[PATCH] D39138: [CodeGen] Generate TBAA info for 'this' pointers

2017-10-26 Thread Ivan Kosarev via Phabricator via cfe-commits
kosarev abandoned this revision. kosarev added a comment. OK, thanks. Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D39138 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D39138: [CodeGen] Generate TBAA info for 'this' pointers

2017-10-25 Thread John McCall via Phabricator via cfe-commits
rjmccall added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39138#906623, @kosarev wrote: > Hmm, according to our research such loads constitute about 18% of all loads > under ##-O -Xclang -disable-llvm-passes## on the LLVM code base. I wonder, do > you think it would be nice to not generate them

[PATCH] D39138: [CodeGen] Generate TBAA info for 'this' pointers

2017-10-25 Thread Ivan Kosarev via Phabricator via cfe-commits
kosarev added a comment. Hmm, according to our research such loads constitute about 18% of all loads under ##-O -Xclang -disable-llvm-passes## on the LLVM code base. I wonder, do you think it would be nice to not generate them at all? I mean, provided that necessary changes do not add too much

[PATCH] D39138: [CodeGen] Generate TBAA info for 'this' pointers

2017-10-24 Thread Hal Finkel via Phabricator via cfe-commits
hfinkel added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39138#905445, @rjmccall wrote: > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39138#905184, @hfinkel wrote: > > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39138#904747, @rjmccall wrote: > > > > > Okay, if this is just for your own checking, I'd rather not take it. > >

[PATCH] D39138: [CodeGen] Generate TBAA info for 'this' pointers

2017-10-24 Thread John McCall via Phabricator via cfe-commits
rjmccall added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39138#905184, @hfinkel wrote: > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39138#904747, @rjmccall wrote: > > > Okay, if this is just for your own checking, I'd rather not take it. It's > > not a significant compile-time cost, but there's no reason to

[PATCH] D39138: [CodeGen] Generate TBAA info for 'this' pointers

2017-10-24 Thread Hal Finkel via Phabricator via cfe-commits
hfinkel added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39138#904747, @rjmccall wrote: > Okay, if this is just for your own checking, I'd rather not take it. It's > not a significant compile-time cost, but there's no reason to pay it at all. In that case, can we take it? I'd rather have

[PATCH] D39138: [CodeGen] Generate TBAA info for 'this' pointers

2017-10-24 Thread John McCall via Phabricator via cfe-commits
rjmccall added a comment. Okay, if this is just for your own checking, I'd rather not take it. It's not a significant compile-time cost, but there's no reason to pay it at all. Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D39138 ___

[PATCH] D39138: [CodeGen] Generate TBAA info for 'this' pointers

2017-10-24 Thread Ivan Kosarev via Phabricator via cfe-commits
kosarev added a comment. Correct, they are eliminated. However, this change makes things a bit easier as we are pursuing undecorated instructions produced by clang. Once they have their TBAA tags, we don't need to guess if it's something trivial for the optimizer. It shouldn't be a problem to

[PATCH] D39138: [CodeGen] Generate TBAA info for 'this' pointers

2017-10-24 Thread John McCall via Phabricator via cfe-commits
rjmccall added a comment. AFAIK, this is pointless because that alloca will be trivially eliminated by mem2reg. Am I missing something? Is this important for some sort of consistency check? Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D39138

[PATCH] D39138: [CodeGen] Generate TBAA info for 'this' pointers

2017-10-20 Thread Ivan Kosarev via Phabricator via cfe-commits
kosarev created this revision. kosarev added a project: clang. Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D39138 Files: lib/CodeGen/CGCXXABI.cpp test/CodeGen/tbaa-this.cpp Index: test/CodeGen/tbaa-this.cpp === ---