[PM] Rewrite the loop pass manager to use a worklist and augmented run arguments much like the CGSCC pass manager.

[chandlerc]

Summary

This is a major redesign following the pattern established for the CGSCC layer to
support updates to the set of loops during the traversal of the loop nest and
to support invalidation of analyses.

An additional significant burden in the loop PM is that so many passes require
access to a large number of function analyses. Manually ensuring these are
cached, available, and preserved has been a long-standing burden in LLVM even
with the help of the automatic scheduling in the old pass manager. And it made
the new pass manager extremely unweildy. With this design, we can package the
common analyses up while in a function pass and make them immediately available
to all the loop passes. While in some cases this is unnecessary, I think the
simplicity afforded is worth it.

This does not (yet) address loop simplified form or LCSSA form, but those are
the next things on my radar and I have a clear plan for them.

While the patch is very large, most of it is either mechanically updating loop
passes to the new API or the new testing for the loop PM. The code for it is
reasonably compact.

I have not yet updated all of the loop passes to correctly leverage the update
mechanisms demonstrated in the unittests. I'll do that in follow-up patches
along with improved FileCheck tests for those passes that ensure things work in
more realistic scenarios. In many cases, there isn't much we can do with these
until the loop simplified form and LCSSA form are in place.

The unittests are somewhat a placeholder. I wrote them using gmock because it
was substantially easier to make progress and as a demonstration of the
improvements that the gmock infrsatructure can bring to writing precise and
clear test passes to plug into the pass manager. I'm starting an llvm-dev
discussion about whether this is enough to convince folks that we should start
leveraging gmock within LLVM. If we don't go that route, I'll rewrite the tests
without gmock (but likely lose some precision and coverage in the process).

[davide]

Couple of high-level comments:

1. What's the price paid (in compile time) for computing the analyses upfront in a function pass and making them available to the loop passes?
2. What's specifically your plan for LCSSA?

[chandlerc]

In D28292#635230, @davide wrote:

Couple of high-level comments:

1. What's the price paid (in compile time) for computing the analyses upfront in a function pass and making them available to the loop passes?

Very low. We are already computing all of these in the main loop pipeline today. This just makes it explicit.

Many of these are "almost always cached" analyses as well such as TLI, TTI, etc.

That said, I don't have numbers. It's way too early to even get numbers. We can change the particular set of analyses we do this with later as needed though. I just picked all the analyses that had multiple loop pass users and where those passes seemed like actively developed and used things and the analyses didn't seem weird or overly specialized.

2. What's specifically your plan for LCSSA?

The current thinking based on a discussion between myself and Michael Z is to teach the pass manager itself to form loops into LCSSA before starting the inner pipeline (when it is a function pass and can do this) and verify that it is preserved throughout the run. No ambiguity or implicit handshake.

As to the *exact* implementation, I want to play with the code to see what works cleanly before I speculate.

[davide]

This is a large patch, but here's a first round of comments (inline).
I personally like a lot the idea of having the analyses always available (with my pass writer hat on).

Also:

1. You propose as FIXME not using RPO. Do you have data/evidence that a different visitation order actually matters? I'm not entirely convinced about it (but I haven't thought about the problem very carefully so).
2. You removed a call to getContext().yield(). Do you happen to know why it was introduced in the first place?

include/llvm/Analysis/LoopPassManager.h

56–58 ↗

(On Diff #83044)

Nit: infrastructure.

86–90 ↗

(On Diff #83044)

ehm, is this comment correct?
Shouldn't it say The Loop pass manager ?

88–90 ↗

(On Diff #83044)

Also doesn't it run over a sequency of Loop passes?

154–155 ↗

(On Diff #83044)

invalidation of the Module or the Function?

193–194 ↗

(On Diff #83044)

I think "correct" is unneeded. I assume every algorithm implemented here is supposed to be correct.

197–199 ↗

(On Diff #83044)

It could be just me, but I never saw RPO on a tree (only on graphs). Therefore, maybe this function can be called appendLoopsInPreorder as it's what the function is doing (and move the comment explaining why the two forms are equivalent on the top of the function).

200 ↗

(On Diff #83044)

traveral -> traversal.

313–321 ↗

(On Diff #83044)

Style nit: all these newlines between member variables are inconsistent with what you use elsewhere (I don't care which style you use, but pick one and stick with it).

lib/Analysis/LoopPassManager.cpp

71 ↗

(On Diff #83044)

Invaliadtion -> Invalidation.

[chandlerc]

In D28292#635262, @davide wrote:

1. You propose as FIXME not using RPO. Do you have data/evidence that a different visitation order actually matters? I'm not entirely convinced about it (but I haven't thought about the problem very carefully so).

I do? Are you referring to the order of loops in LoopInfo?

The only thing I found surprising is that the natural order of loops in LoopInfo is from the bottom of the function to the top. I haven't checked if it is exactly in postorder of the CFG but it looks close.

I wrote this patch to make us visit loops "forward" program order (top to bottom), and left a FIXME that we might want to reverse them in LoopInfo itself.

As for which order of visit is better, I don't have data at all. It turns out the current loop pass manager processes loops in reverse. However, very nicely, they wrote a long comment about how there wasn't any particular reason. There is some hand waving in it about deleting uses before processing defs, but that actually seems unlikely to matter to me.

The reason I had wanted to process in forward order are three fold:

First and foremost: I find it much less surprising. I wrote a lot of tests assuming it would be forward and was surprised when it wasn't. This is just that I find forward program order (in the absence of something like the bottom-up walk) less surprising in general.

Second: it seems useful to enable SSA propagation of constants and things from unrolling one loop into its sibling. That typically argues for processing defs before uses.

I think my second argument is a bit more compelling than the idea of deleting uses before processing defs. But not by much. Hence the primary rationale was a principle of least surprise.

2. You removed a call to getContext().yield(). Do you happen to know why it was introduced in the first place?

I removed it? I thought I just added a commented out bit below a FIXME that hopefully explains what needs to happen here. Happy to dig into this though, and maybe I'm staring at the diff badly...

include/llvm/Analysis/LoopPassManager.h

154–155 ↗

(On Diff #83044)

This comment and surrounding comments were all wrong. Updated.

197–199 ↗

(On Diff #83044)

I'm not sure why "preorder" is more or less confusing for a tree than "reverse postorder"?

Anyways, I agree RPO isn't that useful in the API. I've gone for a more high-level 'appendLoopsToWorklist' and made the adjustment to the comments. Let me know if this works?

[chandlerc]

Fixes from Davide's review feedback, thanks!!!!

[jlebar]

I've gotten through everything except the test bodies. Overall this seems pretty straightforward -- or at least, it's a pretty straightforward application of what you've developed previously.

include/llvm/Analysis/LoopInfo.h

856 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Nit, "function"?

include/llvm/Analysis/LoopPassManager.h

16 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

comma after "possible"

25 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

My usage dictionary says "innermost" and "outermost".

58 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

sp

93 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Ah, I wasn't sold on typedef PassManager<Function> FunctionPassManager, but now I am.

95 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Can we add a bit of verbiage about what we're trying to accomplish here? It's not obvious to me.

126 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Nit, Do you really want explicit on this two-arg constructor?

169 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Here's that InnerAM again. :)

I think what I'm supposed to get from this name is that this is the AM corresponding to the inner AM in the outer-to-inner proxy that is LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy. Is that right?

Because "LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy" does not contain the words "inner" or "outer", understanding "InnerAM" in this way requires a lot of effort. It's also not clear to me what I gain from understanding it in this way? I already know it's the loop AM from its type.

Suggest LoopAM, or just AM.

197 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

, so

197 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Perhaps simplify "the observed order as it is processed" and put our goal first:

We want to process loops in postorder, but the worklist is a LIFO data structure, so we append to it in *reverse* postorder.

205 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Not sure this comment is necessary.

209 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

s/between unrelated loop nests//

222 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

s/a/the/? Or remove the comment, I think it's pretty clear.

245 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

for updating

248 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

s/ensure they//

251 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

I mean, someone has to construct it. Maybe it's sufficient to combine with the above para:

An instance of this class is passed as an argument to each loop pass, and loop passes should use it to update the LPM infrastructure if they modify the loop nest.

253 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

This is kind of a weird name -- at least as described above, it doesn't sound like a "result". LPMUpdater?

261 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

reflow comment

261 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

, as

261 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Do you mean

If this returns true, the loop object may have been deleted, so passes should take care not to touch the object.

?

285 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

s/The//

289 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

, as

295 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

s/,/ --/ or s/, i/: I/

303 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

s/The//

306 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Should we assert that the loops are actually siblings of the current loop? Similarly in addChildLoops, should we check that the loops are actually children?

307 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Do you want to have an assertion in appendLoopsToWorklist (or here if you can't put it there) that none of the loops are nested within one another, to catch the invariant described above?

309 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

, as

317 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

This changes if you call addSiblingLoops or addChildLoops, so it doesn't seem so fixed. Maybe we can just say what it is instead?

370 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Update this comment if we change the name of LPMUpdateResult.

438 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Perhaps simply

Pass for printing a loop's contents as textual IR.

lib/Analysis/LoopPassManager.cpp

31 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

s/manager/manager's/

32 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

It's not call graph updates we care about, right? It's the addition / removal of loops?

41 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

For my information, why are we using a boolean rather than the DEBUG infrastructure? For one thing, DEBUG compiled away in the builds we release, whereas llvm::dbgs() does not, right?

72 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

What do SCCs have to do with this? (Stale comment?)

92 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

s/ so/. So/

135 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Can you rephrase the "Because" sentence?

136 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

its being

141 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

s/New/Now/? Otherwise I don't know what you mean.

unittests/Analysis/LoopPassManagerTest.cpp

40 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Maybe just MockAnalysisHandleBase?

78 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

s/The base provides/We provide/

Or perhaps just

Derived classes should call this in their constructor to set up default mock actions. (We can't do this in our constructor because this has to run after the DerivedT is constructed.)

100 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Comment what is I

152 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

ibid

184 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

I think some judicious comments are called for above, especially given that your readers may be totally unfamiliar with gmock.

[jlebar]

I <3 gmock. Strong approve; this would be really hard to write without.

unittests/Analysis/LoopPassManagerTest.cpp

1058 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

the last inner loop

1115 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

outermost

1115 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

s/iteration/loop/?

1148 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Same re this comment, not sure it's necessary by this point.

1284 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

ITYM ", which", but not sure. Do you mean you delete the last loop period, or that you delete the last loop that happens to contain another loop?

1285 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

reuse

1308 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

reuse

1319 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

, reusing

1330 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

just-deleted

1333 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Can we rephrase?

To respect our inner-to-outer traversal order, we must visit the newly-inserted sibling of the loop we just deleted before we visit the outer loop. When we do so, this must compute a fresh analysis result, even though our new loop has the same pointer value as the loop we deleted.

1345 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

, including

1346 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

, and

1391 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Same wrt this comment.

[jlebar]

unittests/Analysis/LoopPassManagerTest.cpp

235 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

FWIW -- I think we talked about this elsewhere, but I forget the conclusion -- I would find a raw string far easier to read (and modify).

236 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Nit, it would be really nice if we'd adopt the boolean arg-naming convention, foo(/*some_arg=*/false) -- see also the now five-year-old blog post that keeps on giving, http://jlebar.com/2011/12/16/Boolean_parameters_to_API_functions_considered_harmful..html

237 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Maybe

Register MLAHandle's analysis.

or even

Register our mock analysis.

? I like the latter because it says what we're doing without just repeating what's in the code.

251 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

s/Cross register/Cross-register/

264 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

analysis results for them

or, probably better

get their analysis results

?

266 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

All or almost all of the expectations on run() are of the form

run(HasName("foo"), _, _, _)

It would be kind of nice to simplify this to

run(HasName("foo"))

which we could do by changing the MOCK_METHOD4 to MOCK_METHOD1, per https://github.com/google/googletest/blob/master/googlemock/docs/CookBook.md#simplifying-the-interface-without-breaking-existing-code

I'm on the fence about it. WTYT?

268 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

https://github.com/google/googletest/blob/master/googlemock/docs/ForDummies.md#cardinalities-how-many-times-will-it-be-called suggests Times(1) is not needed.

283 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

I pondered over this for a good five minutes before figuring it out.

I think part of my problem was that based on the comments and the scoping, it seems that this runs some passes somehow.

It's clearer to me in the other tests because we don't have an explicit scope.

Maybe just a brief comment on this block would fix my confusion.

374 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

, causing

389 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

upp

414 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

s/themselves//?

514 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

triggers

514 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

s/,/; it/

639 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

"Set up" :)

640 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

"just need to get"

641 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

gets invalidated

641 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

s/our 'A' analysis/AnalysisA/, and likewise for AnalysisB?

677 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

, and

678 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

s/"/'/

705 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

, with

737 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Set up

738 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

s/by default//?

765 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

preserve

766 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

New sentence, "This should trigger"

766 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

", despite their being preserved." or ", despite the fact that they were preserved."

777 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

required?

859 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

, so

900 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Same here about chaining WillOnce, and same below.

907 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

In the second run

958 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

At this point in the file this comment is probably unnecessary.

1040 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

, as

[chandlerc]

Updates based on review from Justin.

[chandlerc]

Thanks so much for the review! Patch updated and responses below.

include/llvm/Analysis/LoopPassManager.h

95 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Let me know if this isn't enough.

126 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Well, I left it there by accident. But yea, I probably don't want to allow {}s to calls this constructor without a type name. Sadly, I want most constructors to be explicit in this day and age... =[ But its less important for multiple argument constructors. Happy to remove or leave as you see fit.

169 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

So the first thing to realize is that I'm specifically avoiding AM because that's this is *also* a member of the containing analysis class, and that class has a method that gets an analysis manager argument typically spelled 'AM', and this is importantly *not* the same...

Sadly, changing this to LoopAM ends up confusing as well because we don't specialize the Analysis class, and so its member continues to be spelled InnerAM. And we even see this, because we do specialize a *method* of the Analysis, specifically where we pass that InnerAM into the result. I somewhat like the names matching... But if necessary, I guess they could be mismatched... Any other ideas?

197 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

OMG, yes, thank you, so much better. Here and elsewhere, I just want to say thank you for helping me wrap the text of these comments back around to sanity. Half the time, the comments evolve over *many* rounds of edits and time, and end up with really convoluted wording. And at that point i've been staring at it far too long. I appreciate your patience rewording this stuff.

205 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

I'm trying to explain why we have a second worklist?

253 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

So, for both this and the analysis results, I left in somewhat intentionally bad names because i wanted to get help naming them.

I generally like ...Updater here, and ...AnalysisResults above.

My biggest problem is -- what prefix? LPM is actually kinda misleading as they're much more about loop passes and not about loop pass management. I could go with LP, but it seems a pretty lame prefix. I could go with LoopPass to at least avoid the inscrutability of LP at the cost of longer names.

Halp...

261 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Yes, yes I do.

295 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

I have such a complicated relationship with commas....

306 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Yes. I meant to add those asserts and then didn't. Thanks for catching that.

307 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

The assert seems easier to do here while we're checking that they're siblings.

317 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

What it refers to doesn't change is what I meant.... But sure, better comments added instead.

370 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

I can make the comment less redundant and avoid the need to update...

lib/Analysis/LoopPassManager.cpp

32 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

I WOULD NEVER CUT AND PASTE CODE BLINDLY FROM ONE FILE TO ANOTHER AND FAIL TO UPDATE ALL THE COMMENTS!

Except of course for all of this code where I did exactly that. Sorry. ;]

41 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Because I haven't gone back and undone this. :: sigh ::

I do have an idea for how to fix this to be a little less painful. We want to keep a small amount of this stuff even in no-asserts builds, but *WAY* less than currently, so most of this goes into the lovely DEBUG macro. ANyways, planned for a future patch that does this across all the PMs. I can expedite that if useful.

72 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Yep.

However, this code doesn't work as written it occurs to me. I've left a FIXME for now, I need to think about how to handle this.

135 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Tried rewriting this whole thing. Lemme know if this is better.

141 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Also added more detail.

unittests/Analysis/LoopPassManagerTest.cpp

235 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Yea, I just haven't gotten around to cleaning all of these up... Will try to actually do that, but would rather not in this patch.

236 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Yep. But what would be even more nice is to actually accept a more useful argument like the raw_ostream to use. ;] Anyways, I had planned to fix this when lessenging the use of it at all and using DEBUG() more heavily.

266 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

The problem is that even though we don't really need to *match* on these arguments, we do want to have access to them in the Invoke'd actions.

283 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Yep, good suggestion. Let me know if my commets are helping?

414 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Tried a better word. Trying to differentiate from failing to preserve the LoopAnalysis.

514 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

It's not an it though.

I think this should be "the rest don't invalidate; they only trigger ..." which then agrees?

(But I so don't trust myself here...)

777 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

no, this is a RequiresAnalysis pass thingy....

900 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Same what about chaining WillOnce?

958 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

I was being consistent and trying to help the reader that just came into this file at the bottom...

1115 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Yes, but i dunno why I wrote this. the key thing here is that this is testing *top-level* insertion. Commented accordingly now.

1148 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Same as above. I can nuke them all if yo uwant, but i'd as soon have all of them as one of them...

1284 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

the which is an aside, you were correct to suggest a comma.

1346 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

You shoul count the commas and fine me or something....

[jlebar]

\o/

include/llvm/Analysis/LoopPassManager.h

126 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Sadly, I want most constructors to be explicit in this day and age... =[

Yeah, understood. So long as it's intentional, that's cool.

169 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

So the first thing to realize is that I'm specifically avoiding AM because that's this is *also* a member of the containing analysis class

Sorry if this is obvious, who exactly has an AM member variable? Not LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy == InnerAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy afaict? The outer proxy does, but the inner one's member is named InnerAM, like you say. I looked through all of PassManager.h and don't see anyone else that seems relevant with a member called AM.

Sadly, changing this to LoopAM ends up confusing as well because we don't specialize the Analysis class, and so its member continues to be spelled InnerAM.

OK, I'm sold on that basis.

205 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Hm, you're saying we can't use Worklist for the preorder traversal? That seems obvious to me because our goal here is to add some stuff to Worklist, but maybe it's my ignorance that's making me think that's obvious. You could say

Worklist is our output param; we need a second worklist for the preorder traversal.

?

253 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

LPMUpdateResult seems to be more about updating the LPM, not updating an LP. It's the class that LPs use to update the LPM, as I read it. So LPMUpdater or LoopPassManagerUpdater seems fine.

I agree that the analysis results one is less about the manager. LPAnalysisResults or LoopPassAnalysisResults? I kind of want to say that they're the analysis results you get "for free". LPStandardAnalysisResults?

I also agree you should be consistent in whether you abbreviate "LP/M".

97 ↗

(On Diff #83522)

Ah, got it. lgtm, but suggest s/correctly// s/necessary//.

431 ↗

(On Diff #83522)

It would be cool if this set of analyses had a name, then you could say

We also preserve the standard loop analyses [or whatever].

lib/Analysis/LoopPassManager.cpp

41 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

I can expedite that if useful.

No need.

135 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

It's a lot better, but now that I understand what you're saying, I think this should be combined into the comment above. AIUI the loop above is taking the place of a call to InnerAM->clear() in the destructor, so the two comments are related.

