This eliminates all inline creation of SILBasicBlock via placement new.
There are a few reasons to do this:
1. A SILBasicBlock is always created with a parent function. This commit
formalizes this into the SILBasicBlock API by only allowing for SILFunctions to
create SILBasicBlocks. This is implemented via the type system by making all
SILBasicBlock constructors private. Since SILFunction is a friend of
SILBasicBlock, SILFunction can still create a SILBasicBlock without issue.
2. Since all SILBasicBlocks will be created in only a few functions, it becomes
very easy to determine using instruments the amount of memory being allocated
for SILBasicBlocks by simply inverting the call tree in Allocations.
With LTO+PGO, normal inlining can occur if profitable so there shouldn't be
overhead that we care about in shipping compilers.
Today, loads and stores are treated as having @unowned(unsafe) ownership
semantics. This leaves the user to specify ownership changes on the loaded or
stored value independently of the load/store by inserting ARC operations. With
the change to Semantic SIL, this will no longer be true. Instead loads, stores
have ownership semantics that one must reason about such as copy, take, and
trivial.
This change moves us closer to that world by eliminating the default
OwnershipQualification argument from create{Load,Store}. This means that the
compiler developer cannot ignore reasoning about the ownership semantics of the
memory operation that they are creating.
Operationally, this is a NFC change since I have just gone through the compiler
and updated all places where we create loads, stores to pass in the former
default argument ({Load,Store}OwnershipQualifier::Unqualified), to
SILBuilder::create{Load,Store}(...). For now, one can just do that in situations
where one needs to create loads/stores, but over time, I am going to tighten the
semantics up via the verifier.
rdar://28685236
This made call sites confusing to read because it doesn't actually
check if the function already exists.
Also fix some minor formatting issues. This came up while I was working
on a fix for a bug that turned out to not be a bug.
Change the optimizer to only make specializations [fragile] if both the
original callee is [fragile] *and* the caller is [fragile].
Otherwise, the specialized callee might be [fragile] even if it is never
called from a [fragile] function, which inhibits the optimizer from
devirtualizing calls inside the specialization.
This opens up some missed optimization opportunities in the performance
inliner and devirtualization, which currently reject fragile->non-fragile
references:
TEST | OLD_MIN | NEW_MIN | DELTA (%) | SPEEDUP
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
DictionaryRemoveOfObjects | 38391 | 35859 | -6.6% | **1.07x**
Hanoi | 5853 | 5288 | -9.7% | **1.11x**
Phonebook | 18287 | 14988 | -18.0% | **1.22x**
SetExclusiveOr_OfObjects | 20001 | 15906 | -20.5% | **1.26x**
SetUnion_OfObjects | 16490 | 12370 | -25.0% | **1.33x**
Right now, passes other than performance inlining and devirtualization
of class methods are not checking invariants on [fragile] functions
at all, which was incorrect; as part of the work on building the
standard library with -enable-resilience, I added these checks, which
regressed performance with resilience disabled. This patch makes up for
these regressions.
Furthermore, once SIL type lowering is aware of resilience, this will
allow the stack promotion pass to make further optimizations after
specializing [fragile] callees.
With this re-abstraction a specialized function has the same calling convention as if it would have been written with the specialized types in the first place.
In general this results in less alloc_stacks and load/stores.
It also can eliminate some re-abstraction thunks, e.g. if a generic closure is used in a non-generic context.
It some (hopefully rare) cases it may require to add re-abstraction thunks.
In case a function has multiple indirect results, only the first is converted to a direct result. This is an open TODO.
This is something that we have wanted for a long time and will enable us to
remove some hacks from the compiler (i.e. how we determine in the ARC optimizer
that we have "fatalError" like function) and also express new things like
"noarc".
(libraries now)
It has been generally agreed that we need to do this reorg, and now
seems like the perfect time. Some major pass reorganization is in the
works.
This does not have to be the final word on the matter. The consensus
among those working on the code is that it's much better than what we
had and a better starting point for future bike shedding.
Note that the previous organization was designed to allow separate
analysis and optimization libraries. It turns out this is an
artificial distinction and not an important goal.
