third_party/llvm-7.0/llvm/docs/Frontend/PerformanceTips.rst - SwiftShader - Git at Google

 =====================================
 Performance Tips for Frontend Authors
 =====================================

 .. contents::
    :local:
    :depth: 2

 Abstract
 ========

 The intended audience of this document is developers of language frontends
 targeting LLVM IR. This document is home to a collection of tips on how to
 generate IR that optimizes well.

 IR Best Practices
 =================

 As with any optimizer, LLVM has its strengths and weaknesses.  In some cases,
 surprisingly small changes in the source IR can have a large effect on the
 generated code.

 Beyond the specific items on the list below, it's worth noting that the most
 mature frontend for LLVM is Clang.  As a result, the further your IR gets from what Clang might emit, the less likely it is to be effectively optimized.  It
 can often be useful to write a quick C program with the semantics you're trying
 to model and see what decisions Clang's IRGen makes about what IR to emit.
 Studying Clang's CodeGen directory can also be a good source of ideas.  Note
 that Clang and LLVM are explicitly version locked so you'll need to make sure
 you're using a Clang built from the same svn revision or release as the LLVM
 library you're using.  As always, it's *strongly* recommended that you track
 tip of tree development, particularly during bring up of a new project.

 The Basics
 ^^^^^^^^^^^

 #. Make sure that your Modules contain both a data layout specification and
    target triple. Without these pieces, non of the target specific optimization
    will be enabled.  This can have a major effect on the generated code quality.

 #. For each function or global emitted, use the most private linkage type
    possible (private, internal or linkonce_odr preferably).  Doing so will
    make LLVM's inter-procedural optimizations much more effective.

 #. Avoid high in-degree basic blocks (e.g. basic blocks with dozens or hundreds
    of predecessors).  Among other issues, the register allocator is known to
    perform badly with confronted with such structures.  The only exception to
    this guidance is that a unified return block with high in-degree is fine.

 Use of allocas
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 An alloca instruction can be used to represent a function scoped stack slot,
 but can also represent dynamic frame expansion.  When representing function
 scoped variables or locations, placing alloca instructions at the beginning of
 the entry block should be preferred.   In particular, place them before any
 call instructions. Call instructions might get inlined and replaced with
 multiple basic blocks. The end result is that a following alloca instruction
 would no longer be in the entry basic block afterward.

 The SROA (Scalar Replacement Of Aggregates) and Mem2Reg passes only attempt
 to eliminate alloca instructions that are in the entry basic block.  Given
 SSA is the canonical form expected by much of the optimizer; if allocas can
 not be eliminated by Mem2Reg or SROA, the optimizer is likely to be less
 effective than it could be.

 Avoid loads and stores of large aggregate type
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 LLVM currently does not optimize well loads and stores of large :ref:`aggregate
 types <t_aggregate>` (i.e. structs and arrays).  As an alternative, consider
 loading individual fields from memory.

 Aggregates that are smaller than the largest (performant) load or store
 instruction supported by the targeted hardware are well supported.  These can
 be an effective way to represent collections of small packed fields.

 Prefer zext over sext when legal
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 On some architectures (X86_64 is one), sign extension can involve an extra
 instruction whereas zero extension can be folded into a load.  LLVM will try to
 replace a sext with a zext when it can be proven safe, but if you have
 information in your source language about the range of a integer value, it can
 be profitable to use a zext rather than a sext.

 Alternatively, you can :ref:`specify the range of the value using metadata
 <range-metadata>` and LLVM can do the sext to zext conversion for you.

 Zext GEP indices to machine register width
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 Internally, LLVM often promotes the width of GEP indices to machine register
 width.  When it does so, it will default to using sign extension (sext)
 operations for safety.  If your source language provides information about
 the range of the index, you may wish to manually extend indices to machine
 register width using a zext instruction.