Walk the loops for this function and clear the results associated with this function. Then set InnerAM to null so that we don't call InnerAM->clear() (which nukes everything from orbit) when this object is destroyed as invalid.

Note that although the LoopInfo may be stale at this point, the loop objects themselves remain the only viable keys that could be in the analysis manager's cache, so we can just walk the keys and forcibly clear those results. The order doesn't matter here as this will directly destroy the results without calling methods on them.

FIXME ...

91 ↗

(On Diff #83522)

Suggest

we can do this by building a preorder sequence and walking it in reverse

112 ↗

(On Diff #83522)

here too it would be good to have a standard name for these analyses.

133 ↗

(On Diff #83522)

s/the result object/this object/?

unittests/Analysis/LoopPassManagerTest.cpp

107 ↗

(On Diff #83522)

Suggest changing to active voice and then providing a brief example:

If you want to register multiple loop analysis passes, you'll need to instantiate this type with different values for I. For example:

MockLoopAnalysisHandleTemplate<0> h0;
MockLoopAnalysisHandleTemplate<1> h1;
typedef decltype(h0)::Analysis Analysis0;
typedef decltype(h1)::Analysis Analysis1;

In fact I could see getting rid of the example, too.

(I got rid of the enum because you only ever use it once, so who cares if you hardcode constants?)

540 ↗

(On Diff #83522)

There's a typo here, but other than that it's fine. Because phab is awful I am not sure if this is the line the above comments were talking about or what, but I'm sure it's all fine here.

235 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

np, sgtm.

236 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

sgtm

266 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Ah, scratch that plan then.

283 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Yes, looks good.

900 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Sorry, that was related to a comment I deleted.

958 ↗

(On Diff #83173)

Eh, copy-pasted comments are almost as bad as copy-pasted code. But up to you, not a big deal.

[davide]

In D28292#636375, @chandlerc wrote:

In D28292#635262, @davide wrote:

1. You propose as FIXME not using RPO. Do you have data/evidence that a different visitation order actually matters? I'm not entirely convinced about it (but I haven't thought about the problem very carefully so).

I do? Are you referring to the order of loops in LoopInfo?

The only thing I found surprising is that the natural order of loops in LoopInfo is from the bottom of the function to the top. I haven't checked if it is exactly in postorder of the CFG but it looks close.

I wrote this patch to make us visit loops "forward" program order (top to bottom), and left a FIXME that we might want to reverse them in LoopInfo itself.

As for which order of visit is better, I don't have data at all. It turns out the current loop pass manager processes loops in reverse. However, very nicely, they wrote a long comment about how there wasn't any particular reason. There is some hand waving in it about deleting uses before processing defs, but that actually seems unlikely to matter to me.

The reason I had wanted to process in forward order are three fold:

First and foremost: I find it much less surprising. I wrote a lot of tests assuming it would be forward and was surprised when it wasn't. This is just that I find forward program order (in the absence of something like the bottom-up walk) less surprising in general.

Second: it seems useful to enable SSA propagation of constants and things from unrolling one loop into its sibling. That typically argues for processing defs before uses.

I think my second argument is a bit more compelling than the idea of deleting uses before processing defs. But not by much. Hence the primary rationale was a principle of least surprise.

2. You removed a call to getContext().yield(). Do you happen to know why it was introduced in the first place?

I removed it? I thought I just added a commented out bit below a FIXME that hopefully explains what needs to happen here. Happy to dig into this though, and maybe I'm staring at the diff badly...

Both comments make sense. Thanks for explaining. LGTM if/when others are happy.

[chandlerc]

Thanks for all the reviews! I've done the suggested renaming from our discussion on IRC:

LPMAnalysisResults -> LoopStandardAnalysisResults

LPMUpdateResult -> LPMUpdater

I'll land this once i get gmock and co. landed so the tests work.

[chandlerc]

Landed, thanks so much for all the reviews!!!

llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Analysis/IVUsers.h

 /// Analysis pass that exposes the \c IVUsers for a loop.
 class IVUsersAnalysis : public AnalysisInfoMixin<IVUsersAnalysis> {
   friend AnalysisInfoMixin<IVUsersAnalysis>;
   static AnalysisKey Key;
 
 public:
   typedef IVUsers Result;
 
-  IVUsers run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM);
+  IVUsers run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+              LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR);
 };
 
 /// Printer pass for the \c IVUsers for a loop.
 class IVUsersPrinterPass : public PassInfoMixin<IVUsersPrinterPass> {
   raw_ostream &OS;
 
 public:
   explicit IVUsersPrinterPass(raw_ostream &OS) : OS(OS) {}
-  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM);
+  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                        LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &U);
 };
 }
 
 #endif

llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Analysis/LoopAccessAnalysis.h

 /// specifics of what information is provided.
 class LoopAccessAnalysis
     : public AnalysisInfoMixin<LoopAccessAnalysis> {
   friend AnalysisInfoMixin<LoopAccessAnalysis>;
   static AnalysisKey Key;
 
 public:
   typedef LoopAccessInfo Result;
-  Result run(Loop &, LoopAnalysisManager &);
-  static StringRef name() { return "LoopAccessAnalysis"; }
+
+  Result run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM, LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR);
 };
 
 /// \brief Printer pass for the \c LoopAccessInfo results.
 class LoopAccessInfoPrinterPass
     : public PassInfoMixin<LoopAccessInfoPrinterPass> {
   raw_ostream &OS;
 
 public:
   explicit LoopAccessInfoPrinterPass(raw_ostream &OS) : OS(OS) {}
-  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM);
+  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                        LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &U);
 };
 
 inline Instruction *MemoryDepChecker::Dependence::getSource(
     const LoopAccessInfo &LAI) const {
   return LAI.getDepChecker().getMemoryInstructions()[Source];
 }
 
 inline Instruction *MemoryDepChecker::Dependence::getDestination(
     const LoopAccessInfo &LAI) const {
   return LAI.getDepChecker().getMemoryInstructions()[Destination];
 }
 
 } // End llvm namespace
 
 #endif

llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Analysis/LoopInfo.h

public:
 
   void releaseMemory() override { LI.releaseMemory(); }
 
   void print(raw_ostream &O, const Module *M = nullptr) const override;
 
   void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const override;
 };
 
-/// \brief Pass for printing a loop's contents as LLVM's text IR assembly.
-class PrintLoopPass : public PassInfoMixin<PrintLoopPass> {
-  raw_ostream &OS;
-  std::string Banner;
-
-public:
-  PrintLoopPass();
-  PrintLoopPass(raw_ostream &OS, const std::string &Banner = "");
-
-  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, AnalysisManager<Loop> &);
-};
+/// Function to print a loop's contents as LLVM's text IR assembly.
+void printLoop(Loop &L, raw_ostream &OS, const std::string &Banner = "");
 
 } // End llvm namespace
 
 #endif

llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Analysis/LoopPassManager.h

 //===- LoopPassManager.h - Loop pass management -----------------*- C++ -*-===//
 //
 //                     The LLVM Compiler Infrastructure
 //
 // This file is distributed under the University of Illinois Open Source
 // License. See LICENSE.TXT for details.
 //
 //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
 /// \file
 ///
-/// This header provides classes for managing passes over loops in LLVM IR.
+/// This header provides classes for managing a pipeline of passes over loops
+/// in LLVM IR.
+///
+/// The primary loop pass pipeline is managed in a very particular way to
+/// provide a set of core guarantees:
+/// 1) Loops are, where possible, in simplified form.
+/// 2) Loops are *always* in LCSSA form.
+/// 3) A collection of Loop-specific analysis results are available:
+///    - LoopInfo
+///    - DominatorTree
+///    - ScalarEvolution
+///    - AAManager
+/// 4) All loop passes preserve #1 (where possible), #2, and #3.
+/// 5) Loop passes run over each loop in the loop nest from the innermost to
+///    the outermost. Specifically, all inner loops are processed before
+///    passes run over outer loops. When running the pipeline across an inner
+///    loop creates new inner loops, those are added and processed in this
+///    order as well.
+///
+/// This process is designed to facilitate transformations which simplify,
+/// reduce, and remove loops. For passes which are more oriented towards
+/// optimizing loops, especially optimizing loop *nests* instead of single
+/// loops in isolation, this framework is less interesting.
 ///
 //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
 
 #ifndef LLVM_ANALYSIS_LOOPPASSMANAGER_H
 #define LLVM_ANALYSIS_LOOPPASSMANAGER_H
 
+#include "llvm/ADT/PostOrderIterator.h"
+#include "llvm/ADT/PriorityWorklist.h"
 #include "llvm/ADT/STLExtras.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/AliasAnalysis.h"
+#include "llvm/Analysis/BasicAliasAnalysis.h"
+#include "llvm/Analysis/GlobalsModRef.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/LoopInfo.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.h"
+#include "llvm/Analysis/ScalarEvolutionAliasAnalysis.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/TargetLibraryInfo.h"
+#include "llvm/Analysis/TargetTransformInfo.h"
 #include "llvm/IR/Dominators.h"
 #include "llvm/IR/PassManager.h"
 
 namespace llvm {
 
-extern template class PassManager<Loop>;
-/// \brief The loop pass manager.
-///
-/// See the documentation for the PassManager template for details. It runs a
-/// sequency of loop passes over each loop that the manager is run over. This
-/// typedef serves as a convenient way to refer to this construct.
-typedef PassManager<Loop> LoopPassManager;
+// Forward declarations of a update tracking and analysis result tracking
+// structures used in the API of loop passes that work within this
+// infrastructure.
+class LPMUpdater;
+struct LoopStandardAnalysisResults;
+
+/// Extern template declaration for the analysis set for this IR unit.
+extern template class AllAnalysesOn<Loop>;
 
-extern template class AnalysisManager<Loop>;
+extern template class AnalysisManager<Loop, LoopStandardAnalysisResults &>;
 /// \brief The loop analysis manager.
 ///
 /// See the documentation for the AnalysisManager template for detail
 /// documentation. This typedef serves as a convenient way to refer to this
 /// construct in the adaptors and proxies used to integrate this into the larger
 /// pass manager infrastructure.
-typedef AnalysisManager<Loop> LoopAnalysisManager;
+typedef AnalysisManager<Loop, LoopStandardAnalysisResults &>
+    LoopAnalysisManager;
+
+// Explicit specialization and instantiation declarations for the pass manager.
+// See the comments on the definition of the specialization for details on how
+// it differs from the primary template.
+template <>
+PreservedAnalyses
+PassManager<Loop, LoopAnalysisManager, LoopStandardAnalysisResults &,
+            LPMUpdater &>::run(Loop &InitialL, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                               LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AnalysisResults,
+                               LPMUpdater &U);
+extern template class PassManager<Loop, LoopAnalysisManager,
+                                  LoopStandardAnalysisResults &, LPMUpdater &>;
+
+/// \brief The Loop pass manager.
+///
+/// See the documentation for the PassManager template for details. It runs
+/// a sequence of Loop passes over each Loop that the manager is run over. This
+/// typedef serves as a convenient way to refer to this construct.
+typedef PassManager<Loop, LoopAnalysisManager, LoopStandardAnalysisResults &,
+                    LPMUpdater &>
+    LoopPassManager;
+
+/// A partial specialization of the require analysis template pass to forward
+/// the extra parameters from a transformation's run method to the
+/// AnalysisManager's getResult.
+template <typename AnalysisT>
+struct RequireAnalysisPass<AnalysisT, Loop, LoopAnalysisManager,
+                           LoopStandardAnalysisResults &, LPMUpdater &>
+    : PassInfoMixin<
+          RequireAnalysisPass<AnalysisT, Loop, LoopAnalysisManager,
+                              LoopStandardAnalysisResults &, LPMUpdater &>> {
+  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                        LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &) {
+    (void)AM.template getResult<AnalysisT>(L, AR);
+    return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+  }
+};
+
+/// An alias template to easily name a require analysis loop pass.
+template <typename AnalysisT>
+using RequireAnalysisLoopPass =
+    RequireAnalysisPass<AnalysisT, Loop, LoopAnalysisManager,
+                        LoopStandardAnalysisResults &, LPMUpdater &>;
 
 /// A proxy from a \c LoopAnalysisManager to a \c Function.
 typedef InnerAnalysisManagerProxy<LoopAnalysisManager, Function>
     LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy;
 
-/// Specialization of the invalidate method for the \c
-/// LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy's result.
-template <>
-bool LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy::Result::invalidate(
-    Function &F, const PreservedAnalyses &PA,
+/// A specialized result for the \c LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy which
+/// retains a \c LoopInfo reference.
+///
+/// This allows it to collect loop objects for which analysis results may be
+/// cached in the \c LoopAnalysisManager.
+template <> class LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy::Result {
+public:
+  explicit Result(LoopAnalysisManager &InnerAM, LoopInfo &LI)
+      : InnerAM(&InnerAM), LI(&LI) {}
+  Result(Result &&Arg) : InnerAM(std::move(Arg.InnerAM)), LI(Arg.LI) {
+    // We have to null out the analysis manager in the moved-from state
+    // because we are taking ownership of the responsibilty to clear the
+    // analysis state.
+    Arg.InnerAM = nullptr;
+  }
+  Result &operator=(Result &&RHS) {
+    InnerAM = RHS.InnerAM;
+    LI = RHS.LI;
+    // We have to null out the analysis manager in the moved-from state
+    // because we are taking ownership of the responsibilty to clear the
+    // analysis state.
+    RHS.InnerAM = nullptr;
+    return *this;
+  }
+  ~Result() {
+    // InnerAM is cleared in a moved from state where there is nothing to do.
+    if (!InnerAM)
+      return;
+
+    // Clear out the analysis manager if we're being destroyed -- it means we
+    // didn't even see an invalidate call when we got invalidated.
+    InnerAM->clear();
+  }
+
+  /// Accessor for the analysis manager.
+  LoopAnalysisManager &getManager() { return *InnerAM; }
+
+  /// Handler for invalidation of the proxy for a particular function.
+  ///
+  /// If the proxy, \c LoopInfo, and associated analyses are preserved, this
+  /// will merely forward the invalidation event to any cached loop analysis
+  /// results for loops within this function.
+  ///
+  /// If the necessary loop infrastructure is not preserved, this will forcibly
+  /// clear all of the cached analysis results that are keyed on the \c
+  /// LoopInfo for this function.
+  bool invalidate(Function &F, const PreservedAnalyses &PA,
                   FunctionAnalysisManager::Invalidator &Inv);
 
+private:
+  LoopAnalysisManager *InnerAM;
+  LoopInfo *LI;
+};
+
+/// Provide a specialized run method for the \c LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy
+/// so it can pass the \c LoopInfo to the result.
+template <>
+LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy::Result
+LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy::run(Function &F, FunctionAnalysisManager &AM);
+
 // Ensure the \c LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy is provided as an extern
 // template.
 extern template class InnerAnalysisManagerProxy<LoopAnalysisManager, Function>;
 
-extern template class OuterAnalysisManagerProxy<FunctionAnalysisManager, Loop>;
+extern template class OuterAnalysisManagerProxy<FunctionAnalysisManager, Loop,
+                                                LoopStandardAnalysisResults &>;
 /// A proxy from a \c FunctionAnalysisManager to a \c Loop.
-typedef OuterAnalysisManagerProxy<FunctionAnalysisManager, Loop>
+typedef OuterAnalysisManagerProxy<FunctionAnalysisManager, Loop,
+                                  LoopStandardAnalysisResults &>
     FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy;
 
 /// Returns the minimum set of Analyses that all loop passes must preserve.
 PreservedAnalyses getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses();
 
+namespace internal {
+/// Helper to implement appending of loops onto a worklist.
+///
+/// We want to process loops in postorder, but the worklist is a LIFO data
+/// structure, so we append to it in *reverse* postorder.
+///
+/// For trees, a preorder traversal is a viable reverse postorder, so we
+/// actually append using a preorder walk algorithm.
+template <typename RangeT>
+inline void appendLoopsToWorklist(RangeT &&Loops,
+                                  SmallPriorityWorklist<Loop *, 4> &Worklist) {
+  // We use an internal worklist to build up the preorder traversal without
+  // recursion.
+  SmallVector<Loop *, 4> PreOrderLoops, PreOrderWorklist;
+
+  // We walk the initial sequence of loops in reverse because we generally want
+  // to visit defs before uses and the worklist is LIFO.
+  for (Loop *RootL : reverse(Loops)) {
+    assert(PreOrderLoops.empty() && "Must start with an empty preorder walk.");
+    assert(PreOrderWorklist.empty() &&
+           "Must start with an empty preorder walk worklist.");
+    PreOrderWorklist.push_back(RootL);
+    do {
+      Loop *L = PreOrderWorklist.pop_back_val();
+      PreOrderWorklist.append(L->begin(), L->end());
+      PreOrderLoops.push_back(L);
+    } while (!PreOrderWorklist.empty());
+
+    Worklist.insert(std::move(PreOrderLoops));
+    PreOrderLoops.clear();
+  }
+}
+}
+
+/// The adaptor from a function pass to a loop pass directly computes
+/// a standard set of analyses that are especially useful to loop passes and
+/// makes them available in the API. Loop passes are also expected to update
+/// all of these so that they remain correct across the entire loop pipeline.
+struct LoopStandardAnalysisResults {
+  AAResults &AA;
+  AssumptionCache &AC;
+  DominatorTree &DT;
+  LoopInfo &LI;
+  ScalarEvolution &SE;
+  TargetLibraryInfo &TLI;
+  TargetTransformInfo &TTI;
+};
+
+template <typename LoopPassT> class FunctionToLoopPassAdaptor;
+
+/// This class provides an interface for updating the loop pass manager based
+/// on mutations to the loop nest.
+///
+/// A reference to an instance of this class is passed as an argument to each
+/// Loop pass, and Loop passes should use it to update LPM infrastructure if
+/// they modify the loop nest structure.
+class LPMUpdater {
+public:
+  /// This can be queried by loop passes which run other loop passes (like pass
+  /// managers) to know whether the loop needs to be skipped due to updates to
+  /// the loop nest.
+  ///
+  /// If this returns true, the loop object may have been deleted, so passes
+  /// should take care not to touch the object.
+  bool skipCurrentLoop() const { return SkipCurrentLoop; }
+
+  /// Loop passes should use this method to indicate they have deleted a loop
+  /// from the nest.
+  ///
+  /// Note that this loop must either be the current loop or a subloop of the
+  /// current loop. This routine must be called prior to removing the loop from
+  /// the loop nest.
+  ///
+  /// If this is called for the current loop, in addition to clearing any
+  /// state, this routine will mark that the current loop should be skipped by
+  /// the rest of the pass management infrastructure.
+  void markLoopAsDeleted(Loop &L) {
+    LAM.clear(L);
+    assert(CurrentL->contains(&L) && "Cannot delete a loop outside of the "
+                                     "subloop tree currently being processed.");
+    if (&L == CurrentL)
+      SkipCurrentLoop = true;
+  }
+
+  /// Loop passes should use this method to indicate they have added new child
+  /// loops of the current loop.
+  ///
+  /// \p NewChildLoops must contain only the immediate children. Any nested
+  /// loops within them will be visited in postorder as usual for the loop pass
+  /// manager.
+  void addChildLoops(ArrayRef<Loop *> NewChildLoops) {
+    // Insert ourselves back into the worklist first, as this loop should be
+    // revisited after all the children have been processed.
+    Worklist.insert(CurrentL);
+
+#ifndef NDEBUG
+    for (Loop *NewL : NewChildLoops)
+      assert(NewL->getParentLoop() == CurrentL && "All of the new loops must "
+                                                  "be immediate children of "
+                                                  "the current loop!");
+#endif
+
+    internal::appendLoopsToWorklist(NewChildLoops, Worklist);
+
+    // Also skip further processing of the current loop--it will be revisited
+    // after all of its newly added children are accounted for.
+    SkipCurrentLoop = true;
+  }
+
+  /// Loop passes should use this method to indicate they have added new
+  /// sibling loops to the current loop.
+  ///
+  /// \p NewSibLoops must only contain the immediate sibling loops. Any nested
+  /// loops within them will be visited in postorder as usual for the loop pass
+  /// manager.
+  void addSiblingLoops(ArrayRef<Loop *> NewSibLoops) {
+#ifndef NDEBUG
+    for (Loop *NewL : NewSibLoops)
+      assert(NewL->getParentLoop() == ParentL &&
+             "All of the new loops must be siblings of the current loop!");
+#endif
+
+    internal::appendLoopsToWorklist(NewSibLoops, Worklist);
+
+    // No need to skip the current loop or revisit it, as sibling loops
+    // shouldn't impact anything.
+  }
+
+private:
+  template <typename LoopPassT> friend class llvm::FunctionToLoopPassAdaptor;
+
+  /// The \c FunctionToLoopPassAdaptor's worklist of loops to process.
+  SmallPriorityWorklist<Loop *, 4> &Worklist;
+
+  /// The analysis manager for use in the current loop nest.
+  LoopAnalysisManager &LAM;
+
+  Loop *CurrentL;
+  bool SkipCurrentLoop;
+
+#ifndef NDEBUG
+  // In debug builds we also track the parent loop to implement asserts even in
+  // the face of loop deletion.
+  Loop *ParentL;
+#endif
+
+  LPMUpdater(SmallPriorityWorklist<Loop *, 4> &Worklist,
+             LoopAnalysisManager &LAM)
+      : Worklist(Worklist), LAM(LAM) {}
+};
+
 /// \brief Adaptor that maps from a function to its loops.
 ///
 /// Designed to allow composition of a LoopPass(Manager) and a
 /// FunctionPassManager. Note that if this pass is constructed with a \c
 /// FunctionAnalysisManager it will run the \c LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy
 /// analysis prior to running the loop passes over the function to enable a \c
 /// LoopAnalysisManager to be used within this run safely.
 template <typename LoopPassT>
 class FunctionToLoopPassAdaptor
     : public PassInfoMixin<FunctionToLoopPassAdaptor<LoopPassT>> {
 public:
   explicit FunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(LoopPassT Pass)
       : Pass(std::move(Pass)) {}
 
