The LLVM target-independent code generator is a framework that provides a -suite of reusable components for translating the LLVM internal representation to -the machine code for a specified target—either in assembly form (suitable -for a static compiler) or in binary machine code format (usable for a JIT -compiler). The LLVM target-independent code generator consists of five main -components:
+ suite of reusable components for translating the LLVM internal representation + to the machine code for a specified target—either in assembly form + (suitable for a static compiler) or in binary machine code format (usable for + a JIT compiler). The LLVM target-independent code generator consists of five + main components:-Depending on which part of the code generator you are interested in working on, -different pieces of this will be useful to you. In any case, you should be -familiar with the target description and machine code representation classes. If you want to add -a backend for a new target, you will need to implement the -target description classes for your new target and understand the LLVM code representation. If you are interested in -implementing a new code generation algorithm, it -should only depend on the target-description and machine code representation -classes, ensuring that it is portable. -
+Depending on which part of the code generator you are interested in working + on, different pieces of this will be useful to you. In any case, you should + be familiar with the target description + and machine code representation classes. If you + want to add a backend for a new target, you will need + to implement the target description classes for + your new target and understand the LLVM code + representation. If you are interested in implementing a + new code generation algorithm, it should only + depend on the target-description and machine code representation classes, + ensuring that it is portable.
The two pieces of the LLVM code generator are the high-level interface to the -code generator and the set of reusable components that can be used to build -target-specific backends. The two most important interfaces (TargetMachine and TargetData) are the only ones that are -required to be defined for a backend to fit into the LLVM system, but the others -must be defined if the reusable code generator components are going to be -used.
+ code generator and the set of reusable components that can be used to build + target-specific backends. The two most important interfaces + (TargetMachine + and TargetData) are the only ones that are + required to be defined for a backend to fit into the LLVM system, but the + others must be defined if the reusable code generator components are going to + be used.This design has two important implications. The first is that LLVM can -support completely non-traditional code generation targets. For example, the C -backend does not require register allocation, instruction selection, or any of -the other standard components provided by the system. As such, it only -implements these two interfaces, and does its own thing. Another example of a -code generator like this is a (purely hypothetical) backend that converts LLVM -to the GCC RTL form and uses GCC to emit machine code for a target.
+ support completely non-traditional code generation targets. For example, the + C backend does not require register allocation, instruction selection, or any + of the other standard components provided by the system. As such, it only + implements these two interfaces, and does its own thing. Another example of + a code generator like this is a (purely hypothetical) backend that converts + LLVM to the GCC RTL form and uses GCC to emit machine code for a target. -This design also implies that it is possible to design and -implement radically different code generators in the LLVM system that do not -make use of any of the built-in components. Doing so is not recommended at all, -but could be required for radically different targets that do not fit into the -LLVM machine description model: FPGAs for example.
+This design also implies that it is possible to design and implement + radically different code generators in the LLVM system that do not make use + of any of the built-in components. Doing so is not recommended at all, but + could be required for radically different targets that do not fit into the + LLVM machine description model: FPGAs for example.
The LLVM target-independent code generator is designed to support efficient and -quality code generation for standard register-based microprocessors. Code -generation in this model is divided into the following stages:
+The LLVM target-independent code generator is designed to support efficient + and quality code generation for standard register-based microprocessors. + Code generation in this model is divided into the following stages:
The code generator is based on the assumption that the instruction selector -will use an optimal pattern matching selector to create high-quality sequences of -native instructions. Alternative code generator designs based on pattern -expansion and aggressive iterative peephole optimization are much slower. This -design permits efficient compilation (important for JIT environments) and -aggressive optimization (used when generating code offline) by allowing -components of varying levels of sophistication to be used for any step of -compilation.
+ will use an optimal pattern matching selector to create high-quality + sequences of native instructions. Alternative code generator designs based + on pattern expansion and aggressive iterative peephole optimization are much + slower. This design permits efficient compilation (important for JIT + environments) and aggressive optimization (used when generating code offline) + by allowing components of varying levels of sophistication to be used for any + step of compilation.In addition to these stages, target implementations can insert arbitrary -target-specific passes into the flow. For example, the X86 target uses a -special pass to handle the 80x87 floating point stack architecture. Other -targets with unusual requirements can be supported with custom passes as -needed.
