Commit Graph

65 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Nico Weber 7408c7066a Add a LLVM_DUMP_METHOD macro.
The motivation is to mark dump methods as used in debug builds so that they can
be called from lldb, but to not do so in release builds so that they can be
dead-stripped.

There's lots of potential follow-up work suggested in the thread
"Should dump methods be LLVM_ATTRIBUTE_USED only in debug builds?" on cfe-dev,
but everyone seems to agreen on this subset.

Macro name chosen by fair coin toss.

llvm-svn: 198456
2014-01-03 22:53:37 +00:00
Michael Gottesman b78dec8faf [block-freq] Update MachineBlockPlacement and RegAllocGreedy to use the new MachineBlockFrequencyInfo methods.
llvm-svn: 197290
2013-12-14 00:25:45 +00:00
Matt Arsenault 0f5f015bfd Fix gcc warnings.
Unused variable and unused typedef in release build.

llvm-svn: 196947
2013-12-10 18:55:37 +00:00
Matt Arsenault 79d55f5c1f Revert part of GCC warning fix to fix debug build.
The typedef is used inside the DEBUG(), and apparently can't be moved
inside of it.

llvm-svn: 196528
2013-12-05 20:02:18 +00:00
Matt Arsenault c44a3ff638 Fix minor GCC warnings.
Unused typedefs and unused variables.

llvm-svn: 196526
2013-12-05 19:37:36 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 260258b9c0 Output a bit more information in the debug printing for MBP. This was
useful when analyzing parts of zlib's behavior here.

llvm-svn: 195588
2013-11-25 00:43:41 +00:00
Benjamin Kramer c8160d6523 MachineBlockPlacement: Strengthen the source order bias when picking an exit block.
We now only allow breaking source order if the exit block frequency is
significantly higher than the other exit block. The actual bias is
currently under a flag so the best cut-off can be found; the flag
defaults to the old behavior. The idea is to get some benchmark coverage
over different values for the flag and pick the best one.

When we require the new frequency to be at least 20% higher than the old
frequency I see a 5% speedup on zlib's deflate when compressing a random
file on x86_64/westmere. Hal reported a small speedup on Fhourstones on
a BG/Q and no regressions in the test suite.

The test case is the full long_match function from zlib's deflate. I was
reluctant to add it for previous tweaks to branch probabilities because
it's large and potentially fragile, but changed my mind since it's an
important use case and more likely to break with all the current work
going into the PGO infrastructure.

Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2202

llvm-svn: 195265
2013-11-20 19:08:44 +00:00
Shuxin Yang 8b8fd2171c Fix a defect in code-layout pass, improving Benchmarks/Olden/em3d/em3d by about 30%
(4.58s vs 3.2s on an oldish Mac Tower). 

  The corresponding src is excerpted bellow. The lopp accounts for about 90% of execution time.
  --------------------
    cat -n test-suite/MultiSource/Benchmarks/Olden/em3d/make_graph.c
     90 
     91         for (k=0; k<j; k++)
     92           if (other_node == cur_node->to_nodes[k]) break;

  The defective layout is sketched bellow, where the two branches need to swap.
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      L:
         ...
      if (cond) goto out-of-loop
      goto L

  While this code sequence is defective, I don't understand why it incurs 1/3 of 
execution time. CPU-event-profiling indicates the poor laoyout dose not increase
in br-misprediction; it dosen't increase stall cycle at all, and it dosen't 
prevent the CPU detect the loop (i.e. Loop-Stream-Detector seems to be working fine
as well)... 

   The root cause of the problem is that the layout pass calls AnalyzeBranch() 
with basic-block which is not updated to reflect its current layout.

rdar://13966341

llvm-svn: 183174
2013-06-04 01:00:57 +00:00
Nadav Rotem c0adc9fd91 Don't disable block layout when forcing block alignment.
llvm-svn: 179355
2013-04-12 01:24:16 +00:00
Nadav Rotem c3b0f50ac2 Add a flag to align all basic blocks in the function.
When debugging performance regressions we often ask ourselves if the regression
that we see is due to poor isel/sched/ra or due to some micro-architetural
problem.  When comparing two code sequences one good way to rule out front-end
bottlenecks (and other the issues) is to force code alignment. This pass adds
a flag that forces the alignment of all of the basic blocks in the program.

llvm-svn: 179353
2013-04-12 00:48:32 +00:00
Nadav Rotem 6036f581aa Fix a typo
llvm-svn: 178346
2013-03-29 16:34:23 +00:00
Benjamin Kramer 56b31bd9d7 Split TargetLowering into a CodeGen and a SelectionDAG part.
This fixes some of the cycles between libCodeGen and libSelectionDAG. It's still
a complete mess but as long as the edges consist of virtual call it doesn't
cause breakage. BasicTTI did static calls and thus broke some build
configurations.

llvm-svn: 172246
2013-01-11 20:05:37 +00:00
Bill Wendling 698e84fc4f Remove the Function::getFnAttributes method in favor of using the AttributeSet
directly.

This is in preparation for removing the use of the 'Attribute' class as a
collection of attributes. That will shift to the AttributeSet class instead.

llvm-svn: 171253
2012-12-30 10:32:01 +00:00
Bill Wendling 3d7b0b8ac7 Rename the 'Attributes' class to 'Attribute'. It's going to represent a single attribute in the future.
llvm-svn: 170502
2012-12-19 07:18:57 +00:00
Chandler Carruth ed0881b2a6 Use the new script to sort the includes of every file under lib.
Sooooo many of these had incorrect or strange main module includes.
I have manually inspected all of these, and fixed the main module
include to be the nearest plausible thing I could find. If you own or
care about any of these source files, I encourage you to take some time
and check that these edits were sensible. I can't have broken anything
(I strictly added headers, and reordered them, never removed), but they
may not be the headers you'd really like to identify as containing the
API being implemented.