   /// \brief Runs the loop passes across every loop in the function.
   PreservedAnalyses run(Function &F, FunctionAnalysisManager &AM) {
     // Setup the loop analysis manager from its proxy.
     LoopAnalysisManager &LAM =
         AM.getResult<LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy>(F).getManager();
     // Get the loop structure for this function
     LoopInfo &LI = AM.getResult<LoopAnalysis>(F);
 
-    // Also precompute all of the function analyses used by loop passes.
-    // FIXME: These should be handed into the loop passes when the loop pass
-    // management layer is reworked to follow the design of CGSCC.
-    (void)AM.getResult<AAManager>(F);
-    (void)AM.getResult<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(F);
-    (void)AM.getResult<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>(F);
-    (void)AM.getResult<TargetLibraryAnalysis>(F);
+    // If there are no loops, there is nothing to do here.
+    if (LI.empty())
+      return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+
+    // Get the analysis results needed by loop passes.
+    LoopStandardAnalysisResults LAR = {AM.getResult<AAManager>(F),
+                                       AM.getResult<AssumptionAnalysis>(F),
+                                       AM.getResult<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(F),
+                                       AM.getResult<LoopAnalysis>(F),
+                                       AM.getResult<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>(F),
+                                       AM.getResult<TargetLibraryAnalysis>(F),
+                                       AM.getResult<TargetIRAnalysis>(F)};
 
     PreservedAnalyses PA = PreservedAnalyses::all();
 
-    // We want to visit the loops in reverse post-order. We'll build the stack
-    // of loops to visit in Loops by first walking the loops in pre-order.
-    SmallVector<Loop *, 2> Loops;
-    SmallVector<Loop *, 2> WorkList(LI.begin(), LI.end());
-    while (!WorkList.empty()) {
-      Loop *L = WorkList.pop_back_val();
-      WorkList.insert(WorkList.end(), L->begin(), L->end());
-      Loops.push_back(L);
-    }
+    // A postorder worklist of loops to process.
+    SmallPriorityWorklist<Loop *, 4> Worklist;
+
+    // Register the worklist and loop analysis manager so that loop passes can
+    // update them when they mutate the loop nest structure.
+    LPMUpdater Updater(Worklist, LAM);
+
+    // Add the loop nests in the reverse order of LoopInfo. For some reason,
+    // they are stored in RPO w.r.t. the control flow graph in LoopInfo. For
+    // the purpose of unrolling, loop deletion, and LICM, we largely want to
+    // work forward across the CFG so that we visit defs before uses and can
+    // propagate simplifications from one loop nest into the next.
+    // FIXME: Consider changing the order in LoopInfo.
+    internal::appendLoopsToWorklist(reverse(LI), Worklist);
+
+    do {
+      Loop *L = Worklist.pop_back_val();
+
+      // Reset the update structure for this loop.
+      Updater.CurrentL = L;
+      Updater.SkipCurrentLoop = false;
+#ifndef NDEBUG
+      Updater.ParentL = L->getParentLoop();
+#endif
 
-    // Now pop each element off of the stack to visit the loops in reverse
-    // post-order.
-    for (auto *L : reverse(Loops)) {
-      PreservedAnalyses PassPA = Pass.run(*L, LAM);
+      PreservedAnalyses PassPA = Pass.run(*L, LAM, LAR, Updater);
       // FIXME: We should verify the set of analyses relevant to Loop passes
       // are preserved.
 
-      // We know that the loop pass couldn't have invalidated any other loop's
-      // analyses (that's the contract of a loop pass), so directly handle the
-      // loop analysis manager's invalidation here.
+      // If the loop hasn't been deleted, we need to handle invalidation here.
+      if (!Updater.skipCurrentLoop())
+        // We know that the loop pass couldn't have invalidated any other
+        // loop's analyses (that's the contract of a loop pass), so directly
+        // handle the loop analysis manager's invalidation here.
         LAM.invalidate(*L, PassPA);
 
       // Then intersect the preserved set so that invalidation of module
       // analyses will eventually occur when the module pass completes.
       PA.intersect(std::move(PassPA));
-    }
+    } while (!Worklist.empty());
 
     // By definition we preserve the proxy. We also preserve all analyses on
     // Loops. This precludes *any* invalidation of loop analyses by the proxy,
     // but that's OK because we've taken care to invalidate analyses in the
     // loop analysis manager incrementally above.
     PA.preserveSet<AllAnalysesOn<Loop>>();
     PA.preserve<LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy>();
+    // We also preserve the set of standard analyses.
+    PA.preserve<AssumptionAnalysis>();
+    PA.preserve<DominatorTreeAnalysis>();
+    PA.preserve<LoopAnalysis>();
+    PA.preserve<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>();
+    // FIXME: What we really want to do here is preserve an AA category, but
+    // that concept doesn't exist yet.
+    PA.preserve<AAManager>();
+    PA.preserve<BasicAA>();
+    PA.preserve<GlobalsAA>();
+    PA.preserve<SCEVAA>();
     return PA;
   }
 
 private:
   LoopPassT Pass;
 };
 
 /// \brief A function to deduce a loop pass type and wrap it in the templated
 /// adaptor.
 template <typename LoopPassT>
 FunctionToLoopPassAdaptor<LoopPassT>
 createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(LoopPassT Pass) {
   return FunctionToLoopPassAdaptor<LoopPassT>(std::move(Pass));
 }
+
+/// \brief Pass for printing a loop's contents as textual IR.
+class PrintLoopPass : public PassInfoMixin<PrintLoopPass> {
+  raw_ostream &OS;
+  std::string Banner;
+
+public:
+  PrintLoopPass();
+  PrintLoopPass(raw_ostream &OS, const std::string &Banner = "");
+
+  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &,
+                        LoopStandardAnalysisResults &, LPMUpdater &);
+};
 }
 
 #endif // LLVM_ANALYSIS_LOOPPASSMANAGER_H

llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Transforms/Scalar/IndVarSimplify.h

 #include "llvm/Analysis/LoopInfo.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/LoopPassManager.h"
 #include "llvm/IR/PassManager.h"
 
 namespace llvm {
 
 class IndVarSimplifyPass : public PassInfoMixin<IndVarSimplifyPass> {
 public:
-  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM);
+  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                        LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &U);
 };
 }
 
 #endif // LLVM_TRANSFORMS_SCALAR_INDVARSIMPLIFY_H

llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.h

 #include "llvm/Analysis/LoopPassManager.h"
 #include "llvm/IR/PassManager.h"
 
 namespace llvm {
 
 /// Performs Loop Invariant Code Motion Pass.
 class LICMPass : public PassInfoMixin<LICMPass> {
 public:
-  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM);
+  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                        LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &U);
 };
 } // end namespace llvm
 
 #endif // LLVM_TRANSFORMS_SCALAR_LICM_H

llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Transforms/Scalar/LoopDeletion.h

 #include "llvm/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.h"
 #include "llvm/IR/PassManager.h"
 
 namespace llvm {
 
 class LoopDeletionPass : public PassInfoMixin<LoopDeletionPass> {
 public:
   LoopDeletionPass() {}
-  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM);
+  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                        LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &U);
   bool runImpl(Loop *L, DominatorTree &DT, ScalarEvolution &SE,
               LoopInfo &loopInfo);
 
 private:
   bool isLoopDead(Loop *L, ScalarEvolution &SE,
                   SmallVectorImpl<BasicBlock *> &exitingBlocks,
                   SmallVectorImpl<BasicBlock *> &exitBlocks, bool &Changed,
                   BasicBlock *Preheader);
 };
 }
 
 #endif // LLVM_TRANSFORMS_SCALAR_LOOPDELETION_H

llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Transforms/Scalar/LoopIdiomRecognize.h

 #include "llvm/Analysis/LoopPassManager.h"
 #include "llvm/IR/PassManager.h"
 
 namespace llvm {
 
 /// Performs Loop Idiom Recognize Pass.
 class LoopIdiomRecognizePass : public PassInfoMixin<LoopIdiomRecognizePass> {
 public:
-  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM);
+  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                        LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &U);
 };
 } // end namespace llvm
 
 #endif // LLVM_TRANSFORMS_SCALAR_LOOPIDIOMRECOGNIZE_H

llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Transforms/Scalar/LoopInstSimplify.h

 #include "llvm/Analysis/LoopPassManager.h"
 #include "llvm/IR/PassManager.h"
 
 namespace llvm {
 
 /// Performs Loop Inst Simplify Pass.
 class LoopInstSimplifyPass : public PassInfoMixin<LoopInstSimplifyPass> {
 public:
-  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM);
+  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                        LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &U);
 };
 } // end namespace llvm
 
 #endif // LLVM_TRANSFORMS_SCALAR_LOOPINSTSIMPLIFY_H

llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Transforms/Scalar/LoopRotation.h

 #include "llvm/IR/PassManager.h"
 
 namespace llvm {
 
 /// A simple loop rotation transformation.
 class LoopRotatePass : public PassInfoMixin<LoopRotatePass> {
 public:
   LoopRotatePass(bool EnableHeaderDuplication = true);
-  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM);
+  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                        LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &U);
 
 private:
   const bool EnableHeaderDuplication;
 };
 }
 
 #endif // LLVM_TRANSFORMS_SCALAR_LOOPROTATION_H

llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Transforms/Scalar/LoopSimplifyCFG.h

 #include "llvm/Analysis/LoopPassManager.h"
 #include "llvm/IR/PassManager.h"
 
 namespace llvm {
 
 /// Performs basic CFG simplifications to assist other loop passes.
 class LoopSimplifyCFGPass : public PassInfoMixin<LoopSimplifyCFGPass> {
 public:
-  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM);
+  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                        LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &U);
 };
 } // end namespace llvm
 
 #endif // LLVM_TRANSFORMS_SCALAR_LOOPSIMPLIFYCFG_H

llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Transforms/Scalar/LoopStrengthReduce.h

 #include "llvm/Analysis/LoopPassManager.h"
 #include "llvm/IR/PassManager.h"
 
 namespace llvm {
 
 /// Performs Loop Strength Reduce Pass.
 class LoopStrengthReducePass : public PassInfoMixin<LoopStrengthReducePass> {
 public:
-  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM);
+  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                        LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &U);
 };
 } // end namespace llvm
 
 #endif // LLVM_TRANSFORMS_SCALAR_LOOPSTRENGTHREDUCE_H

llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Transforms/Scalar/LoopUnrollPass.h

 
 struct LoopUnrollPass : public PassInfoMixin<LoopUnrollPass> {
   Optional<unsigned> ProvidedCount;
   Optional<unsigned> ProvidedThreshold;
   Optional<bool> ProvidedAllowPartial;
   Optional<bool> ProvidedRuntime;
   Optional<bool> ProvidedUpperBound;
 
-  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM);
+  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                        LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &U);
 };
 } // end namespace llvm
 
 #endif // LLVM_TRANSFORMS_SCALAR_LOOPUNROLLPASS_H

llvm/trunk/lib/Analysis/IVUsers.cpp

 #include "llvm/Support/raw_ostream.h"
 #include <algorithm>
 using namespace llvm;
 
 #define DEBUG_TYPE "iv-users"
 
 AnalysisKey IVUsersAnalysis::Key;
 
-IVUsers IVUsersAnalysis::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM) {
-  const auto &FAM =
-      AM.getResult<FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy>(L).getManager();
-  Function *F = L.getHeader()->getParent();
-
-  return IVUsers(&L, FAM.getCachedResult<AssumptionAnalysis>(*F),
-                 FAM.getCachedResult<LoopAnalysis>(*F),
-                 FAM.getCachedResult<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(*F),
-                 FAM.getCachedResult<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>(*F));
+IVUsers IVUsersAnalysis::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                             LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR) {
+  return IVUsers(&L, &AR.AC, &AR.LI, &AR.DT, &AR.SE);
 }
 
-PreservedAnalyses IVUsersPrinterPass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM) {
-  AM.getResult<IVUsersAnalysis>(L).print(OS);
+PreservedAnalyses IVUsersPrinterPass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                                          LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR,
+                                          LPMUpdater &U) {
+  AM.getResult<IVUsersAnalysis>(L, AR).print(OS);
   return PreservedAnalyses::all();
 }
 
 char IVUsersWrapperPass::ID = 0;
 INITIALIZE_PASS_BEGIN(IVUsersWrapperPass, "iv-users",
                       "Induction Variable Users", false, true)
 INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(AssumptionCacheTracker)
 INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(LoopInfoWrapperPass)

llvm/trunk/lib/Analysis/LoopAccessAnalysis.cpp

 INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(AAResultsWrapperPass)
 INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(ScalarEvolutionWrapperPass)
 INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(DominatorTreeWrapperPass)
 INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(LoopInfoWrapperPass)
 INITIALIZE_PASS_END(LoopAccessLegacyAnalysis, LAA_NAME, laa_name, false, true)
 
 AnalysisKey LoopAccessAnalysis::Key;
 
-LoopAccessInfo LoopAccessAnalysis::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM) {
-  const FunctionAnalysisManager &FAM =
-      AM.getResult<FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy>(L).getManager();
-  Function &F = *L.getHeader()->getParent();
-  auto *SE = FAM.getCachedResult<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>(F);
-  auto *TLI = FAM.getCachedResult<TargetLibraryAnalysis>(F);
-  auto *AA = FAM.getCachedResult<AAManager>(F);
-  auto *DT = FAM.getCachedResult<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(F);
-  auto *LI = FAM.getCachedResult<LoopAnalysis>(F);
-  if (!SE)
-    report_fatal_error(
-        "ScalarEvolution must have been cached at a higher level");
-  if (!AA)
-    report_fatal_error("AliasAnalysis must have been cached at a higher level");
-  if (!DT)
-    report_fatal_error("DominatorTree must have been cached at a higher level");
-  if (!LI)
-    report_fatal_error("LoopInfo must have been cached at a higher level");
-  return LoopAccessInfo(&L, SE, TLI, AA, DT, LI);
+LoopAccessInfo LoopAccessAnalysis::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                                       LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR) {
+  return LoopAccessInfo(&L, &AR.SE, &AR.TLI, &AR.AA, &AR.DT, &AR.LI);
 }
 
-PreservedAnalyses LoopAccessInfoPrinterPass::run(Loop &L,
-                                                 LoopAnalysisManager &AM) {
+PreservedAnalyses
+LoopAccessInfoPrinterPass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                               LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &) {
   Function &F = *L.getHeader()->getParent();
-  auto &LAI = AM.getResult<LoopAccessAnalysis>(L);
+  auto &LAI = AM.getResult<LoopAccessAnalysis>(L, AR);
   OS << "Loop access info in function '" << F.getName() << "':\n";
   OS.indent(2) << L.getHeader()->getName() << ":\n";
   LAI.print(OS, 4);
   return PreservedAnalyses::all();
 }
 
 namespace llvm {
 
   Pass *createLAAPass() {
     return new LoopAccessLegacyAnalysis();
   }
 
 } // end namespace llvm

llvm/trunk/lib/Analysis/LoopInfo.cpp

 }
 
 PreservedAnalyses LoopPrinterPass::run(Function &F,
                                        FunctionAnalysisManager &AM) {
   AM.getResult<LoopAnalysis>(F).print(OS);
   return PreservedAnalyses::all();
 }
 
-PrintLoopPass::PrintLoopPass() : OS(dbgs()) {}
-PrintLoopPass::PrintLoopPass(raw_ostream &OS, const std::string &Banner)
-    : OS(OS), Banner(Banner) {}
-
-PreservedAnalyses PrintLoopPass::run(Loop &L, AnalysisManager<Loop> &) {
+void llvm::printLoop(Loop &L, raw_ostream &OS, const std::string &Banner) {
   OS << Banner;
   for (auto *Block : L.blocks())
     if (Block)
       Block->print(OS);
     else
       OS << "Printing <null> block";
-  return PreservedAnalyses::all();
 }
 