+ target-specific passes into the flow. For example, the X86 target uses a + special pass to handle the 80x87 floating point stack architecture. Other + targets with unusual requirements can be supported with custom passes as + needed.The target description classes require a detailed description of the target -architecture. These target descriptions often have a large amount of common -information (e.g., an add instruction is almost identical to a -sub instruction). -In order to allow the maximum amount of commonality to be factored out, the LLVM -code generator uses the TableGen tool to -describe big chunks of the target machine, which allows the use of -domain-specific and target-specific abstractions to reduce the amount of -repetition.
+ architecture. These target descriptions often have a large amount of common + information (e.g., an add instruction is almost identical to a + sub instruction). In order to allow the maximum amount of + commonality to be factored out, the LLVM code generator uses + the TableGen tool to describe big + chunks of the target machine, which allows the use of domain-specific and + target-specific abstractions to reduce the amount of repetition.As LLVM continues to be developed and refined, we plan to move more and more -of the target description to the .td form. Doing so gives us a -number of advantages. The most important is that it makes it easier to port -LLVM because it reduces the amount of C++ code that has to be written, and the -surface area of the code generator that needs to be understood before someone -can get something working. Second, it makes it easier to change things. In -particular, if tables and other things are all emitted by tblgen, we -only need a change in one place (tblgen) to update all of the targets -to a new interface.
+ of the target description to the .td form. Doing so gives us a + number of advantages. The most important is that it makes it easier to port + LLVM because it reduces the amount of C++ code that has to be written, and + the surface area of the code generator that needs to be understood before + someone can get something working. Second, it makes it easier to change + things. In particular, if tables and other things are all emitted + by tblgen, we only need a change in one place (tblgen) to + update all of the targets to a new interface.The LLVM target description classes (located in the -include/llvm/Target directory) provide an abstract description of the -target machine independent of any particular client. These classes are -designed to capture the abstract properties of the target (such as the -instructions and registers it has), and do not incorporate any particular pieces -of code generation algorithms.
+ include/llvm/Target directory) provide an abstract description of + the target machine independent of any particular client. These classes are + designed to capture the abstract properties of the target (such as the + instructions and registers it has), and do not incorporate any particular + pieces of code generation algorithms. -All of the target description classes (except the TargetData class) are designed to be subclassed by -the concrete target implementation, and have virtual methods implemented. To -get to these implementations, the TargetMachine class provides accessors that -should be implemented by the target.
+All of the target description classes (except the + TargetData class) are designed to be + subclassed by the concrete target implementation, and have virtual methods + implemented. To get to these implementations, the + TargetMachine class provides accessors + that should be implemented by the target.
The TargetMachine class provides virtual methods that are used to -access the target-specific implementations of the various target description -classes via the get*Info methods (getInstrInfo, -getRegisterInfo, getFrameInfo, etc.). This class is -designed to be specialized by -a concrete target implementation (e.g., X86TargetMachine) which -implements the various virtual methods. The only required target description -class is the TargetData class, but if the -code generator components are to be used, the other interfaces should be -implemented as well.
+ access the target-specific implementations of the various target description + classes via the get*Info methods (getInstrInfo, + getRegisterInfo, getFrameInfo, etc.). This class is + designed to be specialized by a concrete target implementation + (e.g., X86TargetMachine) which implements the various virtual + methods. The only required target description class is + the TargetData class, but if the code + generator components are to be used, the other interfaces should be + implemented as well.The TargetData class is the only required target description class, -and it is the only class that is not extensible (you cannot derived a new -class from it). TargetData specifies information about how the target -lays out memory for structures, the alignment requirements for various data -types, the size of pointers in the target, and whether the target is -little-endian or big-endian.
+ and it is the only class that is not extensible (you cannot derived a new + class from it). TargetData specifies information about how the + target lays out memory for structures, the alignment requirements for various + data types, the size of pointers in the target, and whether the target is + little-endian or big-endian.The TargetLowering class is used by SelectionDAG based instruction -selectors primarily to describe how LLVM code should be lowered to SelectionDAG -operations. Among other things, this class indicates:
+ selectors primarily to describe how LLVM code should be lowered to + SelectionDAG operations. Among other things, this class indicates:The TargetRegisterInfo class is used to describe the register -file of the target and any interactions between the registers.
