Michael Gottesman 4cb9eb72f4 [rc-id] Ensure that the reforming enum analysis properly handles no-payload incoming values. ...

One common problem in swift code is the "reforming enum problem". What
happens here is that we have some enum %0 : $Optional<T> and we break it
apart and reform it as a new enum as in the following:

   bb9:
     ...
     switch_enum %0 : $Optional<T>, #Optional.None: bb10,
                                    #Optional.Some: bb11

   bb10:
     %1 = enum $Optional<U>, #Optional.None
     br bb12(%1 : $Optional<U>)

   bb11:
     %2 = some_cast_to_u %0 : ...
     %3 = enum $Optional<U>, #Optional.Some, %2 : $U
     br bb12(%3 : $Optional<U>)

   bb12(%4 : $Optional<U>):
     retain_value %0 : $Optional<T> // id %5
     release_value %4 : $Optional<U> // id %6

We really would like to know that a retain on %4 is equivalent to a
retain on %0 so we can eliminate the retain, release pair. To be able to
do that safely, we need to know that along all paths %0 and %4 either:

1. Both refer to the same RCIdentity directly. An example of this is the
edge from bb11 -> bb12).
2. Both refer to the "null" RCIdentity (i.e. do not have a payload). An
example of this is the edge from bb10 -> bb12.

Only in such cases is it safe to match up %5, %6 and eliminate them. If
this is not true along all paths like in the following:

   bb9:
     ...
     cond_br %foo, bb10, bb11

   bb10:
     %1 = enum $Optional<U>, #Optional.None
     br bb12(%1 : $Optional<U>)

   bb11:
     %2 = some_cast_to_u %0 : ...
     %3 = enum $Optional<U>, #Optional.Some, %2 : $U
     br bb12(%3 : $Optional<U>)

   bb12(%4 : $Optional<U>):
     retain_value %0 : $Optional<T> // id %5
     release_value %4 : $Optional<U> // id %6

then we may have that %0 is always non-payloaded coming into bb12. Then
by matching up %0 and %4, if we go from bb9 -> bb11, we will lose a
retain.

Perf Changes:

TITLE..................OLD...........NEW...........NEW/OLD
LevenshteinDistance....1398195.00....1177397.00....0.84
Memset.................26541.00......23701.00......0.89
CaptureProp............5603.00.......5031.00.......0.90
ImageProc..............1281.00.......1196.00.......0.93
InsertionSort..........109828.00.....104129.00.....0.95
StringWalk.............6813.00.......7456.00.......1.09
Chars..................27182.00......30443.00......1.12

The StringWalk, Chars are both reproducible for me. When I turn back on parts of
the recursion (I took the recursion out to make this change more conservative),
the Chars regression goes away, but the StringWalk stays. I have not had a
chance to look at what is going on with StringWalk.

rdar://19724405

Swift SVN r25339

2015-02-17 01:30:19 +00:00

6.7 KiB

Raw Blame History

View Raw