 //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
 // LoopInfo implementation
 //
 
 char LoopInfoWrapperPass::ID = 0;
 INITIALIZE_PASS_BEGIN(LoopInfoWrapperPass, "loops", "Natural Loop Information",

llvm/trunk/lib/Analysis/LoopPass.cpp

 
 #define DEBUG_TYPE "loop-pass-manager"
 
 namespace {
 
 /// PrintLoopPass - Print a Function corresponding to a Loop.
 ///
 class PrintLoopPassWrapper : public LoopPass {
-  PrintLoopPass P;
+  raw_ostream &OS;
+  std::string Banner;
 
 public:
   static char ID;
-  PrintLoopPassWrapper() : LoopPass(ID) {}
+  PrintLoopPassWrapper() : LoopPass(ID), OS(dbgs()) {}
   PrintLoopPassWrapper(raw_ostream &OS, const std::string &Banner)
-      : LoopPass(ID), P(OS, Banner) {}
+      : LoopPass(ID), OS(OS), Banner(Banner) {}
 
   void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const override {
     AU.setPreservesAll();
   }
 
   bool runOnLoop(Loop *L, LPPassManager &) override {
     auto BBI = find_if(L->blocks().begin(), L->blocks().end(),
                        [](BasicBlock *BB) { return BB; });
     if (BBI != L->blocks().end() &&
         isFunctionInPrintList((*BBI)->getParent()->getName())) {
-      LoopAnalysisManager DummyLAM;
-      P.run(*L, DummyLAM);
+      printLoop(*L, OS, Banner);
     }
     return false;
   }
 };
 
 char PrintLoopPassWrapper::ID = 0;
 }
 

llvm/trunk/lib/Analysis/LoopPassManager.cpp

 #include "llvm/Analysis/ScalarEvolutionAliasAnalysis.h"
 #include "llvm/IR/Dominators.h"
 
 using namespace llvm;
 
 // Explicit template instantiations and specialization defininitions for core
 // template typedefs.
 namespace llvm {
-template class PassManager<Loop>;
-template class AnalysisManager<Loop>;
+template class AllAnalysesOn<Loop>;
+template class AnalysisManager<Loop, LoopStandardAnalysisResults &>;
+template class PassManager<Loop, LoopAnalysisManager,
+                           LoopStandardAnalysisResults &, LPMUpdater &>;
 template class InnerAnalysisManagerProxy<LoopAnalysisManager, Function>;
-template class OuterAnalysisManagerProxy<FunctionAnalysisManager, Loop>;
+template class OuterAnalysisManagerProxy<FunctionAnalysisManager, Loop,
+                                         LoopStandardAnalysisResults &>;
 
+/// Explicitly specialize the pass manager's run method to handle loop nest
+/// structure updates.
 template <>
+PreservedAnalyses
+PassManager<Loop, LoopAnalysisManager, LoopStandardAnalysisResults &,
+            LPMUpdater &>::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                               LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &U) {
+  PreservedAnalyses PA = PreservedAnalyses::all();
+
+  if (DebugLogging)
+    dbgs() << "Starting Loop pass manager run.\n";
+
+  for (auto &Pass : Passes) {
+    if (DebugLogging)
+      dbgs() << "Running pass: " << Pass->name() << " on " << L;
+
+    PreservedAnalyses PassPA = Pass->run(L, AM, AR, U);
+
+    // If the loop was deleted, abort the run and return to the outer walk.
+    if (U.skipCurrentLoop()) {
+      PA.intersect(std::move(PassPA));
+      break;
+    }
+
+    // Update the analysis manager as each pass runs and potentially
+    // invalidates analyses.
+    AM.invalidate(L, PassPA);
+
+    // Finally, we intersect the final preserved analyses to compute the
+    // aggregate preserved set for this pass manager.
+    PA.intersect(std::move(PassPA));
+
+    // FIXME: Historically, the pass managers all called the LLVM context's
+    // yield function here. We don't have a generic way to acquire the
+    // context and it isn't yet clear what the right pattern is for yielding
+    // in the new pass manager so it is currently omitted.
+    // ...getContext().yield();
+  }
+
+  // Invalidation for the current loop should be handled above, and other loop
+  // analysis results shouldn't be impacted by runs over this loop. Therefore,
+  // the remaining analysis results in the AnalysisManager are preserved. We
+  // mark this with a set so that we don't need to inspect each one
+  // individually.
+  // FIXME: This isn't correct! This loop and all nested loops' analyses should
+  // be preserved, but unrolling should invalidate the parent loop's analyses.
+  PA.preserveSet<AllAnalysesOn<Loop>>();
+
+  if (DebugLogging)
+    dbgs() << "Finished Loop pass manager run.\n";
+
+  return PA;
+}
+
 bool LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy::Result::invalidate(
     Function &F, const PreservedAnalyses &PA,
     FunctionAnalysisManager::Invalidator &Inv) {
-  // If this proxy isn't marked as preserved, the set of Function objects in
-  // the module may have changed. We therefore can't call
-  // InnerAM->invalidate(), because any pointers to Functions it has may be
-  // stale.
+  // First compute the sequence of IR units covered by this proxy. We will want
+  // to visit this in postorder, but because this is a tree structure we can do
+  // this by building a preorder sequence and walking it in reverse.
+  SmallVector<Loop *, 4> PreOrderLoops, PreOrderWorklist;
+  // Note that we want to walk the roots in reverse order because we will end
+  // up reversing the preorder sequence. However, it happens that the loop nest
+  // roots are in reverse order within the LoopInfo object. So we just walk
+  // forward here.
+  // FIXME: If we change the order of LoopInfo we will want to add a reverse
+  // here.
+  for (Loop *RootL : *LI) {
+    assert(PreOrderWorklist.empty() &&
+           "Must start with an empty preorder walk worklist.");
+    PreOrderWorklist.push_back(RootL);
+    do {
+      Loop *L = PreOrderWorklist.pop_back_val();
+      PreOrderWorklist.append(L->begin(), L->end());
+      PreOrderLoops.push_back(L);
+    } while (!PreOrderWorklist.empty());
+  }
+
+  // If this proxy or the loop info is going to be invalidated, we also need
+  // to clear all the keys coming from that analysis. We also completely blow
+  // away the loop analyses if any of the standard analyses provided by the
+  // loop pass manager go away so that loop analyses can freely use these
+  // without worrying about declaring dependencies on them etc.
+  // FIXME: It isn't clear if this is the right tradeoff. We could instead make
+  // loop analyses declare any dependencies on these and use the more general
+  // invalidation logic below to act on that.
   auto PAC = PA.getChecker<LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy>();
-  if (!PAC.preserved() && !PAC.preservedSet<AllAnalysesOn<Loop>>())
-    InnerAM->clear();
+  if (!(PAC.preserved() || PAC.preservedSet<AllAnalysesOn<Function>>()) ||
+      Inv.invalidate<AAManager>(F, PA) ||
+      Inv.invalidate<AssumptionAnalysis>(F, PA) ||
+      Inv.invalidate<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(F, PA) ||
+      Inv.invalidate<LoopAnalysis>(F, PA) ||
+      Inv.invalidate<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>(F, PA)) {
+    // Note that the LoopInfo may be stale at this point, however the loop
+    // objects themselves remain the only viable keys that could be in the
+    // analysis manager's cache. So we just walk the keys and forcibly clear
+    // those results. Note that the order doesn't matter here as this will just
+    // directly destroy the results without calling methods on them.
+    for (Loop *L : PreOrderLoops)
+      InnerAM->clear(*L);
+
+    // We also need to null out the inner AM so that when the object gets
+    // destroyed as invalid we don't try to clear the inner AM again. At that
+    // point we won't be able to reliably walk the loops for this function and
+    // only clear results associated with those loops the way we do here.
+    // FIXME: Making InnerAM null at this point isn't very nice. Most analyses
+    // try to remain valid during invalidation. Maybe we should add an
+    // `IsClean` flag?
+    InnerAM = nullptr;
+
+    // Now return true to indicate this *is* invalid and a fresh proxy result
+    // needs to be built. This is especially important given the null InnerAM.
+    return true;
+  }
 
-  // FIXME: Proper suppor for invalidation isn't yet implemented for the LPM.
+  // Directly check if the relevant set is preserved so we can short circuit
+  // invalidating loops.
+  bool AreLoopAnalysesPreserved =
+      PA.allAnalysesInSetPreserved<AllAnalysesOn<Loop>>();
+
+  // Since we have a valid LoopInfo we can actually leave the cached results in
+  // the analysis manager associated with the Loop keys, but we need to
+  // propagate any necessary invalidation logic into them. We'd like to
+  // invalidate things in roughly the same order as they were put into the
+  // cache and so we walk the preorder list in reverse to form a valid
+  // postorder.
+  for (Loop *L : reverse(PreOrderLoops)) {
+    Optional<PreservedAnalyses> InnerPA;
+
+    // Check to see whether the preserved set needs to be adjusted based on
+    // function-level analysis invalidation triggering deferred invalidation
+    // for this loop.
+    if (auto *OuterProxy =
+            InnerAM->getCachedResult<FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy>(*L))
+      for (const auto &OuterInvalidationPair :
+           OuterProxy->getOuterInvalidations()) {
+        AnalysisKey *OuterAnalysisID = OuterInvalidationPair.first;
+        const auto &InnerAnalysisIDs = OuterInvalidationPair.second;
+        if (Inv.invalidate(OuterAnalysisID, F, PA)) {
+          if (!InnerPA)
+            InnerPA = PA;
+          for (AnalysisKey *InnerAnalysisID : InnerAnalysisIDs)
+            InnerPA->abandon(InnerAnalysisID);
+        }
+      }
+
+    // Check if we needed a custom PA set. If so we'll need to run the inner
+    // invalidation.
+    if (InnerPA) {
+      InnerAM->invalidate(*L, *InnerPA);
+      continue;
+    }
+
+    // Otherwise we only need to do invalidation if the original PA set didn't
+    // preserve all Loop analyses.
+    if (!AreLoopAnalysesPreserved)
+      InnerAM->invalidate(*L, PA);
+  }
 
   // Return false to indicate that this result is still a valid proxy.
   return false;
 }
+
+template <>
+LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy::Result
+LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy::run(Function &F,
+                                      FunctionAnalysisManager &AM) {
+  return Result(*InnerAM, AM.getResult<LoopAnalysis>(F));
+}
 }
 
 PreservedAnalyses llvm::getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses() {
   PreservedAnalyses PA;
+  PA.preserve<AssumptionAnalysis>();
   PA.preserve<DominatorTreeAnalysis>();
   PA.preserve<LoopAnalysis>();
+  PA.preserve<LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy>();
   PA.preserve<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>();
   // TODO: What we really want to do here is preserve an AA category, but that
   // concept doesn't exist yet.
   PA.preserve<AAManager>();
   PA.preserve<BasicAA>();
   PA.preserve<GlobalsAA>();
   PA.preserve<SCEVAA>();
   return PA;
 }
+
+PrintLoopPass::PrintLoopPass() : OS(dbgs()) {}
+PrintLoopPass::PrintLoopPass(raw_ostream &OS, const std::string &Banner)
+    : OS(OS), Banner(Banner) {}
+
+PreservedAnalyses PrintLoopPass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &,
+                                     LoopStandardAnalysisResults &,
+                                     LPMUpdater &) {
+  printLoop(L, OS, Banner);
+  return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+}

llvm/trunk/lib/Passes/PassBuilder.cpp

 #include "llvm/Analysis/DependenceAnalysis.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/DominanceFrontier.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/GlobalsModRef.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/IVUsers.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/LazyCallGraph.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/LazyValueInfo.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/LoopAccessAnalysis.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/LoopInfo.h"
+#include "llvm/Analysis/LoopPassManager.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/MemoryDependenceAnalysis.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/ModuleSummaryAnalysis.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/OptimizationDiagnosticInfo.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/PostDominators.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/ProfileSummaryInfo.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/RegionInfo.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/ScalarEvolutionAliasAnalysis.h"

 public:
   struct Result {};
   Result run(Function &, FunctionAnalysisManager &) { return Result(); }
   static StringRef name() { return "NoOpFunctionAnalysis"; }
 };
 
 /// \brief No-op loop pass which does nothing.
 struct NoOpLoopPass {
-  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &) {
+  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &,
+                        LoopStandardAnalysisResults &, LPMUpdater &) {
     return PreservedAnalyses::all();
   }
   static StringRef name() { return "NoOpLoopPass"; }
 };
 
 /// \brief No-op loop analysis.
 class NoOpLoopAnalysis : public AnalysisInfoMixin<NoOpLoopAnalysis> {
   friend AnalysisInfoMixin<NoOpLoopAnalysis>;
   static AnalysisKey Key;
 
 public:
   struct Result {};
-  Result run(Loop &, LoopAnalysisManager &) { return Result(); }
+  Result run(Loop &, LoopAnalysisManager &, LoopStandardAnalysisResults &) {
+    return Result();
+  }
   static StringRef name() { return "NoOpLoopAnalysis"; }
 };
 
 AnalysisKey NoOpModuleAnalysis::Key;
 AnalysisKey NoOpCGSCCAnalysis::Key;
 AnalysisKey NoOpFunctionAnalysis::Key;
 AnalysisKey NoOpLoopAnalysis::Key;
 

 #define LOOP_PASS(NAME, CREATE_PASS)                                           \
   if (Name == NAME) {                                                          \
     LPM.addPass(CREATE_PASS);                                                  \
     return true;                                                               \
   }
 #define LOOP_ANALYSIS(NAME, CREATE_PASS)                                       \
   if (Name == "require<" NAME ">") {                                           \
     LPM.addPass(RequireAnalysisPass<                                           \
-                std::remove_reference<decltype(CREATE_PASS)>::type, Loop>());  \
+                std::remove_reference<decltype(CREATE_PASS)>::type, Loop,      \
+                LoopAnalysisManager, LoopStandardAnalysisResults &,            \
+                LPMUpdater &>());                                              \
     return true;                                                               \
   }                                                                            \
   if (Name == "invalidate<" NAME ">") {                                        \
     LPM.addPass(InvalidateAnalysisPass<                                        \
                 std::remove_reference<decltype(CREATE_PASS)>::type>());        \
     return true;                                                               \
   }
 #include "PassRegistry.def"

llvm/trunk/lib/Transforms/Scalar/IndVarSimplify.cpp

else
                                                  NewBECount->getType());
     assert(BackedgeTakenCount == NewBECount && "indvars must preserve SCEV");
   }
 #endif
 
   return Changed;
 }
 
-PreservedAnalyses IndVarSimplifyPass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM) {
-  auto &FAM = AM.getResult<FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy>(L).getManager();
+PreservedAnalyses IndVarSimplifyPass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                                          LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR,
+                                          LPMUpdater &) {
   Function *F = L.getHeader()->getParent();
   const DataLayout &DL = F->getParent()->getDataLayout();
 
-  auto *LI = FAM.getCachedResult<LoopAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *SE = FAM.getCachedResult<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *DT = FAM.getCachedResult<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(*F);
-
-  assert((LI && SE && DT) &&
-         "Analyses required for indvarsimplify not available!");
-
-  // Optional analyses.
-  auto *TTI = FAM.getCachedResult<TargetIRAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *TLI = FAM.getCachedResult<TargetLibraryAnalysis>(*F);
-
-  IndVarSimplify IVS(LI, SE, DT, DL, TLI, TTI);
+  IndVarSimplify IVS(&AR.LI, &AR.SE, &AR.DT, DL, &AR.TLI, &AR.TTI);
   if (!IVS.run(&L))
     return PreservedAnalyses::all();
 
   // FIXME: This should also 'preserve the CFG'.
   return getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses();
 }
 
 namespace {

llvm/trunk/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

private:
   /// set.
   void deleteAnalysisValue(Value *V, Loop *L) override;
 
   /// Simple Analysis hook. Delete loop L from alias set map.
   void deleteAnalysisLoop(Loop *L) override;
 };
 }
 
-PreservedAnalyses LICMPass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM) {
+PreservedAnalyses LICMPass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                                LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &) {
   const auto &FAM =
-      AM.getResult<FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy>(L).getManager();
+      AM.getResult<FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy>(L, AR).getManager();
   Function *F = L.getHeader()->getParent();
 
-  auto *AA = FAM.getCachedResult<AAManager>(*F);
-  auto *LI = FAM.getCachedResult<LoopAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *DT = FAM.getCachedResult<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *TLI = FAM.getCachedResult<TargetLibraryAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *SE = FAM.getCachedResult<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>(*F);
   auto *ORE = FAM.getCachedResult<OptimizationRemarkEmitterAnalysis>(*F);
-  assert((AA && LI && DT && TLI && SE && ORE) &&
-         "Analyses for LICM not available");
+  // FIXME: This should probably be optional rather than required.
+  if (!ORE)
+    report_fatal_error("LICM: OptimizationRemarkEmitterAnalysis not "
+                       "cached at a higher level");
 
   LoopInvariantCodeMotion LICM;
-
-  if (!LICM.runOnLoop(&L, AA, LI, DT, TLI, SE, ORE, true))
+  if (!LICM.runOnLoop(&L, &AR.AA, &AR.LI, &AR.DT, &AR.TLI, &AR.SE, ORE, true))
     return PreservedAnalyses::all();
 
   // FIXME: There is no setPreservesCFG in the new PM. When that becomes
   // available, it should be used here.
   return getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses();
 }
 
 char LegacyLICMPass::ID = 0;

llvm/trunk/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopDeletion.cpp

bool LoopDeletionPass::runImpl(Loop *L, DominatorTree &DT, ScalarEvolution &SE,
   loopInfo.markAsRemoved(L);
   Changed = true;
 
   ++NumDeleted;
 
   return Changed;
 }
 
-PreservedAnalyses LoopDeletionPass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM) {
-  auto &FAM = AM.getResult<FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy>(L).getManager();
-  Function *F = L.getHeader()->getParent();
-
-  auto &DT = *FAM.getCachedResult<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto &SE = *FAM.getCachedResult<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto &LI = *FAM.getCachedResult<LoopAnalysis>(*F);
-
-  bool Changed = runImpl(&L, DT, SE, LI);
+PreservedAnalyses LoopDeletionPass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                                        LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR,
+                                        LPMUpdater &) {
+  bool Changed = runImpl(&L, AR.DT, AR.SE, AR.LI);
   if (!Changed)
     return PreservedAnalyses::all();
 
   return getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses();
 }
 
 namespace {
 class LoopDeletionLegacyPass : public LoopPass {

llvm/trunk/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopDistribute.cpp

 
 PreservedAnalyses LoopDistributePass::run(Function &F,
                                           FunctionAnalysisManager &AM) {
   auto &LI = AM.getResult<LoopAnalysis>(F);
   auto &DT = AM.getResult<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(F);
   auto &SE = AM.getResult<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>(F);
   auto &ORE = AM.getResult<OptimizationRemarkEmitterAnalysis>(F);
 
+  // We don't directly need these analyses but they're required for loop
+  // analyses so provide them below.
+  auto &AA = AM.getResult<AAManager>(F);
+  auto &AC = AM.getResult<AssumptionAnalysis>(F);
+  auto &TTI = AM.getResult<TargetIRAnalysis>(F);
+  auto &TLI = AM.getResult<TargetLibraryAnalysis>(F);
+
   auto &LAM = AM.getResult<LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy>(F).getManager();
   std::function<const LoopAccessInfo &(Loop &)> GetLAA =
       [&](Loop &L) -> const LoopAccessInfo & {
-    return LAM.getResult<LoopAccessAnalysis>(L);
+    LoopStandardAnalysisResults AR = {AA, AC, DT, LI, SE, TLI, TTI};
+    return LAM.getResult<LoopAccessAnalysis>(L, AR);
   };
 
   bool Changed = runImpl(F, &LI, &DT, &SE, &ORE, GetLAA);
   if (!Changed)
     return PreservedAnalyses::all();
   PreservedAnalyses PA;
   PA.preserve<LoopAnalysis>();
   PA.preserve<DominatorTreeAnalysis>();

llvm/trunk/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopIdiomRecognize.cpp

public:
   void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const override {
     AU.addRequired<TargetLibraryInfoWrapperPass>();
     AU.addRequired<TargetTransformInfoWrapperPass>();
     getLoopAnalysisUsage(AU);
   }
 };
 } // End anonymous namespace.
 
