Changes for basic block flags.#37335
Merged
erozenfeld merged 1 commit intodotnet:masterfrom Jun 5, 2020
Merged
Conversation
Member
Author
|
x64 framework diffs: |
Member
Author
|
@dotnet/jit-contrib @AndyAyersMS PTAL |
CarolEidt
reviewed
Jun 3, 2020
src/coreclr/src/jit/flowgraph.cpp
Outdated
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
will pInlineInfo->retBB always be non-null if bottomBlock != nullptr?
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
pInlineInfo->retBB is non-null if pInlineInfo->retExpr is non null and we have a noway_assert(pInlineInfo->retExpr)` above.
Fix the code that propagates flags from the basic block of the return expression to the caller's basic block during inlining. We are now properly tracking the basic block of the return expression. Fixes dotnet#36588. Don't mark BBJ_RETURN blocks with BBF_BACKWARD_JUMP since they are executed at most once. The first change had a few diffs because we propagated BBF_BACKWARD_JUMP flag. After analyzing them I realized that we shouldn't mark BBJ_RETURN blocks with BBF_BACKWARD_JUMP in the first place. That resulted in some diffs because we are less aggressive with inlining of calls outside of loops.
Member
Author
|
I decided to change my fix to update the basic block flags later in |
erozenfeld
added a commit
to erozenfeld/runtime
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 22, 2020
This is a fllow-up to dotnet#37335 and dotnet#37840. When an inline fails we replace `GT_RET_EXPR`with the original `GT_CALL` node. `GT_RET_EXPR`may end up in a basic block other than the original `GT_CALL` so we need to propagate basic block flags. Fixes dotnet#36588.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fix the code that propagates flags from the basic block of the return
expression to the caller's basic block during inlining. We are now
properly tracking the basic block of the return expression.
Fixes Assertion failed 'false' during 'Early Value Propagation' #36588.
Don't mark
BBJ_RETURNblocks withBBF_BACKWARD_JUMPsince they areexecuted at most once.
The first change had a few diffs because we propagated
BBF_BACKWARD_JUMPflag. After analyzing them I realized that we shouldn't mark
BBJ_RETURNblocks with
BBF_BACKWARD_JUMPin the first place. That resulted in somediffs because we are less aggressive with inlining of calls outside of
loops.