Many forward declarations and missing includes were added to a header
files to allow them to parse cleanly when included first. The main
module rule does in fact have its merits. =]

llvm-svn: 169131
2012-12-03 16:50:05 +00:00
Bill Wendling c9b22d735a Create enums for the different attributes.
We use the enums to query whether an Attributes object has that attribute. The
opaque layer is responsible for knowing where that specific attribute is stored.

llvm-svn: 165488
2012-10-09 07:45:08 +00:00
Bill Wendling 863bab689a Remove the `hasFnAttr' method from Function.
The hasFnAttr method has been replaced by querying the Attributes explicitly. No
intended functionality change.

llvm-svn: 164725
2012-09-26 21:48:26 +00:00
Duncan Sands 291d47efdf Remove silly dead store. Patch by Ettl Martin.
llvm-svn: 163882
2012-09-14 09:00:11 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 881d0a7966 Add a much more conservative strategy for aligning branch targets.
Previously, MBP essentially aligned every branch target it could. This
bloats code quite a bit, especially non-looping code which has no real
reason to prefer aligned branch targets so heavily.

As Andy said in review, it's still a bit odd to do this without a real
cost model, but this at least has much more plausible heuristics.

Fixes PR13265.

llvm-svn: 161409
2012-08-07 09:45:24 +00:00
Manman Ren 2b6a0dfd4c Reverse order of the two branches at end of a basic block if it is profitable.
We branch to the successor with higher edge weight first.
Convert from
     je    LBB4_8  --> to outer loop
     jmp   LBB4_14 --> to inner loop
to
     jne   LBB4_14
     jmp   LBB4_8

PR12750
rdar: 11393714

llvm-svn: 161018
2012-07-31 01:11:07 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 9139f44d23 Update a bunch of stale comments that dated from when this folled the
very first (and worst) placement algorithm. These should now more
accurately reflect the reality of the pass.

llvm-svn: 159185
2012-06-26 05:16:37 +00:00
Benjamin Kramer bde9176663 Fix typos found by http://github.com/lyda/misspell-check
llvm-svn: 157885
2012-06-02 10:20:22 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 8c0b41d656 Add a somewhat hacky heuristic to do something different from whole-loop
rotation. When there is a loop backedge which is an unconditional
branch, we will end up with a branch somewhere no matter what. Try
placing this backedge in a fallthrough position above the loop header as
that will definitely remove at least one branch from the loop iteration,
where whole loop rotation may not.

I haven't seen any benchmarks where this is important but loop-blocks.ll
tests for it, and so this will be covered when I flip the default.

llvm-svn: 154812
2012-04-16 13:33:36 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 8c74c7b1c6 Tweak the loop rotation logic to check whether the loop is naturally
laid out in a form with a fallthrough into the header and a fallthrough
out of the bottom. In that case, leave the loop alone because any
rotation will introduce unnecessary branches. If either side looks like
it will require an explicit branch, then the rotation won't add any, do
it to ensure the branch occurs outside of the loop (if possible) and
maximize the benefit of the fallthrough in the bottom.

llvm-svn: 154806
2012-04-16 09:31:23 +00:00
Chandler Carruth ccc7e42b1f Rewrite how machine block placement handles loop rotation.
This is a complex change that resulted from a great deal of
experimentation with several different benchmarks. The one which proved
the most useful is included as a test case, but I don't know that it
captures all of the relevant changes, as I didn't have specific
regression tests for each, they were more the result of reasoning about
what the old algorithm would possibly do wrong. I'm also failing at the
moment to craft more targeted regression tests for these changes, if
anyone has ideas, it would be welcome.

The first big thing broken with the old algorithm is the idea that we
can take a basic block which has a loop-exiting successor and a looping
successor and use the looping successor as the layout top in order to
get that particular block to be the bottom of the loop after layout.
This happens to work in many cases, but not in all.

The second big thing broken was that we didn't try to select the exit
which fell into the nearest enclosing loop (to which we exit at all). As
a consequence, even if the rotation worked perfectly, it would result in
one of two bad layouts. Either the bottom of the loop would get
fallthrough, skipping across a nearer enclosing loop and thereby making
it discontiguous, or it would be forced to take an explicit jump over
the nearest enclosing loop to earch its successor. The point of the
rotation is to get fallthrough, so we need it to fallthrough to the
nearest loop it can.

The fix to the first issue is to actually layout the loop from the loop
header, and then rotate the loop such that the correct exiting edge can
be a fallthrough edge. This is actually much easier than I anticipated
because we can handle all the hard parts of finding a viable rotation
before we do the layout. We just store that, and then rotate after
layout is finished. No inner loops get split across the post-rotation
backedge because we check for them when selecting the rotation.

That fix exposed a latent problem with our exitting block selection --
we should allow the backedge to point into the middle of some inner-loop
chain as there is no real penalty to it, the whole point is that it
*won't* be a fallthrough edge. This may have blocked the rotation at all
in some cases, I have no idea and no test case as I've never seen it in
practice, it was just noticed by inspection.

Finally, all of these fixes, and studying the loops they produce,
highlighted another problem: in rotating loops like this, we sometimes
fail to align the destination of these backwards jumping edges. Fix this
by actually walking the backwards edges rather than relying on loopinfo.

This fixes regressions on heapsort if block placement is enabled as well
as lots of other cases where the previous logic would introduce an
abundance of unnecessary branches into the execution.

llvm-svn: 154783
2012-04-16 01:12:56 +00:00