-PreservedAnalyses LoopIdiomRecognizePass::run(Loop &L,
-                                              LoopAnalysisManager &AM) {
-  const auto &FAM =
-      AM.getResult<FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy>(L).getManager();
-  Function *F = L.getHeader()->getParent();
-
-  // Use getCachedResult because Loop pass cannot trigger a function analysis.
-  auto *AA = FAM.getCachedResult<AAManager>(*F);
-  auto *DT = FAM.getCachedResult<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *LI = FAM.getCachedResult<LoopAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *SE = FAM.getCachedResult<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *TLI = FAM.getCachedResult<TargetLibraryAnalysis>(*F);
-  const auto *TTI = FAM.getCachedResult<TargetIRAnalysis>(*F);
+PreservedAnalyses LoopIdiomRecognizePass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                                              LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR,
+                                              LPMUpdater &) {
   const auto *DL = &L.getHeader()->getModule()->getDataLayout();
-  assert((AA && DT && LI && SE && TLI && TTI && DL) &&
-         "Analyses for Loop Idiom Recognition not available");
 
-  LoopIdiomRecognize LIR(AA, DT, LI, SE, TLI, TTI, DL);
+  LoopIdiomRecognize LIR(&AR.AA, &AR.DT, &AR.LI, &AR.SE, &AR.TLI, &AR.TTI, DL);
   if (!LIR.runOnLoop(&L))
     return PreservedAnalyses::all();
 
   return getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses();
 }
 
 char LoopIdiomRecognizeLegacyPass::ID = 0;
 INITIALIZE_PASS_BEGIN(LoopIdiomRecognizeLegacyPass, "loop-idiom",

llvm/trunk/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopInstSimplify.cpp

void getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &AU) const override {
     AU.addRequired<AssumptionCacheTracker>();
     AU.addRequired<TargetLibraryInfoWrapperPass>();
     AU.setPreservesCFG();
     getLoopAnalysisUsage(AU);
   }
 };
 }
 
-PreservedAnalyses LoopInstSimplifyPass::run(Loop &L,
-                                            LoopAnalysisManager &AM) {
-  const auto &FAM =
-      AM.getResult<FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy>(L).getManager();
-  Function *F = L.getHeader()->getParent();
-
-  // Use getCachedResult because Loop pass cannot trigger a function analysis.
-  auto *DT = FAM.getCachedResult<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *LI = FAM.getCachedResult<LoopAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *AC = FAM.getCachedResult<AssumptionAnalysis>(*F);
-  const auto *TLI = FAM.getCachedResult<TargetLibraryAnalysis>(*F);
-  assert((LI && AC && TLI) && "Analyses for Loop Inst Simplify not available");
-
-  if (!SimplifyLoopInst(&L, DT, LI, AC, TLI))
+PreservedAnalyses LoopInstSimplifyPass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                                            LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR,
+                                            LPMUpdater &) {
+  if (!SimplifyLoopInst(&L, &AR.DT, &AR.LI, &AR.AC, &AR.TLI))
     return PreservedAnalyses::all();
 
   return getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses();
 }
 
 char LoopInstSimplifyLegacyPass::ID = 0;
 INITIALIZE_PASS_BEGIN(LoopInstSimplifyLegacyPass, "loop-instsimplify",
                       "Simplify instructions in loops", false, false)

llvm/trunk/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopRotation.cpp

if ((MadeChange || SimplifiedLatch) && LoopMD)
     L->setLoopID(LoopMD);
 
   return MadeChange;
 }
 
 LoopRotatePass::LoopRotatePass(bool EnableHeaderDuplication)
     : EnableHeaderDuplication(EnableHeaderDuplication) {}
 
-PreservedAnalyses LoopRotatePass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM) {
-  auto &FAM = AM.getResult<FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy>(L).getManager();
-  Function *F = L.getHeader()->getParent();
-
-  auto *LI = FAM.getCachedResult<LoopAnalysis>(*F);
-  const auto *TTI = FAM.getCachedResult<TargetIRAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *AC = FAM.getCachedResult<AssumptionAnalysis>(*F);
-  assert((LI && TTI && AC) && "Analyses for loop rotation not available");
-
-  // Optional analyses.
-  auto *DT = FAM.getCachedResult<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *SE = FAM.getCachedResult<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>(*F);
+PreservedAnalyses LoopRotatePass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                                      LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR,
+                                      LPMUpdater &) {
   int Threshold = EnableHeaderDuplication ? DefaultRotationThreshold : 0;
-  LoopRotate LR(Threshold, LI, TTI, AC, DT, SE);
+  LoopRotate LR(Threshold, &AR.LI, &AR.TTI, &AR.AC, &AR.DT, &AR.SE);
 
   bool Changed = LR.processLoop(&L);
   if (!Changed)
     return PreservedAnalyses::all();
   return getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses();
 }
 
 namespace {

llvm/trunk/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopSimplifyCFG.cpp

for (auto &Block : Blocks) {
     LI.removeBlock(Pred);
     MergeBasicBlockIntoOnlyPred(Succ, &DT);
     Changed = true;
   }
 
   return Changed;
 }
 
-PreservedAnalyses LoopSimplifyCFGPass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM) {
-  const auto &FAM =
-      AM.getResult<FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy>(L).getManager();
-  Function *F = L.getHeader()->getParent();
-
-  auto *LI = FAM.getCachedResult<LoopAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *DT = FAM.getCachedResult<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(*F);
-  assert((LI && DT) && "Analyses for LoopSimplifyCFG not available");
-
-  if (!simplifyLoopCFG(L, *DT, *LI))
+PreservedAnalyses LoopSimplifyCFGPass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                                           LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR,
+                                           LPMUpdater &) {
+  if (!simplifyLoopCFG(L, AR.DT, AR.LI))
     return PreservedAnalyses::all();
   return getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses();
 }
 
 namespace {
 class LoopSimplifyCFGLegacyPass : public LoopPass {
 public:
   static char ID; // Pass ID, replacement for typeid

llvm/trunk/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopStrengthReduce.cpp

bool LoopStrengthReduce::runOnLoop(Loop *L, LPPassManager & /*LPM*/) {
   auto &SE = getAnalysis<ScalarEvolutionWrapperPass>().getSE();
   auto &DT = getAnalysis<DominatorTreeWrapperPass>().getDomTree();
   auto &LI = getAnalysis<LoopInfoWrapperPass>().getLoopInfo();
   const auto &TTI = getAnalysis<TargetTransformInfoWrapperPass>().getTTI(
       *L->getHeader()->getParent());
   return ReduceLoopStrength(L, IU, SE, DT, LI, TTI);
 }
 
-PreservedAnalyses LoopStrengthReducePass::run(Loop &L,
-                                              LoopAnalysisManager &AM) {
-  const auto &FAM =
-      AM.getResult<FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy>(L).getManager();
-  Function *F = L.getHeader()->getParent();
-
-  auto &IU = AM.getResult<IVUsersAnalysis>(L);
-  auto *SE = FAM.getCachedResult<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *DT = FAM.getCachedResult<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *LI = FAM.getCachedResult<LoopAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *TTI = FAM.getCachedResult<TargetIRAnalysis>(*F);
-  assert((SE && DT && LI && TTI) &&
-         "Analyses for Loop Strength Reduce not available");
-
-  if (!ReduceLoopStrength(&L, IU, *SE, *DT, *LI, *TTI))
+PreservedAnalyses LoopStrengthReducePass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                                              LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR,
+                                              LPMUpdater &) {
+  if (!ReduceLoopStrength(&L, AM.getResult<IVUsersAnalysis>(L, AR), AR.SE,
+                          AR.DT, AR.LI, AR.TTI))
     return PreservedAnalyses::all();
 
   return getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses();
 }
 
 char LoopStrengthReduce::ID = 0;
 INITIALIZE_PASS_BEGIN(LoopStrengthReduce, "loop-reduce",
                       "Loop Strength Reduction", false, false)

llvm/trunk/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopUnrollPass.cpp

return new LoopUnroll(Threshold == -1 ? None : Optional<unsigned>(Threshold),
                         Runtime == -1 ? None : Optional<bool>(Runtime),
                         UpperBound == -1 ? None : Optional<bool>(UpperBound));
 }
 
 Pass *llvm::createSimpleLoopUnrollPass() {
   return llvm::createLoopUnrollPass(-1, -1, 0, 0, 0);
 }
 
-PreservedAnalyses LoopUnrollPass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM) {
+PreservedAnalyses LoopUnrollPass::run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                                      LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR,
+                                      LPMUpdater &) {
   const auto &FAM =
-      AM.getResult<FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy>(L).getManager();
+      AM.getResult<FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy>(L, AR).getManager();
   Function *F = L.getHeader()->getParent();
 
-
-  DominatorTree *DT = FAM.getCachedResult<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(*F);
-  LoopInfo *LI = FAM.getCachedResult<LoopAnalysis>(*F);
-  ScalarEvolution *SE = FAM.getCachedResult<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *TTI = FAM.getCachedResult<TargetIRAnalysis>(*F);
-  auto *AC = FAM.getCachedResult<AssumptionAnalysis>(*F);
   auto *ORE = FAM.getCachedResult<OptimizationRemarkEmitterAnalysis>(*F);
-  if (!DT)
-    report_fatal_error(
-        "LoopUnrollPass: DominatorTreeAnalysis not cached at a higher level");
-  if (!LI)
-    report_fatal_error(
-        "LoopUnrollPass: LoopAnalysis not cached at a higher level");
-  if (!SE)
-    report_fatal_error(
-        "LoopUnrollPass: ScalarEvolutionAnalysis not cached at a higher level");
-  if (!TTI)
-    report_fatal_error(
-        "LoopUnrollPass: TargetIRAnalysis not cached at a higher level");
-  if (!AC)
-    report_fatal_error(
-        "LoopUnrollPass: AssumptionAnalysis not cached at a higher level");
+  // FIXME: This should probably be optional rather than required.
   if (!ORE)
     report_fatal_error("LoopUnrollPass: OptimizationRemarkEmitterAnalysis not "
                        "cached at a higher level");
 
-  bool Changed =
-      tryToUnrollLoop(&L, *DT, LI, SE, *TTI, *AC, *ORE, /*PreserveLCSSA*/ true,
-                      ProvidedCount, ProvidedThreshold, ProvidedAllowPartial,
+  bool Changed = tryToUnrollLoop(&L, AR.DT, &AR.LI, &AR.SE, AR.TTI, AR.AC, *ORE,
+                                 /*PreserveLCSSA*/ true, ProvidedCount,
+                                 ProvidedThreshold, ProvidedAllowPartial,
                                  ProvidedRuntime, ProvidedUpperBound);
 
   if (!Changed)
     return PreservedAnalyses::all();
   return getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses();
 }

llvm/trunk/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/LoopVectorize.cpp

 
 PreservedAnalyses LoopVectorizePass::run(Function &F,
                                          FunctionAnalysisManager &AM) {
     auto &SE = AM.getResult<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>(F);
     auto &LI = AM.getResult<LoopAnalysis>(F);
     auto &TTI = AM.getResult<TargetIRAnalysis>(F);
     auto &DT = AM.getResult<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(F);
     auto &BFI = AM.getResult<BlockFrequencyAnalysis>(F);
-    auto *TLI = AM.getCachedResult<TargetLibraryAnalysis>(F);
+    auto &TLI = AM.getResult<TargetLibraryAnalysis>(F);
     auto &AA = AM.getResult<AAManager>(F);
     auto &AC = AM.getResult<AssumptionAnalysis>(F);
     auto &DB = AM.getResult<DemandedBitsAnalysis>(F);
     auto &ORE = AM.getResult<OptimizationRemarkEmitterAnalysis>(F);
 
     auto &LAM = AM.getResult<LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy>(F).getManager();
     std::function<const LoopAccessInfo &(Loop &)> GetLAA =
         [&](Loop &L) -> const LoopAccessInfo & {
-      return LAM.getResult<LoopAccessAnalysis>(L);
+      LoopStandardAnalysisResults AR = {AA, AC, DT, LI, SE, TLI, TTI};
+      return LAM.getResult<LoopAccessAnalysis>(L, AR);
     };
     bool Changed =
-        runImpl(F, SE, LI, TTI, DT, BFI, TLI, DB, AA, AC, GetLAA, ORE);
+        runImpl(F, SE, LI, TTI, DT, BFI, &TLI, DB, AA, AC, GetLAA, ORE);
     if (!Changed)
       return PreservedAnalyses::all();
     PreservedAnalyses PA;
     PA.preserve<LoopAnalysis>();
     PA.preserve<DominatorTreeAnalysis>();
     PA.preserve<BasicAA>();
     PA.preserve<GlobalsAA>();
     return PA;
 }

llvm/trunk/test/Other/loop-pass-ordering.ll

 ; RUN: opt -disable-output -debug-pass-manager \
 ; RUN:     -passes='no-op-loop' %s 2>&1 \
 ; RUN:     | FileCheck %s
 
 ;            @f()
 ;           /    \
 ;       loop.0   loop.1
 ;      /      \        \
 ; loop.0.0  loop.0.1  loop.1.0
 ;
-; CHECK: Running pass: NoOpLoopPass on loop.1.0
-; CHECK: Running pass: NoOpLoopPass on loop.1
-; CHECK: Running pass: NoOpLoopPass on loop.0.0
-; CHECK: Running pass: NoOpLoopPass on loop.0.1
-; CHECK: Running pass: NoOpLoopPass on loop.0
+; CHECK: Running pass: NoOpLoopPass on Loop at depth 2 containing: %loop.0.0
+; CHECK: Running pass: NoOpLoopPass on Loop at depth 2 containing: %loop.0.1
+; CHECK: Running pass: NoOpLoopPass on Loop at depth 1 containing: %loop.0
+; CHECK: Running pass: NoOpLoopPass on Loop at depth 2 containing: %loop.1.0
+; CHECK: Running pass: NoOpLoopPass on Loop at depth 1 containing: %loop.1
+
 define void @f() {
 entry:
   br label %loop.0
 loop.0:
   br i1 undef, label %loop.0.0, label %loop.1
 loop.0.0:
   br i1 undef, label %loop.0.0, label %loop.0.1
 loop.0.1:

llvm/trunk/test/Other/new-pass-manager.ll

 ; CHECK-O: Running pass: InstCombinePass
 ; CHECK-O1: Running pass: LibCallsShrinkWrapPass
 ; CHECK-O2: Running pass: LibCallsShrinkWrapPass
 ; CHECK-Os-NOT: Running pass: LibCallsShrinkWrapPass
 ; CHECK-Oz-NOT: Running pass: LibCallsShrinkWrapPass
 ; CHECK-O: Running pass: TailCallElimPass
 ; CHECK-O: Running pass: SimplifyCFGPass
 ; CHECK-O: Running pass: ReassociatePass
-; CHECK-O: Starting llvm::Loop pass manager run.
-; CHECK-O: Finished llvm::Loop pass manager run.
+; CHECK-O: Starting Loop pass manager run.
+; CHECK-O: Finished Loop pass manager run.
 ; CHECK-O: Running pass: SimplifyCFGPass
 ; CHECK-O: Running pass: InstCombinePass
-; CHECK-O: Starting llvm::Loop pass manager run.
-; CHECK-O: Finished llvm::Loop pass manager run.
+; CHECK-O: Starting Loop pass manager run.
+; CHECK-O: Finished Loop pass manager run.
 ; CHECK-O: Running pass: MemCpyOptPass
 ; CHECK-O: Running pass: SCCPPass
 ; CHECK-O: Running pass: BDCEPass
 ; CHECK-O: Running pass: InstCombinePass
 ; CHECK-O: Running pass: JumpThreadingPass
 ; CHECK-O: Running pass: CorrelatedValuePropagationPass
 ; CHECK-O: Running pass: DSEPass
 ; CHECK-O: Running pass: ADCEPass

 ; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Running analysis: InnerAnalysisManagerProxy<{{.*}}>
 ; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Starting llvm::Function pass manager run
 ; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Running pass: FunctionToLoopPassAdaptor
 ; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Running analysis: InnerAnalysisManagerProxy<{{.*}}>
 ; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Running analysis: LoopAnalysis
 ; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Running analysis: DominatorTreeAnalysis
 ; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Running analysis: AAManager
 ; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Running analysis: TargetLibraryAnalysis
-; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Running analysis: ScalarEvolutionAnalysis
 ; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Running analysis: AssumptionAnalysis
-; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Starting llvm::Loop pass manager run
+; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Running analysis: ScalarEvolutionAnalysis
+; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Running analysis: TargetIRAnalysis
+; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Starting Loop pass manager run
 ; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Running pass: RepeatedPass
-; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Starting llvm::Loop pass manager run
+; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Starting Loop pass manager run
 ; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Running pass: NoOpLoopPass
-; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Finished llvm::Loop pass manager run
-; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Starting llvm::Loop pass manager run
+; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Finished Loop pass manager run
+; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Starting Loop pass manager run
 ; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Running pass: NoOpLoopPass
-; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Finished llvm::Loop pass manager run
-; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Starting llvm::Loop pass manager run
+; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Finished Loop pass manager run
+; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Starting Loop pass manager run
 ; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Running pass: NoOpLoopPass
-; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Finished llvm::Loop pass manager run
-; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Finished llvm::Loop pass manager run
+; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Finished Loop pass manager run
+; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Finished Loop pass manager run
 ; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Finished llvm::Function pass manager run
 ; CHECK-REPEAT-LOOP-PASS-NEXT: Finished llvm::Module pass manager run
 
 define void @foo(i1 %x, i8* %p1, i8* %p2) {
 entry:
   store i8 42, i8* %p1
   br i1 %x, label %loop, label %exit
 

llvm/trunk/test/Other/pass-pipeline-parsing.ll

 
 ; RUN: opt -disable-output -debug-pass-manager \
 ; RUN:     -passes='no-op-loop,no-op-loop' %s 2>&1 \
 ; RUN:     | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-TWO-NOOP-LOOP
 ; CHECK-TWO-NOOP-LOOP: Starting llvm::Module pass manager run
 ; CHECK-TWO-NOOP-LOOP: Running pass: ModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor
 ; CHECK-TWO-NOOP-LOOP: Starting llvm::Function pass manager run
 ; CHECK-TWO-NOOP-LOOP: Running pass: FunctionToLoopPassAdaptor
-; CHECK-TWO-NOOP-LOOP: Starting llvm::Loop pass manager run
+; CHECK-TWO-NOOP-LOOP: Starting Loop pass manager run
 ; CHECK-TWO-NOOP-LOOP: Running pass: NoOpLoopPass
 ; CHECK-TWO-NOOP-LOOP: Running pass: NoOpLoopPass
-; CHECK-TWO-NOOP-LOOP: Finished llvm::Loop pass manager run
+; CHECK-TWO-NOOP-LOOP: Finished Loop pass manager run
 ; CHECK-TWO-NOOP-LOOP: Finished llvm::Function pass manager run
 ; CHECK-TWO-NOOP-LOOP: Finished llvm::Module pass manager run
 
