Peet Nick via llvm-dev
2016-Jul-04 16:05 UTC
[llvm-dev] Optimization issues (Alias Analysis?)
Hey, I am currently working on a VM which is based on LLVM and I would like to use its optimizer, but it somehow it can't detect something very simple (I guess.) This is the LLVM IR: target datalayout = "e-m:e-p:32:32-f64:32:64-f80:32-n8:16:32-S128" target triple = "i386-unknown-linux-gnu" %struct.regs = type { i32, i32, i32 } define void @Test(%struct.regs* noalias nocapture sret, i32, i32, i32) local_unnamed_addr #0 { %5 = add i32 %3, -4 %6 = inttoptr i32 %5 to i32* store i32 %2, i32* %6, align 4 %7 = add i32 %3, -8 %8 = inttoptr i32 %7 to i32* store i32 %1, i32* %8, align 4 %9 = load i32, i32* %6, align 4 %.sroa.0.0..sroa_idx = getelementptr inbounds %struct.regs, %struct.regs* %0, i32 0, i32 0 store i32 %9, i32* %.sroa.0.0..sroa_idx, align 4 %.sroa.4.0..sroa_idx4 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.regs, %struct.regs* %0, i32 0, i32 1 store i32 %1, i32* %.sroa.4.0..sroa_idx4, align 4 %.sroa.7.0..sroa_idx5 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.regs, %struct.regs* %0, i32 0, i32 2 store i32 %3, i32* %.sroa.7.0..sroa_idx5, align 4 ret void } This is compiled from some cpp just to reproduce the issue. The issue here is that the load isn't eliminated and that the third store isn't directly using %2. I thought that this might be an issue with the current BasicAliasAnalysis so I also tried CFL which isn't working either. ~ Nick -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160704/f8fe973b/attachment.html>
Hal Finkel via llvm-dev
2016-Jul-05 18:52 UTC
[llvm-dev] Optimization issues (Alias Analysis?)
Hi Nick, We really don't do AA on inttoptr at all. You should use i8* (or some other appropriate pointer type) and GEPs instead. -Hal ----- Original Message -----> From: "Peet Nick via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > To: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > Sent: Monday, July 4, 2016 11:05:11 AM > Subject: [llvm-dev] Optimization issues (Alias Analysis?)> Hey,> I am currently working on a VM which is based on LLVM and I would > like to use its optimizer, but it somehow it can't detect something > very simple (I guess.)> This is the LLVM IR:> target datalayout = "e-m:e-p:32:32-f64:32:64-f80:32-n8:16:32-S128" > target triple = "i386-unknown-linux-gnu"> %struct.regs = type { i32, i32, i32 }> define void @Test(%struct.regs* noalias nocapture sret, i32, i32, > i32) local_unnamed_addr #0 { > %5 = add i32 %3, -4 > %6 = inttoptr i32 %5 to i32* > store i32 %2, i32* %6, align 4> %7 = add i32 %3, -8 > %8 = inttoptr i32 %7 to i32* > store i32 %1, i32* %8, align 4> %9 = load i32, i32* %6, align 4> %.sroa.0.0..sroa_idx = getelementptr inbounds %struct.regs, > %struct.regs* %0, i32 0, i32 0 > store i32 %9, i32* %.sroa.0.0..sroa_idx, align 4> %.sroa.4.0..sroa_idx4 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.regs, > %struct.regs* %0, i32 0, i32 1 > store i32 %1, i32* %.sroa.4.0..sroa_idx4, align 4> %.sroa.7.0..sroa_idx5 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.regs, > %struct.regs* %0, i32 0, i32 2 > store i32 %3, i32* %.sroa.7.0..sroa_idx5, align 4> ret void > }> This is compiled from some cpp just to reproduce the issue. > The issue here is that the load isn't eliminated and that the third > store isn't directly using %2.> I thought that this might be an issue with the current > BasicAliasAnalysis so I also tried CFL which isn't working either.> ~ Nick > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev-- Hal Finkel Assistant Computational Scientist Leadership Computing Facility Argonne National Laboratory -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160705/1d5c2582/attachment.html>
Peet Nick via llvm-dev
2016-Jul-05 19:40 UTC
[llvm-dev] Optimization issues (Alias Analysis?)
Oh, I understand. Although I am quite curious why this isn't supported as in C it might be very common to cast integer to pointers and back (This is what triggers clang to emit inttoptr instructions). On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 8:52 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:> Hi Nick, > > We really don't do AA on inttoptr at all. You should use i8* (or some > other appropriate pointer type) and GEPs instead. > > -Hal > > ------------------------------ > > *From: *"Peet Nick via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > *To: *llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > *Sent: *Monday, July 4, 2016 11:05:11 AM > *Subject: *[llvm-dev] Optimization issues (Alias Analysis?) > > > Hey, > > I am currently working on a VM which is based on LLVM and I would like to > use its optimizer, but it somehow it can't detect something very simple (I > guess.) > > This is the LLVM IR: > > target datalayout = "e-m:e-p:32:32-f64:32:64-f80:32-n8:16:32-S128" > target triple = "i386-unknown-linux-gnu" > > %struct.regs = type { i32, i32, i32 } > > define void @Test(%struct.regs* noalias nocapture sret, i32, i32, i32) > local_unnamed_addr #0 { > %5 = add i32 %3, -4 > %6 = inttoptr i32 %5 to i32* > store i32 %2, i32* %6, align 4 > > %7 = add i32 %3, -8 > %8 = inttoptr i32 %7 to i32* > store i32 %1, i32* %8, align 4 > > %9 = load i32, i32* %6, align 4 > > %.sroa.0.0..sroa_idx = getelementptr inbounds %struct.regs, > %struct.regs* %0, i32 0, i32 0 > store i32 %9, i32* %.sroa.0.0..sroa_idx, align 4 > > %.sroa.4.0..sroa_idx4 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.regs, > %struct.regs* %0, i32 0, i32 1 > store i32 %1, i32* %.sroa.4.0..sroa_idx4, align 4 > > %.sroa.7.0..sroa_idx5 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.regs, > %struct.regs* %0, i32 0, i32 2 > store i32 %3, i32* %.sroa.7.0..sroa_idx5, align 4 > > ret void > } > > This is compiled from some cpp just to reproduce the issue. > The issue here is that the load isn't eliminated and that the third store > isn't directly using %2. > > I thought that this might be an issue with the current BasicAliasAnalysis > so I also tried CFL which isn't working either. > > ~ Nick > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev > > > > > -- > Hal Finkel > Assistant Computational Scientist > Leadership Computing Facility > Argonne National Laboratory >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160705/4518e8e1/attachment.html>
Possibly Parallel Threads
- [LLVMdev] Weird volatile propagation ?
- [LLVMdev] Specify the volatile access behaviour of the memcpy, memmove and memset intrinsics
- [LLVMdev] Specify the volatile access behaviour of the memcpy, memmove and memset intrinsics
- [LLVMdev] codegen of volatile aggregate copies (was "Weird volatile propagation" on llvm-dev)
- Redundant ptrtoint/inttoptr instructions