal with constant tag. That is true for ConstantInt constants, although ConstantExpr integer type constants are legally represented as constant LVILatticeVal.
This code fails with CVP change in:
@b = global i32 0, align 4
define void @test6(i32 %a) {
bb:
%add = add i32 %a, ptrtoint (i32* @b to i32)
ret void
}
Currently getConstantRange code is not executed by any of the upstream passes. I'm going to add a test case to test/Transforms/CorrelatedValuePropagation/add.ll once I resubmit the CVP change.
Reviewed By: sanjoy
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D23194
llvm-svn: 278217
Gathering constantins from a condition on the false path ask makeAllowedICmpRegion about inverse predicate instead of inversing the resulting range.
This change was separated from the review "[LVI] Make LVI smarter about comparisons with non-constants" (https://reviews.llvm.org/D23205#inline-198361)
llvm-svn: 278009
Summary:
This lets us avoid creating and destroying a CallbackVH every time we
check the cache.
This is good for a 2% e2e speedup when compiling one of the large Eigen
tests at -O3.
FTR, I tried making the ValueCache hashtable one-level -- i.e., mapping
a pair (Value*, BasicBlock*) to a lattice value, and that didn't seem to
provide any additional improvement. Saving a word in LVILatticeVal by
merging the Tag and Val fields also didn't yield a speedup.
Reviewers: reames
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21951
llvm-svn: 276926
This is a bit gnarly since LVI is maintaining its own cache.
I think this port could be somewhat cleaner, but I'd rather not spend
too much time on it while we still have the old pass hanging around and
limiting how much we can clean things up.
Once the old pass is gone it will be easier (less time spent) to clean
it up anyway.
This is the last dependency needed for porting JumpThreading which I'll
do in a follow-up commit (there's no printer pass for LVI or anything to
test it, so porting a pass that depends on it seems best).
I've been mostly following:
r269370 / D18834 which ported Dependence Analysis
r268601 / D19839 which ported BPI
llvm-svn: 272593
that it computes. Currently this is used for testing and precision
tuning, but it might be used by optimizations later.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19179
llvm-svn: 268291
When encountering a non-local pointer, LVI would eagerly scan the block for dereferences of the given object to prove the pointer to be non null. That's all well and good, but *then* we'd go recurse through our input blocks. As a result, we could end up scanning each and every block we traverse, even if the final definition was obviously non null or we found a constant value somewhere up the chain. The previous code papered over this by using the isKnownNonNull routine from value tracking. This made the duplication less painful in the common case.
Instead, we know do the block scan only *after* we've gotten the recursive results back. This lets us stop scanning individual blocks as soon as we've determined it to be non-null in any predecessor block and use our usual merge rules to propagate that information cheaply through successor blocks. For a pointer which can be found non-null, this does strictly less work and sometimes substaintially so.
Note that the case where we *can't* prove something non-null is still the really expensive case. We end up scanning each and every block looking for a dereference and never end up finding one.
llvm-svn: 267642
Previously we were recursing on our operands for unary and binary operators regardless of whether we knew how to reason about the operator in question. This has the effect of doing a potentially large amount of work, only to throw it away. By checking whether the operation is one LVI can handle, we can cut short the search and return the (overdefined) answer more quickly. The quality of the results produced should not change.
llvm-svn: 267626
As pointed out by John Regehr over in http://reviews.llvm.org/D19485, LVI was being incredibly stupid about applying its transfer rules. Rather than gathering local facts from the expression itself, it was simply giving up entirely if one of the inputs was overdefined. This greatly impacts the precision of the overall analysis and makes it far more fragile as well.
This patch builds on 267609 which did the same thing for unary casts.
llvm-svn: 267620
Essentially, I was using the wrong size function. For types which were sized, but not primitive, I wasn't getting a useful size for the operand and failed an assert. I fixed this, and also added a guard that the input is a sized type. Test case is for the original mistake. I'm not sure how to actually exercise the sized type check.
llvm-svn: 267618
As pointed out by John Regehr over in http://reviews.llvm.org/D19485, LVI was being incredibly stupid about applying its transfer rules. Rather than gathering local facts from the expression itself, it was simply giving up entirely if one of the inputs was overdefined. This greatly impacts the precision of the overall analysis and makes it far more fragile as well.
This patch implements only the unary operation case. Once this is in, I'll implement the same for the binary operations.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19492
llvm-svn: 267609
There has been much recent confusion about the partition in the lattice between constant and non-constant values. Hopefully, documenting this will prevent confusion going forward.
llvm-svn: 267440
This function handled both unary and binary operators. Cloning and specializing leads to much easier to follow code with minimal duplicatation.
llvm-svn: 267438
The diff is relatively large since I took a chance to rearrange the code I had to touch in a more obvious way, but the key bit is merely using the !range metadata when we can't analyze the instruction further. The previous !range metadata code was essentially just dead since no binary operator or cast will have !range metadata (per Verifier) and it was otherwise dropped on the floor.
llvm-svn: 262751
Most of this is fairly straight forward. Add handling for min/max via existing matcher utility and ConstantRange routines. Add handling for clamp by exploiting condition constraints on inputs.
Note that I'm only handling two constant ranges at this point. It would be reasonable to consider treating overdefined as a full range if the instruction is typed as an integer, but that should be a separate change.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17184
llvm-svn: 262085
No functional change intended. Copying small (<= 64 bits) APInts isn't
expensive but bloats code by generating the slow path everywhere. Moving
doesn't care about the size of the value.
llvm-svn: 261426
The root issue appears to be a confusion around what makeNoWrapRegion actually does. It seems likely we need two versions of this function with slightly different semantics.
llvm-svn: 260981
As the title says. Modelled after similar code in SCEV.
This is useful when analysing induction variables in loops which have been canonicalized by other passes. I wrote the tests as non-loops specifically to avoid the generality introduced in http://reviews.llvm.org/D17174. While that can handle many induction variables without *needing* to exploit nsw, there's no reason not to use it if we've already proven it.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17177
llvm-svn: 260705
This patches teaches LVI to recognize clamp idioms (e.g. select(a > 5, a, 5) will always produce something greater than 5.
The tests end up being somewhat simplistic because trying to exercise the case I actually care about (a loop with a range check on a clamped secondary induction variable) ends up tripping across a couple of other imprecisions in the analysis. Ah, the joys of LVI...
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16827
llvm-svn: 260627
There's nothing preventing callers of LVI from asking for lattice values representing a Constant. In fact, given that several callers are walking back through PHI nodes and trying to simplify predicates, such queries are actually quite common. This is mostly harmless today, but we start volatiling assertions if we add new calls to getBlockValue in otherwise reasonable places.
Note that this change is not NFC. Specifically:
1) The result returned through getValueAt will now be more precise. In principle, this could trigger any latent infinite optimization loops in callers, but in practice, we're unlikely to see this.
2) The result returned through getBlockValueAt is potentially weakened for non-constants that were previously queried. With the old code, you had the possibility that a later query might bypass the cache and discover some information the original query did not. I can't find a scenario which actually causes this to happen, but it was in principle possible. On the other hand, this may end up reducing compile time when the same value is queried repeatedly.
llvm-svn: 260439
Due to staleness in a patch I committed yesterday, the debug output was reporting overdefined cases as being undefined. Confusing to say the least. The mistake appears to have only effected the debug output thankfully.
llvm-svn: 259594
I introduced a declaration in 259583 to keep the diff readable. This change just moves the definition up to remove the declaration again.
llvm-svn: 259585