 ; RUN: opt -disable-output -debug-pass-manager \
 ; RUN:     -passes='module(function(loop(no-op-loop)))' %s 2>&1 \
 ; RUN:     | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-NESTED-FP-LP
 ; RUN: opt -disable-output -debug-pass-manager \
 ; RUN:     -passes='function(loop(no-op-loop))' %s 2>&1 \
 ; RUN:     | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-NESTED-FP-LP
 ; RUN: opt -disable-output -debug-pass-manager \
 ; RUN:     -passes='loop(no-op-loop)' %s 2>&1 \
 ; RUN:     | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-NESTED-FP-LP
 ; RUN: opt -disable-output -debug-pass-manager \
 ; RUN:     -passes='no-op-loop' %s 2>&1 \
 ; RUN:     | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-NESTED-FP-LP
 ; CHECK-NESTED-FP-LP: Starting llvm::Module pass manager run
 ; CHECK-NESTED-FP-LP: Running pass: ModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor
 ; CHECK-NESTED-FP-LP: Starting llvm::Function pass manager run
 ; CHECK-NESTED-FP-LP: Running pass: FunctionToLoopPassAdaptor
-; CHECK-NESTED-FP-LP: Starting llvm::Loop pass manager run
+; CHECK-NESTED-FP-LP: Starting Loop pass manager run
 ; CHECK-NESTED-FP-LP: Running pass: NoOpLoopPass
-; CHECK-NESTED-FP-LP: Finished llvm::Loop pass manager run
+; CHECK-NESTED-FP-LP: Finished Loop pass manager run
 ; CHECK-NESTED-FP-LP: Finished llvm::Function pass manager run
 ; CHECK-NESTED-FP-LP: Finished llvm::Module pass manager run
 
 ; RUN: not opt -disable-output -debug-pass-manager \
 ; RUN:     -passes='function(no-op-function)function(no-op-function)' %s 2>&1 \
 ; RUN:     | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-MISSING-COMMA1
 ; CHECK-MISSING-COMMA1: unable to parse pass pipeline description
 

llvm/trunk/unittests/Analysis/LoopPassManagerTest.cpp

 //===- llvm/unittest/Analysis/LoopPassManagerTest.cpp - LPM tests ---------===//
 //
 //                     The LLVM Compiler Infrastructure
 //
 // This file is distributed under the University of Illinois Open Source
 // License. See LICENSE.TXT for details.
 //
 //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
 
 #include "llvm/Analysis/AliasAnalysis.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/AssumptionCache.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/LoopPassManager.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/TargetLibraryInfo.h"
+#include "llvm/Analysis/TargetTransformInfo.h"
 #include "llvm/AsmParser/Parser.h"
 #include "llvm/IR/Dominators.h"
 #include "llvm/IR/Function.h"
 #include "llvm/IR/LLVMContext.h"
 #include "llvm/IR/Module.h"
 #include "llvm/IR/PassManager.h"
 #include "llvm/Support/SourceMgr.h"
+#include "gmock/gmock.h"
 #include "gtest/gtest.h"
 
 using namespace llvm;
 
 namespace {
 
-class TestLoopAnalysis : public AnalysisInfoMixin<TestLoopAnalysis> {
-  friend AnalysisInfoMixin<TestLoopAnalysis>;
+using testing::DoDefault;
+using testing::Return;
+using testing::Expectation;
+using testing::Invoke;
+using testing::InvokeWithoutArgs;
+using testing::_;
+
+template <typename DerivedT, typename IRUnitT,
+          typename AnalysisManagerT = AnalysisManager<IRUnitT>,
+          typename... ExtraArgTs>
+class MockAnalysisHandleBase {
+public:
+  class Analysis : public AnalysisInfoMixin<Analysis> {
+    friend AnalysisInfoMixin<Analysis>;
+    friend MockAnalysisHandleBase;
     static AnalysisKey Key;
 
-  int &Runs;
+    DerivedT *Handle;
+
+    Analysis(DerivedT &Handle) : Handle(&Handle) {}
+
+  public:
+    class Result {
+      friend MockAnalysisHandleBase;
+
+      DerivedT *Handle;
+
+      Result(DerivedT &Handle) : Handle(&Handle) {}
 
     public:
-  struct Result {
-    Result(int Count) : BlockCount(Count) {}
-    int BlockCount;
+      // Forward invalidation events to the mock handle.
+      bool invalidate(IRUnitT &IR, const PreservedAnalyses &PA,
+                      typename AnalysisManagerT::Invalidator &Inv) {
+        return Handle->invalidate(IR, PA, Inv);
+      }
     };
 
-  TestLoopAnalysis(int &Runs) : Runs(Runs) {}
+    Result run(IRUnitT &IR, AnalysisManagerT &AM, ExtraArgTs... ExtraArgs) {
+      return Handle->run(IR, AM, ExtraArgs...);
+    }
+  };
 
-  /// \brief Run the analysis pass over the loop and return a result.
-  Result run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM) {
-    ++Runs;
-    int Count = 0;
+  Analysis getAnalysis() { return Analysis(static_cast<DerivedT &>(*this)); }
+  typename Analysis::Result getResult() {
+    return typename Analysis::Result(static_cast<DerivedT &>(*this));
+  }
 
-    for (auto I = L.block_begin(), E = L.block_end(); I != E; ++I)
-      ++Count;
-    return Result(Count);
+protected:
+  /// Derived classes should call this in their constructor to set up default
+  /// mock actions. (We can't do this in our constructor because this has to
+  /// run after the DerivedT is constructed.)
+  void setDefaults() {
+    ON_CALL(static_cast<DerivedT &>(*this),
+            run(_, _, testing::Matcher<ExtraArgTs>(_)...))
+        .WillByDefault(Return(this->getResult()));
+    ON_CALL(static_cast<DerivedT &>(*this), invalidate(_, _, _))
+        .WillByDefault(Invoke([](IRUnitT &, const PreservedAnalyses &PA,
+                                 typename AnalysisManagerT::Invalidator &Inv) {
+          auto PAC = PA.getChecker<Analysis>();
+          return !PAC.preserved() &&
+                 !PAC.template preservedSet<AllAnalysesOn<IRUnitT>>();
+        }));
   }
 };
 
-AnalysisKey TestLoopAnalysis::Key;
+template <typename DerivedT, typename IRUnitT, typename AnalysisManagerT,
+          typename... ExtraArgTs>
+AnalysisKey MockAnalysisHandleBase<DerivedT, IRUnitT, AnalysisManagerT,
+                                   ExtraArgTs...>::Analysis::Key;
+
+/// Mock handle for loop analyses.
+///
+/// This is provided as a template accepting an (optional) integer. Because
+/// analyses are identified and queried by type, this allows constructing
+/// multiple handles with distinctly typed nested 'Analysis' types that can be
+/// registered and queried. If you want to register multiple loop analysis
+/// passes, you'll need to instantiate this type with different values for I.
+/// For example:
+///
+///   MockLoopAnalysisHandleTemplate<0> h0;
+///   MockLoopAnalysisHandleTemplate<1> h1;
+///   typedef decltype(h0)::Analysis Analysis0;
+///   typedef decltype(h1)::Analysis Analysis1;
+template <size_t I = static_cast<size_t>(-1)>
+struct MockLoopAnalysisHandleTemplate
+    : MockAnalysisHandleBase<MockLoopAnalysisHandleTemplate<I>, Loop,
+                             LoopAnalysisManager,
+                             LoopStandardAnalysisResults &> {
+  typedef typename MockLoopAnalysisHandleTemplate::Analysis Analysis;
 
-class TestLoopPass {
-  std::vector<StringRef> &VisitedLoops;
-  int &AnalyzedBlockCount;
-  bool OnlyUseCachedResults;
+  MOCK_METHOD3_T(run, typename Analysis::Result(Loop &, LoopAnalysisManager &,
+                                                LoopStandardAnalysisResults &));
 
+  MOCK_METHOD3_T(invalidate, bool(Loop &, const PreservedAnalyses &,
+                                  LoopAnalysisManager::Invalidator &));
+
+  MockLoopAnalysisHandleTemplate() { this->setDefaults(); }
+};
+
+typedef MockLoopAnalysisHandleTemplate<> MockLoopAnalysisHandle;
+
+struct MockFunctionAnalysisHandle
+    : MockAnalysisHandleBase<MockFunctionAnalysisHandle, Function> {
+  MOCK_METHOD2(run, Analysis::Result(Function &, FunctionAnalysisManager &));
+
+  MOCK_METHOD3(invalidate, bool(Function &, const PreservedAnalyses &,
+                                FunctionAnalysisManager::Invalidator &));
+
+  MockFunctionAnalysisHandle() { setDefaults(); }
+};
+
+template <typename DerivedT, typename IRUnitT,
+          typename AnalysisManagerT = AnalysisManager<IRUnitT>,
+          typename... ExtraArgTs>
+class MockPassHandleBase {
 public:
-  TestLoopPass(std::vector<StringRef> &VisitedLoops, int &AnalyzedBlockCount,
-               bool OnlyUseCachedResults = false)
-      : VisitedLoops(VisitedLoops), AnalyzedBlockCount(AnalyzedBlockCount),
-        OnlyUseCachedResults(OnlyUseCachedResults) {}
+  class Pass : public PassInfoMixin<Pass> {
+    friend MockPassHandleBase;
+
+    DerivedT *Handle;
 
-  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM) {
-    VisitedLoops.push_back(L.getName());
+    Pass(DerivedT &Handle) : Handle(&Handle) {}
 
-    if (OnlyUseCachedResults) {
-      // Hack to force the use of the cached interface.
-      if (auto *AR = AM.getCachedResult<TestLoopAnalysis>(L))
-        AnalyzedBlockCount += AR->BlockCount;
-    } else {
-      // Typical path just runs the analysis as needed.
-      auto &AR = AM.getResult<TestLoopAnalysis>(L);
-      AnalyzedBlockCount += AR.BlockCount;
+  public:
+    PreservedAnalyses run(IRUnitT &IR, AnalysisManagerT &AM,
+                          ExtraArgTs... ExtraArgs) {
+      return Handle->run(IR, AM, ExtraArgs...);
     }
+  };
 
-    return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+  Pass getPass() { return Pass(static_cast<DerivedT &>(*this)); }
+
+protected:
+  /// Derived classes should call this in their constructor to set up default
+  /// mock actions. (We can't do this in our constructor because this has to
+  /// run after the DerivedT is constructed.)
+  void setDefaults() {
+    ON_CALL(static_cast<DerivedT &>(*this),
+            run(_, _, testing::Matcher<ExtraArgTs>(_)...))
+        .WillByDefault(Return(PreservedAnalyses::all()));
   }
+};
 
-  static StringRef name() { return "TestLoopPass"; }
+struct MockLoopPassHandle
+    : MockPassHandleBase<MockLoopPassHandle, Loop, LoopAnalysisManager,
+                         LoopStandardAnalysisResults &, LPMUpdater &> {
+  MOCK_METHOD4(run,
+               PreservedAnalyses(Loop &, LoopAnalysisManager &,
+                                 LoopStandardAnalysisResults &, LPMUpdater &));
+  MockLoopPassHandle() { setDefaults(); }
 };
 
-// A test loop pass that invalidates the analysis for loops with the given name.
-class TestLoopInvalidatingPass {
-  StringRef Name;
+struct MockFunctionPassHandle
+    : MockPassHandleBase<MockFunctionPassHandle, Function> {
+  MOCK_METHOD2(run, PreservedAnalyses(Function &, FunctionAnalysisManager &));
 
-public:
-  TestLoopInvalidatingPass(StringRef LoopName) : Name(LoopName) {}
+  MockFunctionPassHandle() { setDefaults(); }
+};
 
-  PreservedAnalyses run(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM) {
-    return L.getName() == Name ? getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses()
-                               : PreservedAnalyses::all();
-  }
+struct MockModulePassHandle : MockPassHandleBase<MockModulePassHandle, Module> {
+  MOCK_METHOD2(run, PreservedAnalyses(Module &, ModuleAnalysisManager &));
 
-  static StringRef name() { return "TestLoopInvalidatingPass"; }
+  MockModulePassHandle() { setDefaults(); }
 };
 
+/// Define a custom matcher for objects which support a 'getName' method
+/// returning a StringRef.
+///
+/// LLVM often has IR objects or analysis objects which expose a StringRef name
+/// and in tests it is convenient to match these by name for readability. This
+/// matcher supports any type exposing a getName() method of this form.
+///
+/// It should be used as:
+///
+///   HasName("my_function")
+///
+/// No namespace or other qualification is required.
+MATCHER_P(HasName, Name, "") {
+  // The matcher's name and argument are printed in the case of failure, but we
+  // also want to print out the name of the argument. This uses an implicitly
+  // avaiable std::ostream, so we have to construct a std::string.
+  *result_listener << "has name '" << arg.getName().str() << "'";
+  return Name == arg.getName();
+}
+
 std::unique_ptr<Module> parseIR(LLVMContext &C, const char *IR) {
   SMDiagnostic Err;
   return parseAssemblyString(IR, Err, C);
 }
 
 class LoopPassManagerTest : public ::testing::Test {
 protected:
   LLVMContext Context;
   std::unique_ptr<Module> M;
 
+  LoopAnalysisManager LAM;
+  FunctionAnalysisManager FAM;
+  ModuleAnalysisManager MAM;
+
+  MockLoopAnalysisHandle MLAHandle;
+  MockLoopPassHandle MLPHandle;
+  MockFunctionPassHandle MFPHandle;
+  MockModulePassHandle MMPHandle;
+
+  static PreservedAnalyses
+  getLoopAnalysisResult(Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                        LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &) {
+    (void)AM.getResult<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>(L, AR);
+    return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+  };
+
 public:
   LoopPassManagerTest()
       : M(parseIR(Context, "define void @f() {\n"
                            "entry:\n"
                            "  br label %loop.0\n"
                            "loop.0:\n"
                            "  br i1 undef, label %loop.0.0, label %end\n"
                            "loop.0.0:\n"
                            "  br i1 undef, label %loop.0.0, label %loop.0.1\n"
                            "loop.0.1:\n"
                            "  br i1 undef, label %loop.0.1, label %loop.0\n"
                            "end:\n"
                            "  ret void\n"
                            "}\n"
                            "\n"
                            "define void @g() {\n"
                            "entry:\n"
                            "  br label %loop.g.0\n"
                            "loop.g.0:\n"
                            "  br i1 undef, label %loop.g.0, label %end\n"
                            "end:\n"
                            "  ret void\n"
-                           "}\n")) {}
-};
-
-#define EXPECT_N_ELEMENTS_EQ(N, EXPECTED, ACTUAL)                              \
-  do {                                                                         \
-    EXPECT_EQ(N##UL, ACTUAL.size());                                           \
-    for (int I = 0; I < N; ++I)                                                \
-      EXPECT_TRUE(EXPECTED[I] == ACTUAL[I]) << "Element " << I << " is "       \
-                                            << ACTUAL[I] << ". Expected "      \
-                                            << EXPECTED[I] << ".";             \
-  } while (0)
-
-TEST_F(LoopPassManagerTest, Basic) {
-  LoopAnalysisManager LAM(true);
-  int LoopAnalysisRuns = 0;
-  LAM.registerPass([&] { return TestLoopAnalysis(LoopAnalysisRuns); });
+                           "}\n")),
+        LAM(true), FAM(true), MAM(true) {
+    // Register our mock analysis.
+    LAM.registerPass([&] { return MLAHandle.getAnalysis(); });
 
-  FunctionAnalysisManager FAM(true);
     // We need DominatorTreeAnalysis for LoopAnalysis.
     FAM.registerPass([&] { return DominatorTreeAnalysis(); });
     FAM.registerPass([&] { return LoopAnalysis(); });
     // We also allow loop passes to assume a set of other analyses and so need
     // those.
     FAM.registerPass([&] { return AAManager(); });
-  FAM.registerPass([&] { return TargetLibraryAnalysis(); });
-  FAM.registerPass([&] { return ScalarEvolutionAnalysis(); });
     FAM.registerPass([&] { return AssumptionAnalysis(); });
-  FAM.registerPass([&] { return LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy(LAM); });
-  LAM.registerPass([&] { return FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy(FAM); });
+    FAM.registerPass([&] { return ScalarEvolutionAnalysis(); });
+    FAM.registerPass([&] { return TargetLibraryAnalysis(); });
+    FAM.registerPass([&] { return TargetIRAnalysis(); });
 
-  ModuleAnalysisManager MAM(true);
-  MAM.registerPass([&] { return FunctionAnalysisManagerModuleProxy(FAM); });
+    // Cross-register proxies.
+    LAM.registerPass([&] { return FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy(FAM); });
+    FAM.registerPass([&] { return LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy(LAM); });
     FAM.registerPass([&] { return ModuleAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy(MAM); });
+    MAM.registerPass([&] { return FunctionAnalysisManagerModuleProxy(FAM); });
+  }
+};
 
+TEST_F(LoopPassManagerTest, Basic) {
   ModulePassManager MPM(true);
+  ::testing::InSequence MakeExpectationsSequenced;
+
+  // First we just visit all the loops in all the functions and get their
+  // analysis results. This will run the analysis a total of four times,
+  // once for each loop.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.g.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.g.0"), _, _));
+  // Wire the loop pass through pass managers into the module pipeline.
+  {
+    LoopPassManager LPM(true);
+    LPM.addPass(MLPHandle.getPass());
     FunctionPassManager FPM(true);
+    FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(std::move(LPM)));
+    MPM.addPass(createModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor(std::move(FPM)));
+  }
 
