[llvm-dev] CodeExtractor buggy?
Bekket McClane via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Nov 28 17:35:04 PST 2017
Hi,
I didn’t take a detail look on the problem you encountered, but early this October(5.0 is released in Sep I remembered), I fixed a bug related to exitStub in CodeExtractor:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL315041 <https://reviews.llvm.org/rL315041>
In short, I change the behavior of output variable restoring
Hope this helps
Regards,
Min-Yih
> Pei Wang via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> 於 2017年11月29日 上午9:26 寫道:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I’m currently working on a simple task which needs to transform loops into tail-recursive functions. I found the CodeExtractor class a handy helper to use, but later encountered a problem.
>
> Consider the following CU
>
> struct S { int a, b; };
>
> int foo(struct S *s, unsigned n) {
> struct S *next = s;
>
> unsigned i;
> for (i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
> if (!s[i].a)
> break;
> next = s + i;
> }
> return next->b;
> }
>
> clang 5.0 gives the following IR with O1 optimizations
>
> %struct.S = type { i32, i32 }
>
> ; Function Attrs: norecurse nounwind readonly uwtable
> define i32 @foo(%struct.S* nocapture readonly, i32) local_unnamed_addr #0 {
> %3 = icmp eq i32 %1, 0
> br i1 %3, label %16, label %4
>
> ; <label>:4: ; preds = %2
> br label %7
>
> ; <label>:5: ; preds = %7
> %6 = icmp ult i32 %15, %1
> br i1 %6, label %7, label %16
>
> ; <label>:7: ; preds = %4, %5
> %8 = phi i32 [ %15, %5 ], [ 0, %4 ]
> %9 = phi %struct.S* [ %11, %5 ], [ %0, %4 ]
> %10 = zext i32 %8 to i64
> %11 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.S, %struct.S* %0, i64 %10
> %12 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.S, %struct.S* %11, i64 0, i32 0
> %13 = load i32, i32* %12, align 4, !tbaa !2
> %14 = icmp eq i32 %13, 0
> %15 = add i32 %8, 1
> br i1 %14, label %16, label %5
>
> ; <label>:16: ; preds = %5, %7, %2
> %17 = phi %struct.S* [ %0, %2 ], [ %9, %7 ], [ %11, %5 ]
> %18 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.S, %struct.S* %17, i64 0, i32 1
> %19 = load i32, i32* %18, align 4, !tbaa !7
> ret i32 %19
> }
>
> Here %17 should be noted, which is a phi with 3 incoming blocks, with two of them being part of the loop.
>
> After using CodeExtractor to extract the loop into a new function, I got
>
> %struct.S = type { i32, i32 }
>
> ; Function Attrs: norecurse nounwind readonly uwtable
> define i32 @foo(%struct.S* nocapture readonly, i32) local_unnamed_addr #0 {
> %.loc1 = alloca %struct.S*
> %.loc = alloca %struct.S*
> %3 = icmp eq i32 %1, 0
> br i1 %3, label %5, label %4
>
> ; <label>:4: ; preds = %2
> br label %codeRepl
>
> codeRepl: ; preds = %4
> call void @foo_(%struct.S* %0, i32 %1, %struct.S** %.loc, %struct.S** %.loc1)
> %.reload = load %struct.S*, %struct.S** %.loc
> %.reload2 = load %struct.S*, %struct.S** %.loc1
> br label %.loopexit
>
> .loopexit: ; preds = %codeRepl
> %.ph = phi %struct.S* [ %.reload2, %codeRepl ], [ %.reload, %codeRepl ]
> br label %5
>
> ; <label>:5: ; preds = %.loopexit, %2
> %6 = phi %struct.S* [ %0, %2 ], [ %.ph, %.loopexit ]
> %7 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.S, %struct.S* %6, i64 0, i32 1
> %8 = load i32, i32* %7, align 4, !tbaa !2
> ret i32 %8
> }
>
> ; Function Attrs: nounwind uwtable
> define internal void @foo_(%struct.S*, i32, %struct.S** %.out, %struct.S** %.out1) #1 {
> newFuncRoot:
> br label %2
>
> .loopexit.exitStub: ; preds = %11, %2
> store %struct.S* %4, %struct.S** %.out
> store %struct.S* %6, %struct.S** %.out1
> ret void
>
> ; <label>:2: ; preds = %newFuncRoot, %11
> %3 = phi i32 [ %10, %11 ], [ 0, %newFuncRoot ]
> %4 = phi %struct.S* [ %6, %11 ], [ %0, %newFuncRoot ]
> %5 = zext i32 %3 to i64
> %6 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.S, %struct.S* %0, i64 %5
> %7 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.S, %struct.S* %6, i64 0, i32 0
> %8 = load i32, i32* %7, align 4, !tbaa !7
> %9 = icmp eq i32 %8, 0
> %10 = add i32 %3, 1
> br i1 %9, label %.loopexit.exitStub, label %11
>
> ; <label>:11: ; preds = %2
> %12 = icmp ult i32 %10, %1
> br i1 %12, label %2, label %.loopexit.exitStub
> }
>
> Now, because the loop is coalesced into a function, the definition of %.ph (derived from %17 in the previous version of IR) in .loopexit becomes funny: two different incoming values for the same incoming block. I was wondering if this is a bug of CodeExtractor or the extractor makes assumptions about the code to be extracted which I’m not aware of.
>
> Thanks,
> Pei Wang
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171129/fc850c9d/attachment.html>
More information about the llvm-dev
mailing list