Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

PR for llvm/llvm-project#79571 #79572

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 5, 2024
Merged

Conversation

github-actions[bot]
Copy link

resolves #79571

@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the LLVM 18.X Release milestone Jan 26, 2024
Copy link
Author

@alinas What do you think about merging this PR to the release branch?

@llvmbot
Copy link
Collaborator

llvmbot commented Jan 28, 2024

@llvm/pr-subscribers-llvm-transforms

@llvm/pr-subscribers-llvm-analysis

Author: None (github-actions[bot])

Changes

resolves llvm/llvm-project#79571


Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79572.diff

2 Files Affected:

  • (modified) llvm/lib/Analysis/MemorySSAUpdater.cpp (+3-19)
  • (modified) llvm/test/Transforms/SimpleLoopUnswitch/memssa-readnone-access.ll (+104)
diff --git a/llvm/lib/Analysis/MemorySSAUpdater.cpp b/llvm/lib/Analysis/MemorySSAUpdater.cpp
index e87ae7d71fffe20..aa550f0b6a7bfd6 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Analysis/MemorySSAUpdater.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/Analysis/MemorySSAUpdater.cpp
@@ -692,25 +692,9 @@ void MemorySSAUpdater::updateForClonedLoop(const LoopBlocksRPO &LoopBlocks,
         continue;
 
       // Determine incoming value and add it as incoming from IncBB.
-      if (MemoryUseOrDef *IncMUD = dyn_cast<MemoryUseOrDef>(IncomingAccess)) {
-        if (!MSSA->isLiveOnEntryDef(IncMUD)) {
-          Instruction *IncI = IncMUD->getMemoryInst();
-          assert(IncI && "Found MemoryUseOrDef with no Instruction.");
-          if (Instruction *NewIncI =
-                  cast_or_null<Instruction>(VMap.lookup(IncI))) {
-            IncMUD = MSSA->getMemoryAccess(NewIncI);
-            assert(IncMUD &&
-                   "MemoryUseOrDef cannot be null, all preds processed.");
-          }
-        }
-        NewPhi->addIncoming(IncMUD, IncBB);
-      } else {
-        MemoryPhi *IncPhi = cast<MemoryPhi>(IncomingAccess);
-        if (MemoryAccess *NewDefPhi = MPhiMap.lookup(IncPhi))
-          NewPhi->addIncoming(NewDefPhi, IncBB);
-        else
-          NewPhi->addIncoming(IncPhi, IncBB);
-      }
+      NewPhi->addIncoming(
+          getNewDefiningAccessForClone(IncomingAccess, VMap, MPhiMap, MSSA),
+          IncBB);
     }
     if (auto *SingleAccess = onlySingleValue(NewPhi)) {
       MPhiMap[Phi] = SingleAccess;
diff --git a/llvm/test/Transforms/SimpleLoopUnswitch/memssa-readnone-access.ll b/llvm/test/Transforms/SimpleLoopUnswitch/memssa-readnone-access.ll
index 2aaf777683e116f..c6e6608d4be383a 100644
--- a/llvm/test/Transforms/SimpleLoopUnswitch/memssa-readnone-access.ll
+++ b/llvm/test/Transforms/SimpleLoopUnswitch/memssa-readnone-access.ll
@@ -115,3 +115,107 @@ split:
 exit:
   ret void
 }
+
+; Variants of the above test with swapped branch destinations.
+
+define void @test1_swapped(i1 %c) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: define void @test1_swapped(
+; CHECK-SAME: i1 [[C:%.*]]) {
+; CHECK-NEXT:  start:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[C_FR:%.*]] = freeze i1 [[C]]
+; CHECK-NEXT:    br i1 [[C_FR]], label [[START_SPLIT_US:%.*]], label [[START_SPLIT:%.*]]
+; CHECK:       start.split.us:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    br label [[LOOP_US:%.*]]
+; CHECK:       loop.us:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    call void @foo()
+; CHECK-NEXT:    br label [[LOOP_US]]
+; CHECK:       start.split:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    br label [[LOOP:%.*]]
+; CHECK:       loop:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    call void @foo()
+; CHECK-NEXT:    br label [[EXIT:%.*]]
+; CHECK:       exit:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    ret void
+;
+start:
+  br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %fn = load ptr, ptr @vtable, align 8
+  call void %fn()
+  br i1 %c, label %loop, label %exit
+
+exit:
+  ret void
+}
+
+define void @test2_swapped(i1 %c, ptr %p) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: define void @test2_swapped(
+; CHECK-SAME: i1 [[C:%.*]], ptr [[P:%.*]]) {
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[C_FR:%.*]] = freeze i1 [[C]]
+; CHECK-NEXT:    br i1 [[C_FR]], label [[DOTSPLIT_US:%.*]], label [[DOTSPLIT:%.*]]
+; CHECK:       .split.us:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    br label [[LOOP_US:%.*]]
+; CHECK:       loop.us:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    call void @foo()
+; CHECK-NEXT:    call void @bar()
+; CHECK-NEXT:    br label [[LOOP_US]]
+; CHECK:       .split:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    br label [[LOOP:%.*]]
+; CHECK:       loop:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    call void @foo()
+; CHECK-NEXT:    call void @bar()
+; CHECK-NEXT:    br label [[EXIT:%.*]]
+; CHECK:       exit:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    ret void
+;
+  br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %fn = load ptr, ptr @vtable, align 8
+  call void %fn()
+  call void @bar()
+  br i1 %c, label %loop, label %exit
+
+exit:
+  ret void
+}
+
+define void @test3_swapped(i1 %c, ptr %p) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: define void @test3_swapped(
+; CHECK-SAME: i1 [[C:%.*]], ptr [[P:%.*]]) {
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[C_FR:%.*]] = freeze i1 [[C]]
+; CHECK-NEXT:    br i1 [[C_FR]], label [[DOTSPLIT_US:%.*]], label [[DOTSPLIT:%.*]]
+; CHECK:       .split.us:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    br label [[LOOP_US:%.*]]
+; CHECK:       loop.us:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    br label [[SPLIT_US:%.*]]
+; CHECK:       split.us:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    call void @foo()
+; CHECK-NEXT:    call void @bar()
+; CHECK-NEXT:    br label [[LOOP_US]]
+; CHECK:       .split:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    br label [[LOOP:%.*]]
+; CHECK:       loop:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    br label [[SPLIT:%.*]]
+; CHECK:       split:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    call void @foo()
+; CHECK-NEXT:    call void @bar()
+; CHECK-NEXT:    br label [[EXIT:%.*]]
+; CHECK:       exit:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    ret void
+;
+  br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %fn = load ptr, ptr @vtable, align 8
+  br label %split
+
+split:
+  call void %fn()
+  call void @bar()
+  br i1 %c, label %loop, label %exit
+
+exit:
+  ret void
+}

@tstellar
Copy link
Collaborator

tstellar commented Feb 2, 2024

@alinas What do you think about merging this PR to the release branch?

Copy link
Contributor

@alinas alinas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There are some pre-merge failures to review, but including this in the release makes sense.

This is a followup to llvm#76819. After those changes, we can still run into
an assertion failure for a slight variation of the test case: When
fixing up MemoryPhis, we map the incoming access to the access of the
cloned instruction -- which may now no longer exist.

Fix this by reusing the getNewDefiningAccessForClone() helper, which
will look upwards for a new defining access in that case.

(cherry picked from commit a7a1b8b)
@tstellar tstellar merged commit 43db795 into llvm:release/18.x Feb 5, 2024
6 of 9 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants