[llvm-commits] [llvm] r60274 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/Analysis/MemoryDependenceAnalysis.h lib/Analysis/MemoryDependenceAnalysis.cpp
Chris Lattner
sabre at nondot.org
Sat Nov 29 18:52:27 PST 2008
Author: lattner
Date: Sat Nov 29 20:52:26 2008
New Revision: 60274
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=60274&view=rev
Log:
Two changes: Make getDependency remove QueryInst for a dirty record's
ReverseLocalDeps when we update it. This fixes a regression test
failure from my last commit.
Second, for each non-local cached information structure, keep a bit that
indicates whether it is dirty or not. This saves us a scan over the whole
thing in the common case when it isn't dirty.
Modified:
llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Analysis/MemoryDependenceAnalysis.h
llvm/trunk/lib/Analysis/MemoryDependenceAnalysis.cpp
Modified: llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Analysis/MemoryDependenceAnalysis.h
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Analysis/MemoryDependenceAnalysis.h?rev=60274&r1=60273&r2=60274&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Analysis/MemoryDependenceAnalysis.h (original)
+++ llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Analysis/MemoryDependenceAnalysis.h Sat Nov 29 20:52:26 2008
@@ -129,11 +129,14 @@
typedef DenseMap<BasicBlock*, DepResultTy> NonLocalDepInfo;
+ /// PerInstNLInfo - This is the instruction we keep for each cached access
+ /// that we have for an instruction. The pointer is an owning pointer and
+ /// the bool indicates whether we have any dirty bits in the set.
+ typedef PointerIntPair<NonLocalDepInfo*, 1, bool> PerInstNLInfo;
// A map from instructions to their non-local dependencies.
- typedef DenseMap<Instruction*,
- // This is an owning pointer.
- NonLocalDepInfo*> NonLocalDepMapType;
+ typedef DenseMap<Instruction*, PerInstNLInfo> NonLocalDepMapType;
+
NonLocalDepMapType NonLocalDeps;
// A reverse mapping from dependencies to the dependees. This is
@@ -158,7 +161,7 @@
LocalDeps.clear();
for (NonLocalDepMapType::iterator I = NonLocalDeps.begin(),
E = NonLocalDeps.end(); I != E; ++I)
- delete I->second;
+ delete I->second.getPointer();
NonLocalDeps.clear();
ReverseLocalDeps.clear();
ReverseNonLocalDeps.clear();
Modified: llvm/trunk/lib/Analysis/MemoryDependenceAnalysis.cpp
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/lib/Analysis/MemoryDependenceAnalysis.cpp?rev=60274&r1=60273&r2=60274&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- llvm/trunk/lib/Analysis/MemoryDependenceAnalysis.cpp (original)
+++ llvm/trunk/lib/Analysis/MemoryDependenceAnalysis.cpp Sat Nov 29 20:52:26 2008
@@ -199,8 +199,14 @@
// Otherwise, if we have a dirty entry, we know we can start the scan at that
// instruction, which may save us some work.
- if (Instruction *Inst = LocalCache.getPointer())
+ if (Instruction *Inst = LocalCache.getPointer()) {
ScanPos = Inst;
+
+ SmallPtrSet<Instruction*, 4> &InstMap = ReverseLocalDeps[Inst];
+ InstMap.erase(QueryInst);
+ if (InstMap.empty())
+ ReverseLocalDeps.erase(Inst);
+ }
// Do the scan.
LocalCache = getDependencyFromInternal(QueryInst, ScanPos,
@@ -227,10 +233,10 @@
MemDepResult> > &Result) {
assert(getDependency(QueryInst).isNonLocal() &&
"getNonLocalDependency should only be used on insts with non-local deps!");
- NonLocalDepInfo *&CacheP = NonLocalDeps[QueryInst];
- if (CacheP == 0) CacheP = new NonLocalDepInfo();
+ PerInstNLInfo &CacheP = NonLocalDeps[QueryInst];
+ if (CacheP.getPointer() == 0) CacheP.setPointer(new NonLocalDepInfo());
- NonLocalDepInfo &Cache = *CacheP;
+ NonLocalDepInfo &Cache = *CacheP.getPointer();
/// DirtyBlocks - This is the set of blocks that need to be recomputed. In
/// the cached case, this can happen due to instructions being deleted etc. In
@@ -240,13 +246,13 @@
if (!Cache.empty()) {
// If we already have a partially computed set of results, scan them to
- // determine what is dirty, seeding our initial DirtyBlocks worklist.
- // FIXME: In the "don't need to be updated" case, this is expensive, why not
- // have a per-"cache" flag saying it is undirty?
- for (NonLocalDepInfo::iterator I = Cache.begin(), E = Cache.end();
+ // determine what is dirty, seeding our initial DirtyBlocks worklist. The
+ // Int bit of CacheP tells us if we have anything dirty.
+ if (CacheP.getInt())
+ for (NonLocalDepInfo::iterator I = Cache.begin(), E = Cache.end();
I != E; ++I)
- if (I->second.getInt() == Dirty)
- DirtyBlocks.push_back(I->first);
+ if (I->second.getInt() == Dirty)
+ DirtyBlocks.push_back(I->first);
NumCacheNonLocal++;
@@ -315,7 +321,7 @@
// for any cached queries.
NonLocalDepMapType::iterator NLDI = NonLocalDeps.find(RemInst);
if (NLDI != NonLocalDeps.end()) {
- NonLocalDepInfo &BlockMap = *NLDI->second;
+ NonLocalDepInfo &BlockMap = *NLDI->second.getPointer();
for (NonLocalDepInfo::iterator DI = BlockMap.begin(), DE = BlockMap.end();
DI != DE; ++DI)
if (Instruction *Inst = DI->second.getPointer())
@@ -388,11 +394,13 @@
I != E; ++I) {
assert(*I != RemInst && "Already removed NonLocalDep info for RemInst");
- NonLocalDepInfo &INLD = *NonLocalDeps[*I];
- assert(&INLD != 0 && "Reverse mapping out of date?");
+ PerInstNLInfo &INLD = NonLocalDeps[*I];
+ assert(INLD.getPointer() != 0 && "Reverse mapping out of date?");
+ // The information is now dirty!
+ INLD.setInt(true);
- for (NonLocalDepInfo::iterator DI = INLD.begin(), DE = INLD.end();
- DI != DE; ++DI) {
+ for (NonLocalDepInfo::iterator DI = INLD.getPointer()->begin(),
+ DE = INLD.getPointer()->end(); DI != DE; ++DI) {
if (DI->second.getPointer() != RemInst) continue;
// Convert to a dirty entry for the subsequent instruction.
@@ -435,9 +443,9 @@
for (NonLocalDepMapType::const_iterator I = NonLocalDeps.begin(),
E = NonLocalDeps.end(); I != E; ++I) {
assert(I->first != D && "Inst occurs in data structures");
- NonLocalDepInfo &INLD = *I->second;
- for (NonLocalDepInfo::iterator II = INLD.begin(), EE = INLD.end();
- II != EE; ++II)
+ const PerInstNLInfo &INLD = I->second;
+ for (NonLocalDepInfo::iterator II = INLD.getPointer()->begin(),
+ EE = INLD.getPointer()->end(); II != EE; ++II)
assert(II->second.getPointer() != D && "Inst occurs in data structures");
}
More information about the llvm-commits
mailing list