 When to specify alignment
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 LLVM will always generate correct code if you don’t specify alignment, but may
 generate inefficient code.  For example, if you are targeting MIPS (or older
 ARM ISAs) then the hardware does not handle unaligned loads and stores, and
 so you will enter a trap-and-emulate path if you do a load or store with
 lower-than-natural alignment.  To avoid this, LLVM will emit a slower
 sequence of loads, shifts and masks (or load-right + load-left on MIPS) for
 all cases where the load / store does not have a sufficiently high alignment
 in the IR.

 The alignment is used to guarantee the alignment on allocas and globals,
 though in most cases this is unnecessary (most targets have a sufficiently
 high default alignment that they’ll be fine).  It is also used to provide a
 contract to the back end saying ‘either this load/store has this alignment, or
 it is undefined behavior’.  This means that the back end is free to emit
 instructions that rely on that alignment (and mid-level optimizers are free to
 perform transforms that require that alignment).  For x86, it doesn’t make
 much difference, as almost all instructions are alignment-independent.  For
 MIPS, it can make a big difference.

 Note that if your loads and stores are atomic, the backend will be unable to
 lower an under aligned access into a sequence of natively aligned accesses.
 As a result, alignment is mandatory for atomic loads and stores.

 Other Things to Consider
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 #. Use ptrtoint/inttoptr sparingly (they interfere with pointer aliasing
    analysis), prefer GEPs

 #. Prefer globals over inttoptr of a constant address - this gives you
    dereferencability information.  In MCJIT, use getSymbolAddress to provide
    actual address.

 #. Be wary of ordered and atomic memory operations.  They are hard to optimize
    and may not be well optimized by the current optimizer.  Depending on your
    source language, you may consider using fences instead.

 #. If calling a function which is known to throw an exception (unwind), use
    an invoke with a normal destination which contains an unreachable
    instruction.  This form conveys to the optimizer that the call returns
    abnormally.  For an invoke which neither returns normally or requires unwind
    code in the current function, you can use a noreturn call instruction if
    desired.  This is generally not required because the optimizer will convert
    an invoke with an unreachable unwind destination to a call instruction.

 #. Use profile metadata to indicate statically known cold paths, even if
    dynamic profiling information is not available.  This can make a large
    difference in code placement and thus the performance of tight loops.

 #. When generating code for loops, try to avoid terminating the header block of
    the loop earlier than necessary.  If the terminator of the loop header
    block is a loop exiting conditional branch, the effectiveness of LICM will
    be limited for loads not in the header.  (This is due to the fact that LLVM
    may not know such a load is safe to speculatively execute and thus can't
    lift an otherwise loop invariant load unless it can prove the exiting
    condition is not taken.)  It can be profitable, in some cases, to emit such
    instructions into the header even if they are not used along a rarely
    executed path that exits the loop.  This guidance specifically does not
    apply if the condition which terminates the loop header is itself invariant,
    or can be easily discharged by inspecting the loop index variables.

 #. In hot loops, consider duplicating instructions from small basic blocks
    which end in highly predictable terminators into their successor blocks.
    If a hot successor block contains instructions which can be vectorized
    with the duplicated ones, this can provide a noticeable throughput
    improvement.  Note that this is not always profitable and does involve a
    potentially large increase in code size.

 #. When checking a value against a constant, emit the check using a consistent
    comparison type.  The GVN pass *will* optimize redundant equalities even if
    the type of comparison is inverted, but GVN only runs late in the pipeline.
    As a result, you may miss the opportunity to run other important
    optimizations.  Improvements to EarlyCSE to remove this issue are tracked in
    Bug 23333.

 #. Avoid using arithmetic intrinsics unless you are *required* by your source
    language specification to emit a particular code sequence.  The optimizer
    is quite good at reasoning about general control flow and arithmetic, it is
    not anywhere near as strong at reasoning about the various intrinsics.  If
    profitable for code generation purposes, the optimizer will likely form the
    intrinsics itself late in the optimization pipeline.  It is *very* rarely
    profitable to emit these directly in the language frontend.  This item
    explicitly includes the use of the :ref:`overflow intrinsics <int_overflow>`.