-  // Visit all of the loops.
-  std::vector<StringRef> VisitedLoops1;
-  int AnalyzedBlockCount1 = 0;
+  // Next we run two passes over the loops. The first one invalidates the
+  // analyses for one loop, the second ones try to get the analysis results.
+  // This should force only one analysis to re-run within the loop PM, but will
+  // also invalidate everything after the loop pass manager finishes.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(DoDefault())
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(InvokeWithoutArgs([] { return PreservedAnalyses::none(); }))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(DoDefault())
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.g.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(DoDefault())
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  // Wire two loop pass runs into the module pipeline.
   {
-    LoopPassManager LPM;
-    LPM.addPass(TestLoopPass(VisitedLoops1, AnalyzedBlockCount1));
+    LoopPassManager LPM(true);
+    LPM.addPass(MLPHandle.getPass());
+    LPM.addPass(MLPHandle.getPass());
+    FunctionPassManager FPM(true);
+    FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(std::move(LPM)));
+    MPM.addPass(createModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor(std::move(FPM)));
+  }
+
+  // And now run the pipeline across the module.
+  MPM.run(*M, MAM);
+}
+
+TEST_F(LoopPassManagerTest, FunctionPassInvalidationOfLoopAnalyses) {
+  ModulePassManager MPM(true);
+  FunctionPassManager FPM(true);
+  // We process each function completely in sequence.
+  ::testing::Sequence FSequence, GSequence;
+
+  // First, force the analysis result to be computed for each loop.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _))
+      .InSequence(FSequence)
+      .WillOnce(DoDefault());
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _))
+      .InSequence(FSequence)
+      .WillOnce(DoDefault());
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _))
+      .InSequence(FSequence)
+      .WillOnce(DoDefault());
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.g.0"), _, _))
+      .InSequence(GSequence)
+      .WillOnce(DoDefault());
+  FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>()));
+
+  // No need to re-run if we require again from a fresh loop pass manager.
+  FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>()));
+
+  // For 'f', preserve most things but not the specific loop analyses.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MFPHandle, run(HasName("f"), _))
+      .InSequence(FSequence)
+      .WillOnce(Return(getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses()));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, invalidate(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _))
+      .InSequence(FSequence)
+      .WillOnce(DoDefault());
+  // On one loop, skip the invalidation (as though we did an internal update).
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, invalidate(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _))
+      .InSequence(FSequence)
+      .WillOnce(Return(false));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, invalidate(HasName("loop.0"), _, _))
+      .InSequence(FSequence)
+      .WillOnce(DoDefault());
+  // Now two loops still have to be recomputed.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _))
+      .InSequence(FSequence)
+      .WillOnce(DoDefault());
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _))
+      .InSequence(FSequence)
+      .WillOnce(DoDefault());
+  // Preserve things in the second function to ensure invalidation remains
+  // isolated to one function.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MFPHandle, run(HasName("g"), _))
+      .InSequence(GSequence)
+      .WillOnce(DoDefault());
+  FPM.addPass(MFPHandle.getPass());
+  FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>()));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MFPHandle, run(HasName("f"), _))
+      .InSequence(FSequence)
+      .WillOnce(DoDefault());
+  // For 'g', fail to preserve anything, causing the loops themselves to be
+  // cleared. We don't get an invalidation event here as the loop is gone, but
+  // we should still have to recompute the analysis.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MFPHandle, run(HasName("g"), _))
+      .InSequence(GSequence)
+      .WillOnce(Return(PreservedAnalyses::none()));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.g.0"), _, _))
+      .InSequence(GSequence)
+      .WillOnce(DoDefault());
+  FPM.addPass(MFPHandle.getPass());
+  FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>()));
+
+  MPM.addPass(createModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor(std::move(FPM)));
+
+  // Verify with a separate function pass run that we didn't mess up 'f's
+  // cache. No analysis runs should be necessary here.
+  MPM.addPass(createModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>())));
+
+  MPM.run(*M, MAM);
+}
+
+TEST_F(LoopPassManagerTest, ModulePassInvalidationOfLoopAnalyses) {
+  ModulePassManager MPM(true);
+  ::testing::InSequence MakeExpectationsSequenced;
+
+  // First, force the analysis result to be computed for each loop.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.g.0"), _, _));
+  MPM.addPass(createModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>())));
+
+  // Walking all the way out and all the way back in doesn't re-run the
+  // analysis.
+  MPM.addPass(createModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>())));
+
+  // But a module pass that doesn't preserve the actual mock loop analysis
+  // invalidates all the way down and forces recomputing.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MMPHandle, run(_, _)).WillOnce(InvokeWithoutArgs([] {
+    auto PA = getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses();
+    PA.preserve<FunctionAnalysisManagerModuleProxy>();
+    return PA;
+  }));
+  // All the loop analyses from both functions get invalidated before we
+  // recompute anything.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, invalidate(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  // On one loop, again skip the invalidation (as though we did an internal
+  // update).
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, invalidate(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Return(false));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, invalidate(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, invalidate(HasName("loop.g.0"), _, _));
+  // Now all but one of the loops gets re-analyzed.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.g.0"), _, _));
+  MPM.addPass(MMPHandle.getPass());
+  MPM.addPass(createModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>())));
+
+  // Verify that the cached values persist.
+  MPM.addPass(createModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>())));
+
+  // Now we fail to preserve the loop analysis and observe that the loop
+  // analyses are cleared (so no invalidation event) as the loops themselves
+  // are no longer valid.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MMPHandle, run(_, _)).WillOnce(InvokeWithoutArgs([] {
+    auto PA = PreservedAnalyses::none();
+    PA.preserve<FunctionAnalysisManagerModuleProxy>();
+    return PA;
+  }));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.g.0"), _, _));
+  MPM.addPass(MMPHandle.getPass());
+  MPM.addPass(createModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>())));
+
+  // Verify that the cached values persist.
+  MPM.addPass(createModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>())));
+
+  // Next, check that even if we preserve everything within the function itelf,
+  // if the function's module pass proxy isn't preserved and the potential set
+  // of functions changes, the clear reaches the loop analyses as well. This
+  // will again trigger re-runs but not invalidation events.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MMPHandle, run(_, _)).WillOnce(InvokeWithoutArgs([] {
+    auto PA = PreservedAnalyses::none();
+    PA.preserveSet<AllAnalysesOn<Function>>();
+    PA.preserveSet<AllAnalysesOn<Loop>>();
+    return PA;
+  }));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.g.0"), _, _));
+  MPM.addPass(MMPHandle.getPass());
+  MPM.addPass(createModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>())));
+
+  MPM.run(*M, MAM);
+}
+
+// Test that if any of the bundled analyses provided in the LPM's signature
+// become invalid, the analysis proxy itself becomes invalid and we clear all
+// loop analysis results.
+TEST_F(LoopPassManagerTest, InvalidationOfBundledAnalyses) {
+  ModulePassManager MPM(true);
+  FunctionPassManager FPM(true);
+  ::testing::InSequence MakeExpectationsSequenced;
+
+  // First, force the analysis result to be computed for each loop.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>()));
+
+  // No need to re-run if we require again from a fresh loop pass manager.
+  FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>()));
+
+  // Preserving everything but the loop analyses themselves results in
+  // invalidation and running.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MFPHandle, run(HasName("f"), _))
+      .WillOnce(Return(getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses()));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, invalidate(_, _, _)).Times(3);
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  FPM.addPass(MFPHandle.getPass());
+  FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>()));
+
+  // The rest don't invalidate analyses, they only trigger re-runs because we
+  // clear the cache completely.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MFPHandle, run(HasName("f"), _)).WillOnce(InvokeWithoutArgs([] {
+    auto PA = PreservedAnalyses::none();
+    // Not preserving `AAManager`.
+    PA.preserve<AssumptionAnalysis>();
+    PA.preserve<DominatorTreeAnalysis>();
+    PA.preserve<LoopAnalysis>();
+    PA.preserve<LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy>();
+    PA.preserve<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>();
+    return PA;
+  }));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  FPM.addPass(MFPHandle.getPass());
+  FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>()));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MFPHandle, run(HasName("f"), _)).WillOnce(InvokeWithoutArgs([] {
+    auto PA = PreservedAnalyses::none();
+    PA.preserve<AAManager>();
+    // Not preserving `AssumptionAnalysis`.
+    PA.preserve<DominatorTreeAnalysis>();
+    PA.preserve<LoopAnalysis>();
+    PA.preserve<LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy>();
+    PA.preserve<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>();
+    return PA;
+  }));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  FPM.addPass(MFPHandle.getPass());
+  FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>()));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MFPHandle, run(HasName("f"), _)).WillOnce(InvokeWithoutArgs([] {
+    auto PA = PreservedAnalyses::none();
+    PA.preserve<AAManager>();
+    PA.preserve<AssumptionAnalysis>();
+    // Not preserving `DominatorTreeAnalysis`.
+    PA.preserve<LoopAnalysis>();
+    PA.preserve<LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy>();
+    PA.preserve<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>();
+    return PA;
+  }));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  FPM.addPass(MFPHandle.getPass());
+  FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>()));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MFPHandle, run(HasName("f"), _)).WillOnce(InvokeWithoutArgs([] {
+    auto PA = PreservedAnalyses::none();
+    PA.preserve<AAManager>();
+    PA.preserve<AssumptionAnalysis>();
+    PA.preserve<DominatorTreeAnalysis>();
+    // Not preserving the `LoopAnalysis`.
+    PA.preserve<LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy>();
+    PA.preserve<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>();
+    return PA;
+  }));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  FPM.addPass(MFPHandle.getPass());
+  FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>()));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MFPHandle, run(HasName("f"), _)).WillOnce(InvokeWithoutArgs([] {
+    auto PA = PreservedAnalyses::none();
+    PA.preserve<AAManager>();
+    PA.preserve<AssumptionAnalysis>();
+    PA.preserve<DominatorTreeAnalysis>();
+    PA.preserve<LoopAnalysis>();
+    // Not preserving the `LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy`.
+    PA.preserve<ScalarEvolutionAnalysis>();
+    return PA;
+  }));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  FPM.addPass(MFPHandle.getPass());
+  FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>()));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MFPHandle, run(HasName("f"), _)).WillOnce(InvokeWithoutArgs([] {
+    auto PA = PreservedAnalyses::none();
+    PA.preserve<AAManager>();
+    PA.preserve<AssumptionAnalysis>();
+    PA.preserve<DominatorTreeAnalysis>();
+    PA.preserve<LoopAnalysis>();
+    PA.preserve<LoopAnalysisManagerFunctionProxy>();
+    // Not preserving `ScalarEvolutionAnalysis`.
+    return PA;
+  }));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  FPM.addPass(MFPHandle.getPass());
+  FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(
+      RequireAnalysisLoopPass<MockLoopAnalysisHandle::Analysis>()));
+
+  // After all the churn on 'f', we'll compute the loop analysis results for
+  // 'g' once with a requires pass and then run our mock pass over g a bunch
+  // but just get cached results each time.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.g.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MFPHandle, run(HasName("g"), _)).Times(7);
+
+  MPM.addPass(createModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor(std::move(FPM)));
+  MPM.run(*M, MAM);
+}
+
+TEST_F(LoopPassManagerTest, IndirectInvalidation) {
+  // We need two distinct analysis types and handles.
+  enum { A, B };
+  MockLoopAnalysisHandleTemplate<A> MLAHandleA;
+  MockLoopAnalysisHandleTemplate<B> MLAHandleB;
+  LAM.registerPass([&] { return MLAHandleA.getAnalysis(); });
+  LAM.registerPass([&] { return MLAHandleB.getAnalysis(); });
+  typedef decltype(MLAHandleA)::Analysis AnalysisA;
+  typedef decltype(MLAHandleB)::Analysis AnalysisB;
+
+  // Set up AnalysisA to depend on our AnalysisB. For testing purposes we just
+  // need to get the AnalysisB results in AnalysisA's run method and check if
+  // AnalysisB gets invalidated in AnalysisA's invalidate method.
+  ON_CALL(MLAHandleA, run(_, _, _))
+      .WillByDefault(Invoke([&](Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                                LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR) {
+        (void)AM.getResult<AnalysisB>(L, AR);
+        return MLAHandleA.getResult();
+      }));
+  ON_CALL(MLAHandleA, invalidate(_, _, _))
+      .WillByDefault(Invoke([](Loop &L, const PreservedAnalyses &PA,
+                               LoopAnalysisManager::Invalidator &Inv) {
+        auto PAC = PA.getChecker<AnalysisA>();
+        return !(PAC.preserved() || PAC.preservedSet<AllAnalysesOn<Loop>>()) ||
+               Inv.invalidate<AnalysisB>(L, PA);
+      }));
+
+  ::testing::InSequence MakeExpectationsSequenced;
+
+  // Compute the analyses across all of 'f' first.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandleA, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandleB, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandleA, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandleB, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandleA, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandleB, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+
+  // Now we invalidate AnalysisB (but not AnalysisA) for one of the loops and
+  // preserve everything for the rest. This in turn triggers that one loop to
+  // recompute both AnalysisB *and* AnalysisA if indirect invalidation is
+  // working.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(InvokeWithoutArgs([] {
+        auto PA = getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses();
+        // Specifically preserve AnalysisA so that it would survive if it
+        // didn't depend on AnalysisB.
+        PA.preserve<AnalysisA>();
+        return PA;
+      }));
+  // It happens that AnalysisB is invalidated first. That shouldn't matter
+  // though, and we should still call AnalysisA's invalidation.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandleB, invalidate(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandleA, invalidate(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke([](Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                          LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &) {
+        (void)AM.getResult<AnalysisA>(L, AR);
+        return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+      }));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandleA, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandleB, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  // The rest of the loops should run and get cached results.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke([](Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                                LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &) {
+        (void)AM.getResult<AnalysisA>(L, AR);
+        return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+      }));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke([](Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                                LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &) {
+        (void)AM.getResult<AnalysisA>(L, AR);
+        return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+      }));
 
-    FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(std::move(LPM)));
-  }
+  // The run over 'g' should be boring, with us just computing the analyses once
+  // up front and then running loop passes and getting cached results.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandleA, run(HasName("loop.g.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandleB, run(HasName("loop.g.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.g.0"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke([](Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                                LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &) {
+        (void)AM.getResult<AnalysisA>(L, AR);
+        return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+      }));
+
+  // Build the pipeline and run it.
+  ModulePassManager MPM(true);
+  FunctionPassManager FPM(true);
+  FPM.addPass(
+      createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(RequireAnalysisLoopPass<AnalysisA>()));
+  LoopPassManager LPM(true);
+  LPM.addPass(MLPHandle.getPass());
+  LPM.addPass(MLPHandle.getPass());
+  MPM.addPass(createModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor(std::move(FPM)));
+  MPM.run(*M, MAM);
 
-  // Only use cached analyses.
-  std::vector<StringRef> VisitedLoops2;
-  int AnalyzedBlockCount2 = 0;
-  {
-    LoopPassManager LPM;
-    LPM.addPass(TestLoopInvalidatingPass("loop.g.0"));
-    LPM.addPass(TestLoopPass(VisitedLoops2, AnalyzedBlockCount2,
-                             /*OnlyUseCachedResults=*/true));
+TEST_F(LoopPassManagerTest, IndirectOuterPassInvalidation) {
+  typedef decltype(MLAHandle)::Analysis LoopAnalysis;
+
+  MockFunctionAnalysisHandle MFAHandle;
+  FAM.registerPass([&] { return MFAHandle.getAnalysis(); });
+  typedef decltype(MFAHandle)::Analysis FunctionAnalysis;
+
+  // Set up the loop analysis to depend on both the function and module
+  // analysis.
+  ON_CALL(MLAHandle, run(_, _, _))
+      .WillByDefault(Invoke([&](Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                                LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR) {
+        auto &FAMP = AM.getResult<FunctionAnalysisManagerLoopProxy>(L, AR);
+        auto &FAM = FAMP.getManager();
+        Function &F = *L.getHeader()->getParent();
+        if (auto *FA = FAM.getCachedResult<FunctionAnalysis>(F))
+          FAMP.registerOuterAnalysisInvalidation<FunctionAnalysis,
+                                                 LoopAnalysis>();
+        return MLAHandle.getResult();
+      }));
+
+  ::testing::InSequence MakeExpectationsSequenced;
+
+  // Compute the analyses across all of 'f' first.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MFPHandle, run(HasName("f"), _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke([](Function &F, FunctionAnalysisManager &AM) {
+        // Force the computing of the function analysis so it is available in
+        // this function.
+        (void)AM.getResult<FunctionAnalysis>(F);
+        return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+      }));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+
+  // Now invalidate the function analysis but preserve the loop analyses.
+  // This should trigger immediate invalidation of the loop analyses, despite
+  // the fact that they were preserved.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MFPHandle, run(HasName("f"), _)).WillOnce(InvokeWithoutArgs([] {
+    auto PA = getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses();
+    PA.preserveSet<AllAnalysesOn<Loop>>();
+    return PA;
+  }));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, invalidate(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, invalidate(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, invalidate(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+
+  // And re-running a requires pass recomputes them.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+
+  // When we run over 'g' we don't populate the cache with the function
+  // analysis.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MFPHandle, run(HasName("g"), _))
+      .WillOnce(Return(PreservedAnalyses::all()));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.g.0"), _, _));
+
+  // Which means that no extra invalidation occurs and cached values are used.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MFPHandle, run(HasName("g"), _)).WillOnce(InvokeWithoutArgs([] {
+    auto PA = getLoopPassPreservedAnalyses();
+    PA.preserveSet<AllAnalysesOn<Loop>>();
+    return PA;
+  }));
 
-    FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(std::move(LPM)));
-  }
+  // Build the pipeline and run it.
+  ModulePassManager MPM(true);
+  FunctionPassManager FPM(true);
+  FPM.addPass(MFPHandle.getPass());
+  FPM.addPass(
+      createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(RequireAnalysisLoopPass<LoopAnalysis>()));
+  FPM.addPass(MFPHandle.getPass());
+  FPM.addPass(
+      createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(RequireAnalysisLoopPass<LoopAnalysis>()));
+  MPM.addPass(createModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor(std::move(FPM)));
+  MPM.run(*M, MAM);
+}
+
+TEST_F(LoopPassManagerTest, LoopChildInsertion) {
+  // Super boring module with three loops in a single loop nest.
+  M = parseIR(Context, "define void @f() {\n"
+                       "entry:\n"
+                       "  br label %loop.0\n"
+                       "loop.0:\n"
+                       "  br i1 undef, label %loop.0.0, label %end\n"
+                       "loop.0.0:\n"
+                       "  br i1 undef, label %loop.0.0, label %loop.0.1\n"
+                       "loop.0.1:\n"
+                       "  br i1 undef, label %loop.0.1, label %loop.0.2\n"
+                       "loop.0.2:\n"
+                       "  br i1 undef, label %loop.0.2, label %loop.0\n"
+                       "end:\n"
+                       "  ret void\n"
+                       "}\n");
+
+  // Build up variables referring into the IR so we can rewrite it below
+  // easily.
+  Function &F = *M->begin();
+  ASSERT_THAT(F, HasName("f"));
+  auto BBI = F.begin();
+  BasicBlock &EntryBB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(EntryBB, HasName("entry"));
+  BasicBlock &Loop0BB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(Loop0BB, HasName("loop.0"));
+  BasicBlock &Loop00BB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(Loop00BB, HasName("loop.0.0"));
+  BasicBlock &Loop01BB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(Loop01BB, HasName("loop.0.1"));
+  BasicBlock &Loop02BB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(Loop02BB, HasName("loop.0.2"));
+  BasicBlock &EndBB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(EndBB, HasName("end"));
+  ASSERT_THAT(BBI, F.end());
+
+  // Build the pass managers and register our pipeline. We build a single loop
+  // pass pipeline consisting of three mock pass runs over each loop. After
+  // this we run both domtree and loop verification passes to make sure that
+  // the IR remained valid during our mutations.
+  ModulePassManager MPM(true);
+  FunctionPassManager FPM(true);
+  LoopPassManager LPM(true);
+  LPM.addPass(MLPHandle.getPass());
+  LPM.addPass(MLPHandle.getPass());
+  LPM.addPass(MLPHandle.getPass());
+  FPM.addPass(DominatorTreeVerifierPass());
+  FPM.addPass(LoopVerifierPass());
+  MPM.addPass(createModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor(std::move(FPM)));
+
+  // All the visit orders are deterministic, so we use simple fully order
+  // expectations.
+  ::testing::InSequence MakeExpectationsSequenced;
+
+  // We run loop passes three times over each of the loops.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+
+  // When running over the middle loop, the second run inserts two new child
+  // loops, inserting them and itself into the worklist.
+  BasicBlock *NewLoop010BB;
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke([&](Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                           LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR,
+                           LPMUpdater &Updater) {
+        auto *NewLoop = new Loop();
+        L.addChildLoop(NewLoop);
+        NewLoop010BB = BasicBlock::Create(Context, "loop.0.1.0", &F, &Loop02BB);
+        BranchInst::Create(&Loop01BB, NewLoop010BB,
+                           UndefValue::get(Type::getInt1Ty(Context)),
+                           NewLoop010BB);
+        Loop01BB.getTerminator()->replaceUsesOfWith(&Loop01BB, NewLoop010BB);
+        AR.DT.addNewBlock(NewLoop010BB, &Loop01BB);
+        NewLoop->addBasicBlockToLoop(NewLoop010BB, AR.LI);
+        Updater.addChildLoops({NewLoop});
+        return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+      }));
+
+  // We should immediately drop down to fully visit the new inner loop.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1.0"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  // After visiting the inner loop, we should re-visit the second loop
+  // reflecting its new loop nest structure.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  // In the second run over the middle loop after we've visited the new child,
+  // we add another child to check that we can repeatedly add children, and add
+  // children to a loop that already has children.
+  BasicBlock *NewLoop011BB;
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke([&](Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                           LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR,
+                           LPMUpdater &Updater) {
+        auto *NewLoop = new Loop();
+        L.addChildLoop(NewLoop);
+        NewLoop011BB = BasicBlock::Create(Context, "loop.0.1.1", &F, &Loop02BB);
+        BranchInst::Create(&Loop01BB, NewLoop011BB,
+                           UndefValue::get(Type::getInt1Ty(Context)),
+                           NewLoop011BB);
+        NewLoop010BB->getTerminator()->replaceUsesOfWith(&Loop01BB,
+                                                         NewLoop011BB);
+        AR.DT.addNewBlock(NewLoop011BB, NewLoop010BB);
+        NewLoop->addBasicBlockToLoop(NewLoop011BB, AR.LI);
+        Updater.addChildLoops({NewLoop});
+        return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+      }));
+
+  // Again, we should immediately drop down to visit the new, unvisited child
+  // loop. We don't need to revisit the other child though.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1.1"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1.1"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  // And now we should pop back up to the second loop and do a full pipeline of
+  // three passes on its current form.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(3)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.2"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.2"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.2"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  // Now that all the expected actions are registered, run the pipeline over
+  // our module. All of our expectations are verified when the test finishes.
+  MPM.run(*M, MAM);
 
