with arbitrary topologies (previously it would give up when hitting a diamond
in the use graph for example). The testcase from PR12764 is now reduced from
a pile of additions to the optimal 1617*%x0+208. In doing this I changed the
previous strategy of dropping all uses for expression leaves to one of dropping
all but one use. This works out more neatly (but required a bunch of tweaks)
and is also safer: some recently fixed bugs during recursive linearization were
because the linearization code thinks it completely owns a node if it has no uses
outside the expression it is linearizing. But if the node was also in another
expression that had been linearized (and thus all uses of the node from that
expression dropped) then the conclusion that it is completely owned by the
expression currently being linearized is wrong. Keeping one use from within each
linearized expression avoids this kind of mistake.
llvm-svn: 157467
replace the operands of expressions with only one use with undef and generate
a new expression for the original without using RAUW to update the original.
Thus any copies of the original expression held in a vector may end up
referring to some bogus value - and using a ValueHandle won't help since there
is no RAUW. There is already a mechanism for getting the effect of recursion
non-recursively: adding the value to be recursed on to RedoInsts. But it wasn't
being used systematically. Have various places where recursion had snuck in at
some point use the RedoInsts mechanism instead. Fixes PR12169.
llvm-svn: 156379
elements to minimize the number of multiplies required to compute the
final result. This uses a heuristic to attempt to form near-optimal
binary exponentiation-style multiply chains. While there are some cases
it misses, it seems to at least a decent job on a very diverse range of
inputs.
Initial benchmarks show no interesting regressions, and an 8%
improvement on SPASS. Let me know if any other interesting results (in
either direction) crop up!
Credit to Richard Smith for the core algorithm, and helping code the
patch itself.
llvm-svn: 155616
reassociation opportunities are exposed. This fixes a bug where
the nested reassociation expects to be the IR to be consistent,
but it isn't, because the outer reassociation has disconnected
some of the operands. rdar://9167457
llvm-svn: 129324
Value, not an Instruction, so casting is not necessary. Also,
it's theoretically possible that the Value is not an
Instruction, since WeakVH follows RAUWs.
llvm-svn: 127427
after it has finished all of its reassociations, because its
habit of unlinking operands and holding them in a datastructure
while working means that it's not easy to determine when an
instruction is really dead until after all its regular work is
done. rdar://9096268.
llvm-svn: 127424
operand being factorized (and erased) could occur several times in Ops,
resulting in freed memory being used when the next occurrence in Ops was
analyzed.
llvm-svn: 124287
must be called in the pass's constructor. This function uses static dependency declarations to recursively initialize
the pass's dependencies.
Clients that only create passes through the createFooPass() APIs will require no changes. Clients that want to use the
CommandLine options for passes will need to manually call the appropriate initialization functions in PassInitialization.h
before parsing commandline arguments.
I have tested this with all standard configurations of clang and llvm-gcc on Darwin. It is possible that there are problems
with the static dependencies that will only be visible with non-standard options. If you encounter any crash in pass
registration/creation, please send the testcase to me directly.
llvm-svn: 116820
short-circuited conditions to AND/OR expressions, and those expressions
are often converted back to a short-circuited form in code gen. The
original source order may have been optimized to take advantage of the
expected values, and if we reassociate them, we change the order and
subvert that optimization. Radar 7497329.
llvm-svn: 95333
positive and negative forms of constants together. This
allows us to compile:
int foo(int x, int y) {
return (x-y) + (x-y) + (x-y);
}
into:
_foo: ## @foo
subl %esi, %edi
leal (%rdi,%rdi,2), %eax
ret
instead of (where the 3 and -3 were not factored):
_foo:
imull $-3, 8(%esp), %ecx
imull $3, 4(%esp), %eax
addl %ecx, %eax
ret
this started out as:
movl 12(%ebp), %ecx
imull $3, 8(%ebp), %eax
subl %ecx, %eax
subl %ecx, %eax
subl %ecx, %eax
ret
This comes from PR5359.
llvm-svn: 92381
