[llvm] [CGP] Undo constant propagation of pointers across calls (PR #102926)
Nikita Popov via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Mon Aug 26 12:19:59 PDT 2024
================
@@ -2686,6 +2686,47 @@ bool CodeGenPrepare::optimizeCallInst(CallInst *CI, ModifyDT &ModifiedDT) {
return true;
}
+ // SCCP may have propagated C++ static variables across calls. If this happens
+ // to be the case, we may want to undo it in order to avoid redundant pointer
+ // computation of the constant, as the function method returning the constant
+ // needs to be executed anyways.
+ auto GetUniformReturnValue = [](const Function *F) -> Constant * {
+ if (!F->getReturnType()->isPointerTy())
+ return nullptr;
+
+ Constant *UniformValue = nullptr;
+ for (auto &BB : llvm::reverse(*F)) {
+ if (auto *RI = dyn_cast<ReturnInst>(BB.getTerminator())) {
+ if (auto *V = dyn_cast<GlobalVariable>(RI->getReturnValue())) {
+ if (!UniformValue)
+ UniformValue = V;
+ else if (V != UniformValue)
+ return nullptr;
+ } else {
+ return nullptr;
+ }
+ }
+ }
+
+ return UniformValue;
+ };
+
+ if (Constant *RV = GetUniformReturnValue(CI->getCalledFunction())) {
+ bool MadeChange = false;
+ const auto &DT = getDT(*CI->getFunction());
+ for (Use &U : make_early_inc_range(RV->uses())) {
+ auto *I = dyn_cast<Instruction>(U.getUser());
+ if (!I || I->getParent() != CI->getParent())
----------------
nikic wrote:
Is `I->getParent() != CI->getParent()` a profitability heuristic, to avoid long live ranges? If so, add a comment please.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102926
More information about the llvm-commits
mailing list