[PATCH] D111272: [InlineCost] model calls to llvm.is.constant* more carefully
Nick Desaulniers via Phabricator via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Fri Oct 8 14:59:16 PDT 2021
nickdesaulniers updated this revision to Diff 378364.
nickdesaulniers marked 3 inline comments as done.
nickdesaulniers added a comment.
- further reduce test case, refine regex matches
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D111272/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D111272
Files:
llvm/lib/Analysis/InlineCost.cpp
llvm/test/Transforms/Inline/call-intrinsic-is-constant.ll
Index: llvm/test/Transforms/Inline/call-intrinsic-is-constant.ll
===================================================================
--- /dev/null
+++ llvm/test/Transforms/Inline/call-intrinsic-is-constant.ll
@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+; RUN: opt %s -passes=inline -inline-threshold=20 -S | FileCheck %s
+
+declare i1 @llvm.is.constant.i64(i64)
+declare void @foo()
+
+define void @callee(i64 %val) {
+ %cond = call i1 @llvm.is.constant.i64(i64 %val)
+ br i1 %cond, label %cond.true, label %cond.false
+
+cond.true:
+; Rack up costs with a couple of function calls so that this function
+; gets inlined only when @llvm.is.constant.i64 is folded. In reality,
+; the "then" clause of __builtin_constant_p tends to have statements
+; that fold very well, so the cost of the "then" clause is not a huge
+; concern.
+ call void @foo()
+ call void @foo()
+ ret void
+
+cond.false:
+ ret void
+}
+
+define void @caller(i64 %val) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: @caller(
+; CHECK-NEXT: [[COND_I:%.*]] = call i1 @llvm.is.constant.i64(i64 [[VAL:%.*]])
+; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 [[COND_I]], label %[[COND_TRUE_I:.*]], label %[[COND_FALSE_I:.*]]
+; CHECK: [[COND_TRUE_I]]:
+; CHECK-NEXT: call void @foo()
+; CHECK-NEXT: call void @foo()
+; CHECK-NEXT: br label %[[CALLEE_EXIT:.*]]
+; CHECK: [[COND_FALSE_I]]:
+; CHECK-NEXT: br label %[[CALLEE_EXIT]]
+; CHECK: [[CALLEE_EXIT]]:
+; CHECK-NEXT: ret void
+;
+ call void @callee(i64 %val)
+ ret void
+}
Index: llvm/lib/Analysis/InlineCost.cpp
===================================================================
--- llvm/lib/Analysis/InlineCost.cpp
+++ llvm/lib/Analysis/InlineCost.cpp
@@ -387,6 +387,7 @@
bool simplifyCallSite(Function *F, CallBase &Call);
template <typename Callable>
bool simplifyInstruction(Instruction &I, Callable Evaluate);
+ bool simplifyIntrinsicCallIsConstant(CallBase &CB);
ConstantInt *stripAndComputeInBoundsConstantOffsets(Value *&V);
/// Return true if the given argument to the function being considered for
@@ -1531,6 +1532,27 @@
return true;
}
+/// Try to simplify a call to llvm.is.constant.
+///
+/// Duplicate the argument checking from CallAnalyzer::simplifyCallSite since
+/// we expect calls of this specific intrinsic to be infrequent.
+///
+/// FIXME: If we knew CB's parent's caller, we might be able to determine
+/// whether inlining CB's parent into CB's parent's caller would change how the
+/// call to llvm.is.constant would evaluate. The member CandidateCall of
+/// CallAnalyzer is CB's parent's caller.
+bool CallAnalyzer::simplifyIntrinsicCallIsConstant(CallBase &CB) {
+ Value *Arg = CB.getArgOperand(0);
+ auto *C = dyn_cast<Constant>(Arg);
+
+ if (!C)
+ C = dyn_cast_or_null<Constant>(SimplifiedValues.lookup(Arg));
+
+ Type *RT = CB.getFunctionType()->getReturnType();
+ SimplifiedValues[&CB] = ConstantInt::get(RT, C ? 1 : 0);
+ return true;
+}
+
bool CallAnalyzer::visitBitCast(BitCastInst &I) {
// Propagate constants through bitcasts.
if (simplifyInstruction(I, [&](SmallVectorImpl<Constant *> &COps) {
@@ -2154,6 +2176,8 @@
if (auto *SROAArg = getSROAArgForValueOrNull(II->getOperand(0)))
SROAArgValues[II] = SROAArg;
return true;
+ case Intrinsic::is_constant:
+ return simplifyIntrinsicCallIsConstant(Call);
}
}
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: D111272.378364.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 3310 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20211008/0213b0d7/attachment.bin>
More information about the llvm-commits
mailing list