You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This is a resurrected version of the patch attached to this RFC:
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-constantdata-should-not-have-use-lists/42606
In this adaptation, there are a few differences. In the original patch, the Use's
use list was replaced with an unsigned* to the reference count in the value. This
version leaves them as null and leaves the ref counting only in Value.
Remove use-lists from instances of ConstantData (which are shared
across modules and have no operands).
To continue supporting most of the use-list API, store a ref-count in
place of the use-list; this is for API like Value::use_empty and
Value::hasNUses. Operations that actually need the use-list -- like
Value::use_begin -- will assert.
This change has three benefits:
1. The compiler output cannot in any way depend on the use-list order
of instances of ConstantData.
2. There's no use-list traffic when adding and removing simple
constants from operand lists (although there is ref-count traffic;
YMMV).
3. It's cheaper to serialize use-lists (since we're no longer
serializing the use-list order of things like i32 0).
The downside is that you can't look at all the users of ConstantData,
but traversals of users of i32 0 are already ill-advised.
Possible follow-ups:
- Track if an instance of a ConstantVector/ConstantArray/etc. is known
to have all ConstantData arguments, and drop the use-lists to
ref-counts in those cases. Callers need to check Value::hasUseList
before iterating through the use-list.
- Remove even the ref-counts. I'm not sure they have any benefit
besides minimizing the scope of this commit, and maintaining the
counts is not free.
Fixes#58629
0 commit comments