 #. Avoid using the :ref:`assume intrinsic <int_assume>` until you've
    established that a) there's no other way to express the given fact and b)
    that fact is critical for optimization purposes.  Assumes are a great
    prototyping mechanism, but they can have negative effects on both compile
    time and optimization effectiveness.  The former is fixable with enough
    effort, but the later is fairly fundamental to their designed purpose.


 Describing Language Specific Properties
 =======================================

 When translating a source language to LLVM, finding ways to express concepts
 and guarantees available in your source language which are not natively
 provided by LLVM IR will greatly improve LLVM's ability to optimize your code.
 As an example, C/C++'s ability to mark every add as "no signed wrap (nsw)" goes
 a long way to assisting the optimizer in reasoning about loop induction
 variables and thus generating more optimal code for loops.

 The LLVM LangRef includes a number of mechanisms for annotating the IR with
 additional semantic information.  It is *strongly* recommended that you become
 highly familiar with this document.  The list below is intended to highlight a
 couple of items of particular interest, but is by no means exhaustive.

 Restricted Operation Semantics
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 #. Add nsw/nuw flags as appropriate.  Reasoning about overflow is
    generally hard for an optimizer so providing these facts from the frontend
    can be very impactful.

 #. Use fast-math flags on floating point operations if legal.  If you don't
    need strict IEEE floating point semantics, there are a number of additional
    optimizations that can be performed.  This can be highly impactful for
    floating point intensive computations.

 Describing Aliasing Properties
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 #. Add noalias/align/dereferenceable/nonnull to function arguments and return
    values as appropriate

 #. Use pointer aliasing metadata, especially tbaa metadata, to communicate
    otherwise-non-deducible pointer aliasing facts

 #. Use inbounds on geps.  This can help to disambiguate some aliasing queries.


 Modeling Memory Effects
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 #. Mark functions as readnone/readonly/argmemonly or noreturn/nounwind when
    known.  The optimizer will try to infer these flags, but may not always be
    able to.  Manual annotations are particularly important for external
    functions that the optimizer can not analyze.

 #. Use the lifetime.start/lifetime.end and invariant.start/invariant.end
    intrinsics where possible.  Common profitable uses are for stack like data
    structures (thus allowing dead store elimination) and for describing
    life times of allocas (thus allowing smaller stack sizes).

 #. Mark invariant locations using !invariant.load and TBAA's constant flags

 Pass Ordering
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 One of the most common mistakes made by new language frontend projects is to
 use the existing -O2 or -O3 pass pipelines as is.  These pass pipelines make a
 good starting point for an optimizing compiler for any language, but they have
 been carefully tuned for C and C++, not your target language.  You will almost
 certainly need to use a custom pass order to achieve optimal performance.  A
 couple specific suggestions:

 #. For languages with numerous rarely executed guard conditions (e.g. null
    checks, type checks, range checks) consider adding an extra execution or
    two of LoopUnswith and LICM to your pass order.  The standard pass order,
    which is tuned for C and C++ applications, may not be sufficient to remove
    all dischargeable checks from loops.

 #. If you language uses range checks, consider using the IRCE pass.  It is not
    currently part of the standard pass order.

 #. A useful sanity check to run is to run your optimized IR back through the
    -O2 pipeline again.  If you see noticeable improvement in the resulting IR,
    you likely need to adjust your pass order.


 I Still Can't Find What I'm Looking For
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 If you didn't find what you were looking for above, consider proposing an piece
 of metadata which provides the optimization hint you need.  Such extensions are
 relatively common and are generally well received by the community.  You will
 need to ensure that your proposal is sufficiently general so that it benefits
 others if you wish to contribute it upstream.

 You should also consider describing the problem you're facing on `llvm-dev
 <http://lists.llvm.org/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>`_ and asking for advice.
 It's entirely possible someone has encountered your problem before and can
 give good advice.  If there are multiple interested parties, that also
 increases the chances that a metadata extension would be well received by the
 community as a whole.

 Adding to this document
 =======================

 If you run across a case that you feel deserves to be covered here, please send
 a patch to `llvm-commits
 <http://lists.llvm.org/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits>`_ for review.