+The TargetRegisterInfo class is used to describe the register file + of the target and any interactions between the registers.
Registers in the code generator are represented in the code generator by -unsigned integers. Physical registers (those that actually exist in the target -description) are unique small numbers, and virtual registers are generally -large. Note that register #0 is reserved as a flag value.
+ unsigned integers. Physical registers (those that actually exist in the + target description) are unique small numbers, and virtual registers are + generally large. Note that register #0 is reserved as a flag value.Each register in the processor description has an associated -TargetRegisterDesc entry, which provides a textual name for the -register (used for assembly output and debugging dumps) and a set of aliases -(used to indicate whether one register overlaps with another). -
+ TargetRegisterDesc entry, which provides a textual name for the + register (used for assembly output and debugging dumps) and a set of aliases + (used to indicate whether one register overlaps with another).In addition to the per-register description, the TargetRegisterInfo -class exposes a set of processor specific register classes (instances of the -TargetRegisterClass class). Each register class contains sets of -registers that have the same properties (for example, they are all 32-bit -integer registers). Each SSA virtual register created by the instruction -selector has an associated register class. When the register allocator runs, it -replaces virtual registers with a physical register in the set.
+ class exposes a set of processor specific register classes (instances of the + TargetRegisterClass class). Each register class contains sets of + registers that have the same properties (for example, they are all 32-bit + integer registers). Each SSA virtual register created by the instruction + selector has an associated register class. When the register allocator runs, + it replaces virtual registers with a physical register in the set. --The target-specific implementations of these classes is auto-generated from a TableGen description of the register file. -
+The target-specific implementations of these classes is auto-generated from + a TableGen description of the + register file.
The TargetInstrInfo class is used to describe the machine - instructions supported by the target. It is essentially an array of - TargetInstrDescriptor objects, each of which describes one - instruction the target supports. Descriptors define things like the mnemonic - for the opcode, the number of operands, the list of implicit register uses - and defs, whether the instruction has certain target-independent properties - (accesses memory, is commutable, etc), and holds any target-specific - flags.
+ +The TargetInstrInfo class is used to describe the machine + instructions supported by the target. It is essentially an array of + TargetInstrDescriptor objects, each of which describes one + instruction the target supports. Descriptors define things like the mnemonic + for the opcode, the number of operands, the list of implicit register uses + and defs, whether the instruction has certain target-independent properties + (accesses memory, is commutable, etc), and holds any target-specific + flags.
+The TargetFrameInfo class is used to provide information about the - stack frame layout of the target. It holds the direction of stack growth, - the known stack alignment on entry to each function, and the offset to the - local area. The offset to the local area is the offset from the stack - pointer on function entry to the first location where function data (local - variables, spill locations) can be stored.
+ +The TargetFrameInfo class is used to provide information about the + stack frame layout of the target. It holds the direction of stack growth, the + known stack alignment on entry to each function, and the offset to the local + area. The offset to the local area is the offset from the stack pointer on + function entry to the first location where function data (local variables, + spill locations) can be stored.
+The TargetSubtarget class is used to provide information about the - specific chip set being targeted. A sub-target informs code generation of - which instructions are supported, instruction latencies and instruction - execution itinerary; i.e., which processing units are used, in what order, and - for how long.
+ +The TargetSubtarget class is used to provide information about the + specific chip set being targeted. A sub-target informs code generation of + which instructions are supported, instruction latencies and instruction + execution itinerary; i.e., which processing units are used, in what order, + and for how long.
+The TargetJITInfo class exposes an abstract interface used by the - Just-In-Time code generator to perform target-specific activities, such as - emitting stubs. If a TargetMachine supports JIT code generation, it - should provide one of these objects through the getJITInfo - method.
+ +The TargetJITInfo class exposes an abstract interface used by the + Just-In-Time code generator to perform target-specific activities, such as + emitting stubs. If a TargetMachine supports JIT code generation, it + should provide one of these objects through the getJITInfo + method.
+At the high-level, LLVM code is translated to a machine specific -representation formed out of -MachineFunction, -MachineBasicBlock, and MachineInstr instances -(defined in include/llvm/CodeGen). This representation is completely -target agnostic, representing instructions in their most abstract form: an -opcode and a series of operands. This representation is designed to support -both an SSA representation for machine code, as well as a register allocated, -non-SSA form.
