This adds support for a HasTailCall flag on function call edges in the
ThinLTO summary. It is intended for use in aiding discovery of missing
frames from tail calls in profiled call stacks for MemProf of profiled
binaries that did not disable tail call elimination. A follow on change
will add the use of this new flag during MemProf context disambiguation.

The new flag is encoded in the bitcode along with either the hotness
flag from the profile, or the relative block frequency under the
-write-relbf-to-summary flag when there is no profile data.
Because we now will always have some additional call edge information, I
have removed the non-profile function summary record format, and we
simply encode the tail call flag along with a hotness type of none when
there is no profile information or relative block frequency. The change
of record format and name caused most of the test case changes.

I have added explicit testing of generation of the new tail call flag
into the bitcode and IR assembly format as part of the changes to
llvm/test/Bitcode/thinlto-function-summary-refgraph.ll. I have also
added round trip testing through assembly and bitcode to
llvm/test/Assembler/thinlto-summary.ll.

As pointed out in
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/undeterministic-thin-index-file/69985, the
block count added to distributed ThinLTO index files breaks incremental
builds on ThinLTO - if any linked file has a different number of BBs,
then the accumulated sum placed in the index files will change, causing
all ThinLTO backend compiles to be redone.

The block count is only used for scaling of partial sample profiles, and
was added in D80403 for D79831.

This patch simply removes this field from the index files of non partial
sample profile compiles, which is NFC on the output of the compiler.

We subsequently need to see if this can be removed for partial sample
profiles without signficant performance loss, or redesigned in a way
that does not destroy caching.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D148746

Summary:
Count the per-module number of basic blocks when the module summary is computed
and sum them up during Thin LTO indexing.

This is used to estimate the working set size under the partial sample PGO.

This is split off of D79831.

Reviewers: davidxl, espindola

Subscribers: emaste, inglorion, hiraditya, MaskRay, steven_wu, dexonsmith, arphaman, llvm-commits

Tags: #llvm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80403

llvm-svn: 365215

llvm-svn: 365206

It's possible that some function can load and store the same
variable using the same constant expression:

store %Derived* @foo, %Derived** bitcast (%Base** @bar to %Derived**)
%42 = load %Derived*, %Derived** bitcast (%Base** @bar to %Derived**)

The bitcast expression was mistakenly cached while processing loads,
and never examined later when processing store. This caused @bar to
be mistakenly treated as read-only variable. See load-store-caching.ll.

llvm-svn: 365188

This reverts r365040 (git commit 5cacb914758c7f436b47c8362100f10cef14bbc4)

Speculatively reverting, since this appears to have broken check-lld on
Linux. Partial analysis in https://crbug.com/981168.

llvm-svn: 365097

Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63444

llvm-svn: 365040

Summary:
Records in the module summary index whether the bitcode was compiled
with the option necessary to enable splitting the LTO unit
(e.g. -fsanitize=cfi, -fwhole-program-vtables, or -fsplit-lto-unit).

The information is passed down to the ModuleSummaryIndex builder via a
new module flag "EnableSplitLTOUnit", which is propagated onto a flag
on the summary index.

This is then used during the LTO link to check whether all linked
summaries were built with the same value of this flag. If not, an error
is issued when we detect a situation requiring whole program visibility
of the class hierarchy. This is the case when both of the following
conditions are met:
1) We are performing LowerTypeTests or Whole Program Devirtualization.
2) There are type tests or type checked loads in the code.

Note I have also changed the ThinLTOBitcodeWriter to also gate the
module splitting on the value of this flag.

Reviewers: pcc

Subscribers: ormris, mehdi_amini, Prazek, inglorion, eraman, steven_wu, dexonsmith, arphaman, dang, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53890

llvm-svn: 350948

An attempt to recommit r346584 after failure on OSX build bot.
Fixed cache key computation in ThinLTOCodeGenerator and added
test case

llvm-svn: 347033