Instead the pipeline is continued on the old function. This happens when a pass pushes a new, e.g. specialized function, on the function stack.
There is no need to repeat passes which already did run on a function.
It saves a little of compile time and I didn't see any significant impact on code size or performance.
It also simplifies the pass manager.
This establishes a real def-use relation from the self-parameter to any instruction which uses the dynamic-self type.
This is an addition to what was already done for opened archetypes.
The biggest part of this commit is to rename "OpenedArchetypeOperands" to "TypeDependentOperands" as this name is now more appropriate.
Other than that the change includes:
*) type-dependent operands are now printed after a SIL instruction in a comment as "type-defs:" (for debugging)
*) FuncationSignatureOpts doesn't need to explicitly check if a function doesn't bind dynamic self to remove a dead self metadata argument
*) the check if a function binds dynamic self (used in the inliner) is much simpler now
*) also collect type-dependent operands for ApplyInstBase::SubstCalleeType and not only in the substitution list
*) with this SILInstruction::mayHaveOpenedArchetypeOperands (used in CSE) is not needed anymore and removed
*) add type dependent operands to dynamic_method instruction
Regarding the generated code it should be a NFC.
*) cast optimizer: when a bridging cast is replaced with a function call and the owning convention of the instruction and the call parameter do not match, compensating retain/release instructions must be inserted.
*) cast optimizer: when a consuming dead cast instruction is removed a compensating release instruction must be inserted
*) mem2reg: An alloc_stack location which contains a destroy_addr must not be considered as a write-only location. The destroy_addr must be preserved.
rdar://problem/27601057
This commit fixes a bug where we were not checking that all predecessors had the
cond_fail block as its only successor. This occured since we were bailing early
when we saw a constant. So if we saw a predecessor with a constant before a
predecessor that had multiple successors, we would optimize even though we would
be introducing an extra cond_fail along a path.
I added a new utility pass to test this code since so much is going on in
SimplifyCFG that it is difficult to construct a test case running the full
pass.
Really this code should be in a different pass (properly SIL Code Motion TBH).
But for now, this commit just fixes the bug.
rdar://26904047
Some modifications for the ms-extension option of the clang.exe in the Visual Studio 2015 development environment
This patch is only for swiftc.exe. I used the library set of Visual Studio 2015 Update 1 and recent version of swift-clang as the compiler. If you are using the real MSVC compiler, more patch might be required.
Till now there was no way in SIL to explicitly express a dependency of an instruction on any opened archetypes used by it. This was a cause of many errors and correctness issues. In many cases the code was moved around without taking into account these dependencies, which resulted in breaking the invariant that any uses of an opened archetype should be dominated by the definition of this archetype.
This patch does the following:
- Map opened archetypes to the instructions defining them, i.e. to open_existential instructions.
- Introduce a helper class SILOpenedArchetypesTracker for creating and maintaining such mappings.
- Introduce a helper class SILOpenedArchetypesState for providing a read-only API for looking up available opened archetypes.
- Each SIL instruction which uses an opened archetype as a type gets an additional opened archetype operand representing a dependency of the instruction on this archetype. These opened archetypes operands are an in-memory representation. They are not serialized. Instead, they are re-constructed when reading binary or textual SIL files.
- SILVerifier was extended to conduct more thorough checks related to the usage of opened archetypes.
Till now there was no way in SIL to explicitly express a dependency of an instruction on any opened archetypes used by it. This was a cause of many errors and correctness issues. In many cases the code was moved around without taking into account these dependencies, which resulted in breaking the invariant that any uses of an opened archetype should be dominated by the definition of this archetype.
This patch does the following:
- Map opened archetypes to the instructions defining them, i.e. to open_existential instructions.
- Introduce a helper class SILOpenedArchetypesTracker for creating and maintaining such mappings.
- Introduce a helper class SILOpenedArchetypesState for providing a read-only API for looking up available opened archetypes.
- Each SIL instruction which uses an opened archetype as a type gets an additional opened archetype operand representing a dependency of the instruction on this archetype. These opened archetypes operands are an in-memory representation. They are not serialized. Instead, they are re-constructed when reading binary or textual SIL files.
- SILVerifier was extended to conduct more thorough checks related to the usage of opened archetypes.
Each time we delete the pass manager, we delete the analyses it
holds. In this analysis we were holding onto memory that wasn't getting
released when the analysis was deleted.
Fixes rdar://problem/26245872.
replaced by retain release code motion. This code has been disabled for sometime now.
This should bring the retain release code motion into a close. The retain release
code motion pipeline looks like this. There could be some minor cleanups after this though.
1. We perform a global data flow for retain release code motion in RRCM (RetainReleaseCodeMotion)
2. We perform a local form of retain release code motion in SILCodeMotion. This is more
for cases which can not be handled in RRCM. e.g. sinking into a switch is more efficiently
done in a local form, the retain is not needed on the None block. Release on SILArgument needs
to be split to incoming values, this can not be done in RRCM and other cases.
3. We do not perform code motion in ASO, only elimination which are very important.
Some modifications to test cases, they look different, but functionally the same.
RRCM has this canonicalization effect, i.e. it uses the rc root, instead of
the SSA value the retain/release is currently using. As a result some test cases need
to be modified.
I also removed some test cases that do not make sense anymore and lot of duplicate test
cases between earlycodemotion.sil and latecodemotion.sil. These tests cases only have retains
and should be used to test early code motion.
Several functionalities have been added to FSO over time and the logic has become
muddled.
We were always looking at a static image of the SIL and try to reason about what kind of
function signature related optimizations we can do.
This can easily lead to muddled logic. e.g. we need to consider 2 different function
signature optimizations together instead of independently.
Split 1 single function to do all sorts of different analyses in FSO into several
small transformations, each of which does a specific job. After every analysis, we produce
a new function and eventually we collapse all intermediate thunks to in a single thunk.
With this change, it will be easier to implement function signature optimization as now
we can do them independently now.
Small modifications to the test cases.
Shaves about 19% of the time from the construction of these sets. The
SmallVector size was chosen to minimize the number of dynamic
allocations we end up doing while building the stdlib. This should be a
reasonable size for most projects, too. It's a bit wasteful in space,
but the total amount of allocated space here is pretty small to begin
with.
For details see the comment in ConditionForwarding.cpp.
This optimization pass helps to optimize loops iterating over closed ranges, e.g. for i in 0...n { }
Several functionalities have been added to FSO over time and the logic has become
muddled.
We were always looking at a static image of the SIL and try to reason about what kind of
function signature related optimizations we can do.
This can easily lead to muddled logic. e.g. we need to consider 2 different function
signature optimizations together instead of independently.
Split 1 single function to do all sorts of different analyses in FSO into several
small transformations, each of which does a specific job. After every analysis, we produce
a new function and eventually we collapse all intermediate thunks to in a single thunk.
With this change, it will be easier to implement function signature optimization as now
we can do them independently now.
Minimal modifications to the test cases.
