Updated for comments.

Add env variable to enable profiling, better naming

In D93055#2446636, @JonChesterfield wrote:

Interesting. Not sure about the dependency on an llvm library, though maybe guarding it makes that acceptable.

The DIY equivalent we've been using is functionally similar. Implemented at trace.h in as unintrusive a fashion as I could manage.

In addition to the time taken by calls, maintaining a log of the arguments to the functions (and the return value) has been very helpful as a debugging hack. The proper thing to do is probably to write said data to an in memory ring buffer. The above header just splats it to stdout.

Does this clang-format nicely? I'd expect to have to spell it TIMESCOPE(); or similar.

Update for comments

In D92779#2437765, @jdoerfert wrote:

I suspect this is copied from one of the other projects? If so, LGTM.

Update to correctly handle inputs to sequential regions.

Simplify check for unmergable regions, add flag for extractor sinking in OMPIRBuilder outlining.

I see your point @vsk. I have added a unit test. Anything else missing for acceptance?

Add unit test

In D90689#2371522, @vsk wrote:

In the example, what pass/component is responsible for creating %1 = bitcast i32* %0 to i8*?

If it's CodeExtractor itself, it would be nice to solve the problem earlier by getting rid of bitcasts which only exist to wire up lifetime markers. I tried doing that in 26ee8aff2, but had to revert (099bffe7f) because llvm doesn't support specializing its lifetime intrinsics on opaque pointer types. That's a bug, I think: if we fix that, perhaps this whole problem goes away.

OTOH, if this %1 = bitcast i32* %0 to i8* value comes from a frontend or another pass, I think the approach taken in this patch is reasonable. Please add a test (perhaps in the CodeExtractor unittest).

Format better the patch message

Amend commit message

Update commit message

Update for comments (for real)

Update for comments

Fix clang-tidy complaints

Fix for .ll files appearing as binary

Updates per comments

Update for comments

Update diff for linting warning?

Update for comments

In D83635#2146375, @hfinkel wrote:

It's great that you're working on this. It's very important that we allow people to write code, structured and decomposed in a way that makes sense from an engineering and maintenance perspective, and have the compiler combine things later to avoid unnecessary overhead. This is just as much true for expressions of parallelism as it is for other aspects of the code.

Update for comments

Update for latest comment

Update for latest nit comment

Note I also update the regression test Transforms/OpenMP/parallel_deletion.ll since the merging optimization, which applies after deletion, changes the output

Revert changes to regression tests

Update regression tests under Transforms/Attributor/IPConstantProp

Update regression test

Update for comment

In D83370#2138377, @lebedev.ri wrote:

I may be missing context, but this may be missing some wording.
*Why* should they not be in the callgraph?