// Random ideas for the X86 backend.
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-We should add support for the "movbe" instruction, which does a byte-swapping
-copy (3-addr bswap + memory support?) This is available on Atom processors.
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
-CodeGen/X86/lea-3.ll:test3 should be a single LEA, not a shift/move. The X86
-backend knows how to three-addressify this shift, but it appears the register
-allocator isn't even asking it to do so in this case. We should investigate
-why this isn't happening, it could have significant impact on other important
-cases for X86 as well.
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
This should be one DIV/IDIV instruction, not a libcall:
unsigned test(unsigned long long X, unsigned Y) {
Some isel ideas:
-1. Dynamic programming based approach when compile time if not an
+1. Dynamic programming based approach when compile time is not an
issue.
2. Code duplication (addressing mode) during isel.
3. Other ideas from "Register-Sensitive Selection, Duplication, and
The instruction selector sometimes misses folding a load into a compare. The
pattern is written as (cmp reg, (load p)). Because the compare isn't
commutative, it is not matched with the load on both sides. The dag combiner
-should be made smart enough to cannonicalize the load into the RHS of a compare
+should be made smart enough to canonicalize the load into the RHS of a compare
when it can invert the result of the compare for free.
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Take the following:
-target datalayout = "e-p:32:32:32-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:32:64-f32:32:32-f64:32:64-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-f80:128:128"
+target datalayout = "e-p:32:32:32-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:32:64-f32:32:32-f64:32:64-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-f80:128:128-S128"
target triple = "i386-apple-darwin8"
@in_exit.4870.b = internal global i1 false ; <i1*> [#uses=2]
define fastcc void @abort_gzip() noreturn nounwind {
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-This code:
-
-void vec_mpys1(int y[], const int x[], int scaler) {
-int i;
-for (i = 0; i < 150; i++)
- y[i] += (((long long)scaler * (long long)x[i]) >> 31);
-}
-
-Compiles to this loop with GCC 3.x:
-
-.L5:
- movl %ebx, %eax
- imull (%edi,%ecx,4)
- shrdl $31, %edx, %eax
- addl %eax, (%esi,%ecx,4)
- incl %ecx
- cmpl $149, %ecx
- jle .L5
-
-llvm-gcc compiles it to the much uglier:
-
-LBB1_1: ## bb1
- movl 24(%esp), %eax
- movl (%eax,%edi,4), %ebx
- movl %ebx, %ebp
- imull %esi, %ebp
- movl %ebx, %eax
- mull %ecx
- addl %ebp, %edx
- sarl $31, %ebx
- imull %ecx, %ebx
- addl %edx, %ebx
- shldl $1, %eax, %ebx
- movl 20(%esp), %eax
- addl %ebx, (%eax,%edi,4)
- incl %edi
- cmpl $150, %edi
- jne LBB1_1 ## bb1
-
-The issue is that we hoist the cast of "scaler" to long long outside of the
-loop, the value comes into the loop as two values, and
-RegsForValue::getCopyFromRegs doesn't know how to put an AssertSext on the
-constructed BUILD_PAIR which represents the cast value.
-
-This can be handled by making CodeGenPrepare sink the cast.
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
Test instructions can be eliminated by using EFLAGS values from arithmetic
instructions. This is currently not done for mul, and, or, xor, neg, shl,
sra, srl, shld, shrd, atomic ops, and others. It is also currently not done
processors. GCC does two optimizations:
1. ix86_pad_returns inserts a noop before ret instructions if immediately
- preceeded by a conditional branch or is the target of a jump.
+ preceded by a conditional branch or is the target of a jump.
2. ix86_avoid_jump_misspredicts inserts noops in cases where a 16-byte block of
code contains more than 3 branches.
The second one is done for: Atom, Pentium Pro, all AMDs, Pentium 4, Nocona,
Core 2, and "Generic"
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
-Testcase:
-int a(int x) { return (x & 127) > 31; }
-
-Current output:
- movl 4(%esp), %eax
- andl $127, %eax
- cmpl $31, %eax
- seta %al
- movzbl %al, %eax
- ret
-
-Ideal output:
- xorl %eax, %eax
- testl $96, 4(%esp)
- setne %al
- ret
-
-This should definitely be done in instcombine, canonicalizing the range
-condition into a != condition. We get this IR:
-
-define i32 @a(i32 %x) nounwind readnone {
-entry:
- %0 = and i32 %x, 127 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
- %1 = icmp ugt i32 %0, 31 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
- %2 = zext i1 %1 to i32 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
- ret i32 %2
-}
-
-Instcombine prefers to strength reduce relational comparisons to equality
-comparisons when possible, this should be another case of that. This could
-be handled pretty easily in InstCombiner::visitICmpInstWithInstAndIntCst, but it
-looks like InstCombiner::visitICmpInstWithInstAndIntCst should really already
-be redesigned to use ComputeMaskedBits and friends.