 If you have questions on these items, please direct them to `llvm-dev
 <http://lists.llvm.org/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>`_.  The more relevant
 context you are able to give to your question, the more likely it is to be
 answered.
	=====================================
	Performance Tips for Frontend Authors
	=====================================

	.. contents::
	:local:
	:depth: 2

	Abstract
	========

	The intended audience of this document is developers of language frontends
	targeting LLVM IR. This document is home to a collection of tips on how to
	generate IR that optimizes well.

	IR Best Practices
	=================

	As with any optimizer, LLVM has its strengths and weaknesses. In some cases,
	surprisingly small changes in the source IR can have a large effect on the
	generated code.

	Beyond the specific items on the list below, it's worth noting that the most
	mature frontend for LLVM is Clang. As a result, the further your IR gets from what Clang might emit, the less likely it is to be effectively optimized. It
	can often be useful to write a quick C program with the semantics you're trying
	to model and see what decisions Clang's IRGen makes about what IR to emit.
	Studying Clang's CodeGen directory can also be a good source of ideas. Note
	that Clang and LLVM are explicitly version locked so you'll need to make sure
	you're using a Clang built from the same svn revision or release as the LLVM
	library you're using. As always, it's strongly recommended that you track
	tip of tree development, particularly during bring up of a new project.

	The Basics
	^^^^^^^^^^^

	#. Make sure that your Modules contain both a data layout specification and
	target triple. Without these pieces, non of the target specific optimization
	will be enabled. This can have a major effect on the generated code quality.

	#. For each function or global emitted, use the most private linkage type
	possible (private, internal or linkonce_odr preferably). Doing so will
	make LLVM's inter-procedural optimizations much more effective.

	#. Avoid high in-degree basic blocks (e.g. basic blocks with dozens or hundreds
	of predecessors). Among other issues, the register allocator is known to
	perform badly with confronted with such structures. The only exception to
	this guidance is that a unified return block with high in-degree is fine.

	Use of allocas
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	An alloca instruction can be used to represent a function scoped stack slot,
	but can also represent dynamic frame expansion. When representing function
	scoped variables or locations, placing alloca instructions at the beginning of
	the entry block should be preferred. In particular, place them before any
	call instructions. Call instructions might get inlined and replaced with
	multiple basic blocks. The end result is that a following alloca instruction
	would no longer be in the entry basic block afterward.

	The SROA (Scalar Replacement Of Aggregates) and Mem2Reg passes only attempt
	to eliminate alloca instructions that are in the entry basic block. Given
	SSA is the canonical form expected by much of the optimizer; if allocas can
	not be eliminated by Mem2Reg or SROA, the optimizer is likely to be less
	effective than it could be.

	Avoid loads and stores of large aggregate type
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	LLVM currently does not optimize well loads and stores of large :ref:`aggregate
	types <t_aggregate>` (i.e. structs and arrays). As an alternative, consider
	loading individual fields from memory.

	Aggregates that are smaller than the largest (performant) load or store
	instruction supported by the targeted hardware are well supported. These can
	be an effective way to represent collections of small packed fields.

	Prefer zext over sext when legal
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	On some architectures (X86_64 is one), sign extension can involve an extra
	instruction whereas zero extension can be folded into a load. LLVM will try to
	replace a sext with a zext when it can be proven safe, but if you have
	information in your source language about the range of a integer value, it can
	be profitable to use a zext rather than a sext.

	Alternatively, you can :ref:`specify the range of the value using metadata
	<range-metadata>` and LLVM can do the sext to zext conversion for you.

	Zext GEP indices to machine register width
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	Internally, LLVM often promotes the width of GEP indices to machine register
	width. When it does so, it will default to using sign extension (sext)
	operations for safety. If your source language provides information about
	the range of the index, you may wish to manually extend indices to machine
	register width using a zext instruction.