+TEST_F(LoopPassManagerTest, LoopPeerInsertion) {
+  // Super boring module with two loop nests and loop nest with two child
+  // loops.
+  M = parseIR(Context, "define void @f() {\n"
+                       "entry:\n"
+                       "  br label %loop.0\n"
+                       "loop.0:\n"
+                       "  br i1 undef, label %loop.0.0, label %loop.2\n"
+                       "loop.0.0:\n"
+                       "  br i1 undef, label %loop.0.0, label %loop.0.2\n"
+                       "loop.0.2:\n"
+                       "  br i1 undef, label %loop.0.2, label %loop.0\n"
+                       "loop.2:\n"
+                       "  br i1 undef, label %loop.2, label %end\n"
+                       "end:\n"
+                       "  ret void\n"
+                       "}\n");
+
+  // Build up variables referring into the IR so we can rewrite it below
+  // easily.
+  Function &F = *M->begin();
+  ASSERT_THAT(F, HasName("f"));
+  auto BBI = F.begin();
+  BasicBlock &EntryBB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(EntryBB, HasName("entry"));
+  BasicBlock &Loop0BB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(Loop0BB, HasName("loop.0"));
+  BasicBlock &Loop00BB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(Loop00BB, HasName("loop.0.0"));
+  BasicBlock &Loop02BB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(Loop02BB, HasName("loop.0.2"));
+  BasicBlock &Loop2BB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(Loop2BB, HasName("loop.2"));
+  BasicBlock &EndBB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(EndBB, HasName("end"));
+  ASSERT_THAT(BBI, F.end());
+  Constant *Undefi1 = UndefValue::get(Type::getInt1Ty(Context));
+
+  // Build the pass managers and register our pipeline. We build a single loop
+  // pass pipeline consisting of three mock pass runs over each loop. After
+  // this we run both domtree and loop verification passes to make sure that
+  // the IR remained valid during our mutations.
+  ModulePassManager MPM(true);
+  FunctionPassManager FPM(true);
+  LoopPassManager LPM(true);
+  LPM.addPass(MLPHandle.getPass());
+  LPM.addPass(MLPHandle.getPass());
+  LPM.addPass(MLPHandle.getPass());
+  FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(std::move(LPM)));
+  FPM.addPass(DominatorTreeVerifierPass());
+  FPM.addPass(LoopVerifierPass());
   MPM.addPass(createModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor(std::move(FPM)));
+
+  // All the visit orders are deterministic, so we use simple fully order
+  // expectations.
+  ::testing::InSequence MakeExpectationsSequenced;
+
+  // We run loop passes three times over each of the loops.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+
+  // On the second run, we insert a sibling loop.
+  BasicBlock *NewLoop01BB;
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke([&](Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                           LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR,
+                           LPMUpdater &Updater) {
+        auto *NewLoop = new Loop();
+        L.getParentLoop()->addChildLoop(NewLoop);
+        NewLoop01BB = BasicBlock::Create(Context, "loop.0.1", &F, &Loop02BB);
+        BranchInst::Create(&Loop02BB, NewLoop01BB, Undefi1, NewLoop01BB);
+        Loop00BB.getTerminator()->replaceUsesOfWith(&Loop02BB, NewLoop01BB);
+        auto *NewDTNode = AR.DT.addNewBlock(NewLoop01BB, &Loop00BB);
+        AR.DT.changeImmediateDominator(AR.DT[&Loop02BB], NewDTNode);
+        NewLoop->addBasicBlockToLoop(NewLoop01BB, AR.LI);
+        Updater.addSiblingLoops({NewLoop});
+        return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+      }));
+  // We finish processing this loop as sibling loops don't perturb the
+  // postorder walk.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  // We visit the inserted sibling next.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.2"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.2"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.2"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  // Next, on the third pass run on the last inner loop we add more new
+  // siblings, more than one, and one with nested child loops. By doing this at
+  // the end we make sure that edge case works well.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.2"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke([&](Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                           LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR,
+                           LPMUpdater &Updater) {
+        Loop *NewLoops[] = {new Loop(), new Loop(), new Loop()};
+        L.getParentLoop()->addChildLoop(NewLoops[0]);
+        L.getParentLoop()->addChildLoop(NewLoops[1]);
+        NewLoops[1]->addChildLoop(NewLoops[2]);
+        auto *NewLoop03BB =
+            BasicBlock::Create(Context, "loop.0.3", &F, &Loop2BB);
+        auto *NewLoop04BB =
+            BasicBlock::Create(Context, "loop.0.4", &F, &Loop2BB);
+        auto *NewLoop040BB =
+            BasicBlock::Create(Context, "loop.0.4.0", &F, &Loop2BB);
+        Loop02BB.getTerminator()->replaceUsesOfWith(&Loop0BB, NewLoop03BB);
+        BranchInst::Create(NewLoop04BB, NewLoop03BB, Undefi1, NewLoop03BB);
+        BranchInst::Create(&Loop0BB, NewLoop040BB, Undefi1, NewLoop04BB);
+        BranchInst::Create(NewLoop04BB, NewLoop040BB, Undefi1, NewLoop040BB);
+        AR.DT.addNewBlock(NewLoop03BB, &Loop02BB);
+        AR.DT.addNewBlock(NewLoop04BB, NewLoop03BB);
+        AR.DT.addNewBlock(NewLoop040BB, NewLoop04BB);
+        NewLoops[0]->addBasicBlockToLoop(NewLoop03BB, AR.LI);
+        NewLoops[1]->addBasicBlockToLoop(NewLoop04BB, AR.LI);
+        NewLoops[2]->addBasicBlockToLoop(NewLoop040BB, AR.LI);
+        Updater.addSiblingLoops({NewLoops[0], NewLoops[1]});
+        return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+      }));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.3"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.3"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.3"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  // Note that we need to visit the inner loop of this added sibling before the
+  // sibling itself!
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.4.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.4.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.4.0"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.4"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.4"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.4"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  // And only now do we visit the outermost loop of the nest.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  // On the second pass, we add sibling loops which become new top-level loops.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke([&](Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                           LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR,
+                           LPMUpdater &Updater) {
+        auto *NewLoop = new Loop();
+        AR.LI.addTopLevelLoop(NewLoop);
+        auto *NewLoop1BB = BasicBlock::Create(Context, "loop.1", &F, &Loop2BB);
+        BranchInst::Create(&Loop2BB, NewLoop1BB, Undefi1, NewLoop1BB);
+        Loop0BB.getTerminator()->replaceUsesOfWith(&Loop2BB, NewLoop1BB);
+        auto *NewDTNode = AR.DT.addNewBlock(NewLoop1BB, &Loop0BB);
+        AR.DT.changeImmediateDominator(AR.DT[&Loop2BB], NewDTNode);
+        NewLoop->addBasicBlockToLoop(NewLoop1BB, AR.LI);
+        Updater.addSiblingLoops({NewLoop});
+        return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+      }));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.1"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.1"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.2"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.2"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.2"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  // Now that all the expected actions are registered, run the pipeline over
+  // our module. All of our expectations are verified when the test finishes.
   MPM.run(*M, MAM);
+}
+
+TEST_F(LoopPassManagerTest, LoopDeletion) {
+  // Build a module with a single loop nest that contains one outer loop with
+  // three subloops, and one of those with its own subloop. We will
+  // incrementally delete all of these to test different deletion scenarios.
+  M = parseIR(Context, "define void @f() {\n"
+                       "entry:\n"
+                       "  br label %loop.0\n"
+                       "loop.0:\n"
+                       "  br i1 undef, label %loop.0.0, label %end\n"
+                       "loop.0.0:\n"
+                       "  br i1 undef, label %loop.0.0, label %loop.0.1\n"
+                       "loop.0.1:\n"
+                       "  br i1 undef, label %loop.0.1, label %loop.0.2\n"
+                       "loop.0.2:\n"
+                       "  br i1 undef, label %loop.0.2.0, label %loop.0\n"
+                       "loop.0.2.0:\n"
+                       "  br i1 undef, label %loop.0.2.0, label %loop.0.2\n"
+                       "end:\n"
+                       "  ret void\n"
+                       "}\n");
 
-  StringRef ExpectedLoops[] = {"loop.0.0", "loop.0.1", "loop.0", "loop.g.0"};
+  // Build up variables referring into the IR so we can rewrite it below
+  // easily.
+  Function &F = *M->begin();
+  ASSERT_THAT(F, HasName("f"));
+  auto BBI = F.begin();
+  BasicBlock &EntryBB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(EntryBB, HasName("entry"));
+  BasicBlock &Loop0BB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(Loop0BB, HasName("loop.0"));
+  BasicBlock &Loop00BB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(Loop00BB, HasName("loop.0.0"));
+  BasicBlock &Loop01BB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(Loop01BB, HasName("loop.0.1"));
+  BasicBlock &Loop02BB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(Loop02BB, HasName("loop.0.2"));
+  BasicBlock &Loop020BB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(Loop020BB, HasName("loop.0.2.0"));
+  BasicBlock &EndBB = *BBI++;
+  ASSERT_THAT(EndBB, HasName("end"));
+  ASSERT_THAT(BBI, F.end());
+  Constant *Undefi1 = UndefValue::get(Type::getInt1Ty(Context));
+
+  // Helper to do the actual deletion of a loop. We directly encode this here
+  // to isolate ourselves from the rest of LLVM and for simplicity. Here we can
+  // egregiously cheat based on knowledge of the test case. For example, we
+  // have no PHI nodes and there is always a single i-dom.
+  auto DeleteLoopBlocks = [](Loop &L, BasicBlock &IDomBB,
+                             LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR,
+                             LPMUpdater &Updater) {
+    for (BasicBlock *LoopBB : L.blocks()) {
+      SmallVector<DomTreeNode *, 4> ChildNodes(AR.DT[LoopBB]->begin(),
+                                               AR.DT[LoopBB]->end());
+      for (DomTreeNode *ChildNode : ChildNodes)
+        AR.DT.changeImmediateDominator(ChildNode, AR.DT[&IDomBB]);
+      AR.DT.eraseNode(LoopBB);
+      LoopBB->dropAllReferences();
+    }
+    SmallVector<BasicBlock *, 4> LoopBBs(L.block_begin(), L.block_end());
+    Updater.markLoopAsDeleted(L);
+    AR.LI.markAsRemoved(&L);
+    for (BasicBlock *LoopBB : LoopBBs)
+      LoopBB->eraseFromParent();
+  };
 
-  // Validate the counters and order of loops visited.
-  // loop.0 has 3 blocks whereas loop.0.0, loop.0.1, and loop.g.0 each have 1.
-  EXPECT_N_ELEMENTS_EQ(4, ExpectedLoops, VisitedLoops1);
-  EXPECT_EQ(6, AnalyzedBlockCount1);
+  // Build up the pass managers.
+  ModulePassManager MPM(true);
+  FunctionPassManager FPM(true);
+  // We run several loop pass pipelines across the loop nest, but they all take
+  // the same form of three mock pass runs in a loop pipeline followed by
+  // domtree and loop verification. We use a lambda to stamp this out each
+  // time.
+  auto AddLoopPipelineAndVerificationPasses = [&] {
+    LoopPassManager LPM(true);
+    LPM.addPass(MLPHandle.getPass());
+    LPM.addPass(MLPHandle.getPass());
+    LPM.addPass(MLPHandle.getPass());
+    FPM.addPass(createFunctionToLoopPassAdaptor(std::move(LPM)));
+    FPM.addPass(DominatorTreeVerifierPass());
+    FPM.addPass(LoopVerifierPass());
+  };
 
-  EXPECT_N_ELEMENTS_EQ(4, ExpectedLoops, VisitedLoops2);
-  // The block from loop.g.0 won't be counted, since it wasn't cached.
-  EXPECT_EQ(5, AnalyzedBlockCount2);
+  // All the visit orders are deterministic so we use simple fully order
+  // expectations.
+  ::testing::InSequence MakeExpectationsSequenced;
+
+  // We run the loop pipeline with three passes over each of the loops. When
+  // running over the middle loop, the second pass in the pipeline deletes it.
+  // This should prevent the third pass from visiting it but otherwise leave
+  // the process unimpacted.
+  AddLoopPipelineAndVerificationPasses();
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.1"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(
+          Invoke([&](Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                     LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &Updater) {
+            AR.SE.forgetLoop(&L);
+            Loop00BB.getTerminator()->replaceUsesOfWith(&Loop01BB, &Loop02BB);
+            DeleteLoopBlocks(L, Loop00BB, AR, Updater);
+            return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+          }));
 
-  // The first LPM runs the loop analysis for all four loops, the second uses
-  // cached results for everything.
-  EXPECT_EQ(4, LoopAnalysisRuns);
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.2.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.2.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.2.0"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.2"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.2"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.2"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  // Run the loop pipeline again. This time we delete the last loop, which
+  // contains a nested loop within it, and we reuse its inner loop object to
+  // insert a new loop into the nest. This makes sure that we don't reuse
+  // cached analysis results for loop objects when removed just because their
+  // pointers match, and that we can handle nested loop deletion.
+  AddLoopPipelineAndVerificationPasses();
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(3)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.2.0"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(3)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.2"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  BasicBlock *NewLoop03BB;
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.2"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(
+          Invoke([&](Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                     LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &Updater) {
+            // Delete the inner loop first. we also do this manually because we
+            // want to preserve the loop object and reuse it.
+            AR.SE.forgetLoop(*L.begin());
+            Loop02BB.getTerminator()->replaceUsesOfWith(&Loop020BB, &Loop02BB);
+            assert(std::next((*L.begin())->block_begin()) ==
+                       (*L.begin())->block_end() &&
+                   "There should only be one block.");
+            assert(AR.DT[&Loop020BB]->getNumChildren() == 0 &&
+                   "Cannot have children in the domtree!");
+            AR.DT.eraseNode(&Loop020BB);
+            Updater.markLoopAsDeleted(**L.begin());
+            AR.LI.removeBlock(&Loop020BB);
+            auto *OldL = L.removeChildLoop(L.begin());
+            Loop020BB.eraseFromParent();
+
+            auto *ParentL = L.getParentLoop();
+            AR.SE.forgetLoop(&L);
+            Loop00BB.getTerminator()->replaceUsesOfWith(&Loop02BB, &Loop0BB);
+            DeleteLoopBlocks(L, Loop00BB, AR, Updater);
+
+            // Now insert a new sibling loop, reusing a loop pointer.
+            ParentL->addChildLoop(OldL);
+            NewLoop03BB = BasicBlock::Create(Context, "loop.0.3", &F, &EndBB);
+            BranchInst::Create(&Loop0BB, NewLoop03BB, Undefi1, NewLoop03BB);
+            Loop00BB.getTerminator()->replaceUsesOfWith(&Loop0BB, NewLoop03BB);
+            AR.DT.addNewBlock(NewLoop03BB, &Loop00BB);
+            OldL->addBasicBlockToLoop(NewLoop03BB, AR.LI);
+            Updater.addSiblingLoops({OldL});
+            return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+          }));
+
+  // To respect our inner-to-outer traversal order, we must visit the
+  // newly-inserted sibling of the loop we just deleted before we visit the
+  // outer loop. When we do so, this must compute a fresh analysis result, even
+  // though our new loop has the same pointer value as the loop we deleted.
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.3"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLAHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.3"), _, _));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.3"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(2)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _, _))
+      .Times(3)
+      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+
+  // In the final loop pipeline run we delete every loop, including the last
+  // loop of the nest. We do this again in the second pass in the pipeline, and
+  // as a consequence we never make it to three runs on any loop. We also cover
+  // deleting multiple loops in a single pipeline, deleting the first loop and
+  // deleting the (last) top level loop.
+  AddLoopPipelineAndVerificationPasses();
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(
+          Invoke([&](Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                     LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &Updater) {
+            AR.SE.forgetLoop(&L);
+            Loop0BB.getTerminator()->replaceUsesOfWith(&Loop00BB, NewLoop03BB);
+            DeleteLoopBlocks(L, Loop0BB, AR, Updater);
+            return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+          }));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.3"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0.3"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(
+          Invoke([&](Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                     LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &Updater) {
+            AR.SE.forgetLoop(&L);
+            Loop0BB.getTerminator()->replaceUsesOfWith(NewLoop03BB, &Loop0BB);
+            DeleteLoopBlocks(L, Loop0BB, AR, Updater);
+            return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+          }));
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(Invoke(getLoopAnalysisResult));
+  EXPECT_CALL(MLPHandle, run(HasName("loop.0"), _, _, _))
+      .WillOnce(
+          Invoke([&](Loop &L, LoopAnalysisManager &AM,
+                     LoopStandardAnalysisResults &AR, LPMUpdater &Updater) {
+            AR.SE.forgetLoop(&L);
+            EntryBB.getTerminator()->replaceUsesOfWith(&Loop0BB, &EndBB);
+            DeleteLoopBlocks(L, EntryBB, AR, Updater);
+            return PreservedAnalyses::all();
+          }));
+
+  // Add the function pass pipeline now that it is fully built up and run it
+  // over the module's one function.
+  MPM.addPass(createModuleToFunctionPassAdaptor(std::move(FPM)));
+  MPM.run(*M, MAM);
 }
 }