-
-
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Testcase:
int x(int a) { return (a&0xf0)>>4; }
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-_Bool bar(int *x) { return *x & 1; }
+struct B {
+ unsigned char y0 : 1;
+};
-define zeroext i1 @bar(i32* nocapture %x) nounwind readonly {
-entry:
- %tmp1 = load i32* %x ; <i32> [#uses=1]
- %and = and i32 %tmp1, 1 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
- %tobool = icmp ne i32 %and, 0 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
- ret i1 %tobool
+int bar(struct B* a) { return a->y0; }
+
+define i32 @bar(%struct.B* nocapture %a) nounwind readonly optsize {
+ %1 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.B* %a, i64 0, i32 0
+ %2 = load i8* %1, align 1
+ %3 = and i8 %2, 1
+ %4 = zext i8 %3 to i32
+ ret i32 %4
}
-bar: # @bar
-# BB#0: # %entry
- movl 4(%esp), %eax
- movb (%eax), %al
- andb $1, %al
- movzbl %al, %eax
- ret
+bar: # @bar
+# BB#0:
+ movb (%rdi), %al
+ andb $1, %al
+ movzbl %al, %eax
+ ret
Missed optimization: should be movl+andl.
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+The x86_64 abi says:
+
+Booleans, when stored in a memory object, are stored as single byte objects the
+value of which is always 0 (false) or 1 (true).
+
+We are not using this fact:
+
+int bar(_Bool *a) { return *a; }
+
+define i32 @bar(i8* nocapture %a) nounwind readonly optsize {
+ %1 = load i8* %a, align 1, !tbaa !0
+ %tmp = and i8 %1, 1
+ %2 = zext i8 %tmp to i32
+ ret i32 %2
+}
+
+bar:
+ movb (%rdi), %al
+ andb $1, %al
+ movzbl %al, %eax
+ ret
+
+GCC produces
+
+bar:
+ movzbl (%rdi), %eax
+ ret
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
Consider the following two functions compiled with clang:
_Bool foo(int *x) { return !(*x & 4); }
unsigned bar(int *x) { return !(*x & 4); }
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-Take the following C code:
-int x(int y) { return (y & 63) << 14; }
-
-Code produced by gcc:
- andl $63, %edi
- sall $14, %edi
- movl %edi, %eax
- ret
-
-Code produced by clang:
- shll $14, %edi
- movl %edi, %eax
- andl $1032192, %eax
- ret
-
-The code produced by gcc is 3 bytes shorter. This sort of construct often
-shows up with bitfields.
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
Take the following C code:
int f(int a, int b) { return (unsigned char)a == (unsigned char)b; }
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+For the branch in the following code:
+int a();
+int b(int x, int y) {
+ if (x & (1<<(y&7)))
+ return a();
+ return y;
+}
+
+We currently generate:
+ movb %sil, %al
+ andb $7, %al
+ movzbl %al, %eax
+ btl %eax, %edi
+ jae .LBB0_2
+
+movl+andl would be shorter than the movb+andb+movzbl sequence.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+For the following:
+struct u1 {
+ float x, y;
+};
+float foo(struct u1 u) {
+ return u.x + u.y;
+}
+
+We currently generate:
+ movdqa %xmm0, %xmm1
+ pshufd $1, %xmm0, %xmm0 # xmm0 = xmm0[1,0,0,0]
+ addss %xmm1, %xmm0
+ ret
+
+We could save an instruction here by commuting the addss.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+This (from PR9661):
+
+float clamp_float(float a) {
+ if (a > 1.0f)
+ return 1.0f;
+ else if (a < 0.0f)
+ return 0.0f;
+ else
+ return a;
+}
+
+Could compile to:
+
+clamp_float: # @clamp_float
+ movss .LCPI0_0(%rip), %xmm1
+ minss %xmm1, %xmm0
+ pxor %xmm1, %xmm1
+ maxss %xmm1, %xmm0
+ ret
+
+with -ffast-math.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+This function (from PR9803):
+
+int clamp2(int a) {
+ if (a > 5)
+ a = 5;
+ if (a < 0)
+ return 0;
+ return a;
+}
+
+Compiles to:
+
+_clamp2: ## @clamp2
+ pushq %rbp
+ movq %rsp, %rbp
+ cmpl $5, %edi
+ movl $5, %ecx
+ cmovlel %edi, %ecx
+ testl %ecx, %ecx
+ movl $0, %eax
+ cmovnsl %ecx, %eax
+ popq %rbp
+ ret
+
+The move of 0 could be scheduled above the test to make it is xor reg,reg.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+GCC PR48986. We currently compile this:
+
+void bar(void);
+void yyy(int* p) {
+ if (__sync_fetch_and_add(p, -1) == 1)
+ bar();
+}
+
+into:
+ movl $-1, %eax
+ lock
+ xaddl %eax, (%rdi)
+ cmpl $1, %eax
+ je LBB0_2
+
+Instead we could generate:
+
+ lock
+ dec %rdi
+ je LBB0_2
+
+The trick is to match "fetch_and_add(X, -C) == C".
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+unsigned t(unsigned a, unsigned b) {
+ return a <= b ? 5 : -5;
+}
+
+We generate:
+ movl $5, %ecx
+ cmpl %esi, %edi
+ movl $-5, %eax
+ cmovbel %ecx, %eax
+
+GCC:
+ cmpl %edi, %esi
+ sbbl %eax, %eax
+ andl $-10, %eax
+ addl $5, %eax
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
projects / oota-llvm.git / blobdiff