	When to specify alignment
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
	LLVM will always generate correct code if you don’t specify alignment, but may
	generate inefficient code. For example, if you are targeting MIPS (or older
	ARM ISAs) then the hardware does not handle unaligned loads and stores, and
	so you will enter a trap-and-emulate path if you do a load or store with
	lower-than-natural alignment. To avoid this, LLVM will emit a slower
	sequence of loads, shifts and masks (or load-right + load-left on MIPS) for
	all cases where the load / store does not have a sufficiently high alignment
	in the IR.

	The alignment is used to guarantee the alignment on allocas and globals,
	though in most cases this is unnecessary (most targets have a sufficiently
	high default alignment that they’ll be fine). It is also used to provide a
	contract to the back end saying ‘either this load/store has this alignment, or
	it is undefined behavior’. This means that the back end is free to emit
	instructions that rely on that alignment (and mid-level optimizers are free to
	perform transforms that require that alignment). For x86, it doesn’t make
	much difference, as almost all instructions are alignment-independent. For
	MIPS, it can make a big difference.

	Note that if your loads and stores are atomic, the backend will be unable to
	lower an under aligned access into a sequence of natively aligned accesses.
	As a result, alignment is mandatory for atomic loads and stores.

	Other Things to Consider
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	#. Use ptrtoint/inttoptr sparingly (they interfere with pointer aliasing
	analysis), prefer GEPs

	#. Prefer globals over inttoptr of a constant address - this gives you
	dereferencability information. In MCJIT, use getSymbolAddress to provide
	actual address.

	#. Be wary of ordered and atomic memory operations. They are hard to optimize
	and may not be well optimized by the current optimizer. Depending on your
	source language, you may consider using fences instead.

	#. If calling a function which is known to throw an exception (unwind), use
	an invoke with a normal destination which contains an unreachable
	instruction. This form conveys to the optimizer that the call returns
	abnormally. For an invoke which neither returns normally or requires unwind
	code in the current function, you can use a noreturn call instruction if
	desired. This is generally not required because the optimizer will convert
	an invoke with an unreachable unwind destination to a call instruction.

	#. Use profile metadata to indicate statically known cold paths, even if
	dynamic profiling information is not available. This can make a large
	difference in code placement and thus the performance of tight loops.

	#. When generating code for loops, try to avoid terminating the header block of
	the loop earlier than necessary. If the terminator of the loop header
	block is a loop exiting conditional branch, the effectiveness of LICM will
	be limited for loads not in the header. (This is due to the fact that LLVM
	may not know such a load is safe to speculatively execute and thus can't
	lift an otherwise loop invariant load unless it can prove the exiting
	condition is not taken.) It can be profitable, in some cases, to emit such
	instructions into the header even if they are not used along a rarely
	executed path that exits the loop. This guidance specifically does not
	apply if the condition which terminates the loop header is itself invariant,
	or can be easily discharged by inspecting the loop index variables.

	#. In hot loops, consider duplicating instructions from small basic blocks
	which end in highly predictable terminators into their successor blocks.
	If a hot successor block contains instructions which can be vectorized
	with the duplicated ones, this can provide a noticeable throughput
	improvement. Note that this is not always profitable and does involve a
	potentially large increase in code size.

	#. When checking a value against a constant, emit the check using a consistent
	comparison type. The GVN pass will optimize redundant equalities even if
	the type of comparison is inverted, but GVN only runs late in the pipeline.
	As a result, you may miss the opportunity to run other important
	optimizations. Improvements to EarlyCSE to remove this issue are tracked in
	Bug 23333.

	#. Avoid using arithmetic intrinsics unless you are required by your source
	language specification to emit a particular code sequence. The optimizer
	is quite good at reasoning about general control flow and arithmetic, it is
	not anywhere near as strong at reasoning about the various intrinsics. If
	profitable for code generation purposes, the optimizer will likely form the
	intrinsics itself late in the optimization pipeline. It is very rarely
	profitable to emit these directly in the language frontend. This item
	explicitly includes the use of the :ref:`overflow intrinsics <int_overflow>`.

	#. Avoid using the :ref:`assume intrinsic <int_assume>` until you've
	established that a) there's no other way to express the given fact and b)
	that fact is critical for optimization purposes. Assumes are a great
	prototyping mechanism, but they can have negative effects on both compile
	time and optimization effectiveness. The former is fixable with enough
	effort, but the later is fairly fundamental to their designed purpose.


	Describing Language Specific Properties
	=======================================

	When translating a source language to LLVM, finding ways to express concepts
	and guarantees available in your source language which are not natively
	provided by LLVM IR will greatly improve LLVM's ability to optimize your code.
	As an example, C/C++'s ability to mark every add as "no signed wrap (nsw)" goes
	a long way to assisting the optimizer in reasoning about loop induction
	variables and thus generating more optimal code for loops.

	The LLVM LangRef includes a number of mechanisms for annotating the IR with
	additional semantic information. It is strongly recommended that you become
	highly familiar with this document. The list below is intended to highlight a
	couple of items of particular interest, but is by no means exhaustive.

	Restricted Operation Semantics
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
	#. Add nsw/nuw flags as appropriate. Reasoning about overflow is
	generally hard for an optimizer so providing these facts from the frontend
	can be very impactful.

	#. Use fast-math flags on floating point operations if legal. If you don't
	need strict IEEE floating point semantics, there are a number of additional
	optimizations that can be performed. This can be highly impactful for
	floating point intensive computations.

	Describing Aliasing Properties
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	#. Add noalias/align/dereferenceable/nonnull to function arguments and return
	values as appropriate

	#. Use pointer aliasing metadata, especially tbaa metadata, to communicate
	otherwise-non-deducible pointer aliasing facts

	#. Use inbounds on geps. This can help to disambiguate some aliasing queries.


	Modeling Memory Effects
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	#. Mark functions as readnone/readonly/argmemonly or noreturn/nounwind when
	known. The optimizer will try to infer these flags, but may not always be
	able to. Manual annotations are particularly important for external
	functions that the optimizer can not analyze.

	#. Use the lifetime.start/lifetime.end and invariant.start/invariant.end
	intrinsics where possible. Common profitable uses are for stack like data
	structures (thus allowing dead store elimination) and for describing
	life times of allocas (thus allowing smaller stack sizes).

	#. Mark invariant locations using !invariant.load and TBAA's constant flags

	Pass Ordering
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	One of the most common mistakes made by new language frontend projects is to
	use the existing -O2 or -O3 pass pipelines as is. These pass pipelines make a
	good starting point for an optimizing compiler for any language, but they have
	been carefully tuned for C and C++, not your target language. You will almost
	certainly need to use a custom pass order to achieve optimal performance. A
	couple specific suggestions:

	#. For languages with numerous rarely executed guard conditions (e.g. null
	checks, type checks, range checks) consider adding an extra execution or
	two of LoopUnswith and LICM to your pass order. The standard pass order,
	which is tuned for C and C++ applications, may not be sufficient to remove
	all dischargeable checks from loops.

	#. If you language uses range checks, consider using the IRCE pass. It is not
	currently part of the standard pass order.

	#. A useful sanity check to run is to run your optimized IR back through the
	-O2 pipeline again. If you see noticeable improvement in the resulting IR,
	you likely need to adjust your pass order.


	I Still Can't Find What I'm Looking For
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	If you didn't find what you were looking for above, consider proposing an piece
	of metadata which provides the optimization hint you need. Such extensions are
	relatively common and are generally well received by the community. You will
	need to ensure that your proposal is sufficiently general so that it benefits
	others if you wish to contribute it upstream.

	You should also consider describing the problem you're facing on `llvm-dev
	<http://lists.llvm.org/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>`_ and asking for advice.
	It's entirely possible someone has encountered your problem before and can
	give good advice. If there are multiple interested parties, that also
	increases the chances that a metadata extension would be well received by the
	community as a whole.

	Adding to this document
	=======================

	If you run across a case that you feel deserves to be covered here, please send
	a patch to `llvm-commits
	<http://lists.llvm.org/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits>`_ for review.

	If you have questions on these items, please direct them to `llvm-dev
	<http://lists.llvm.org/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>`_. The more relevant
	context you are able to give to your question, the more likely it is to be
	answered.