+ representation formed out of + MachineFunction, + MachineBasicBlock, + and MachineInstr instances (defined + in include/llvm/CodeGen). This representation is completely target + agnostic, representing instructions in their most abstract form: an opcode + and a series of operands. This representation is designed to support both an + SSA representation for machine code, as well as a register allocated, non-SSA + form.Target machine instructions are represented as instances of the -MachineInstr class. This class is an extremely abstract way of -representing machine instructions. In particular, it only keeps track of -an opcode number and a set of operands.
- -The opcode number is a simple unsigned integer that only has meaning to a -specific backend. All of the instructions for a target should be defined in -the *InstrInfo.td file for the target. The opcode enum values -are auto-generated from this description. The MachineInstr class does -not have any information about how to interpret the instruction (i.e., what the -semantics of the instruction are); for that you must refer to the -TargetInstrInfo class.
- -The operands of a machine instruction can be of several different types: -a register reference, a constant integer, a basic block reference, etc. In -addition, a machine operand should be marked as a def or a use of the value -(though only registers are allowed to be defs).
+ MachineInstr class. This class is an extremely abstract way of + representing machine instructions. In particular, it only keeps track of an + opcode number and a set of operands. + +The opcode number is a simple unsigned integer that only has meaning to a + specific backend. All of the instructions for a target should be defined in + the *InstrInfo.td file for the target. The opcode enum values are + auto-generated from this description. The MachineInstr class does + not have any information about how to interpret the instruction (i.e., what + the semantics of the instruction are); for that you must refer to the + TargetInstrInfo class.
+ +The operands of a machine instruction can be of several different types: a + register reference, a constant integer, a basic block reference, etc. In + addition, a machine operand should be marked as a def or a use of the value + (though only registers are allowed to be defs).
By convention, the LLVM code generator orders instruction operands so that -all register definitions come before the register uses, even on architectures -that are normally printed in other orders. For example, the SPARC add -instruction: "add %i1, %i2, %i3" adds the "%i1", and "%i2" registers -and stores the result into the "%i3" register. In the LLVM code generator, -the operands should be stored as "%i3, %i1, %i2": with the destination -first.
+ all register definitions come before the register uses, even on architectures + that are normally printed in other orders. For example, the SPARC add + instruction: "add %i1, %i2, %i3" adds the "%i1", and "%i2" registers + and stores the result into the "%i3" register. In the LLVM code generator, + the operands should be stored as "%i3, %i1, %i2": with the + destination first. -Keeping destination (definition) operands at the beginning of the operand -list has several advantages. In particular, the debugging printer will print -the instruction like this:
+Keeping destination (definition) operands at the beginning of the operand + list has several advantages. In particular, the debugging printer will print + the instruction like this:
@@ -545,9 +550,8 @@ the instruction like this:
Also if the first operand is a def, it is easier to create instructions whose only def is the first -operand.
+Also if the first operand is a def, it is easier to create + instructions whose only def is the first operand.
Machine instructions are created by using the BuildMI functions, -located in the include/llvm/CodeGen/MachineInstrBuilder.h file. The -BuildMI functions make it easy to build arbitrary machine -instructions. Usage of the BuildMI functions look like this:
+ located in the include/llvm/CodeGen/MachineInstrBuilder.h file. The + BuildMI functions make it easy to build arbitrary machine + instructions. Usage of the BuildMI functions look like this:@@ -588,15 +592,15 @@ BuildMI(MBB, X86::JNE, 1).addMBB(&MBB);
The key thing to remember with the BuildMI functions is that you -have to specify the number of operands that the machine instruction will take. -This allows for efficient memory allocation. You also need to specify if -operands default to be uses of values, not definitions. If you need to add a -definition operand (other than the optional destination register), you must -explicitly mark it as such:
+ have to specify the number of operands that the machine instruction will + take. This allows for efficient memory allocation. You also need to specify + if operands default to be uses of values, not definitions. If you need to + add a definition operand (other than the optional destination register), you + must explicitly mark it as such:-MI.addReg(Reg, MachineOperand::Def); +MI.addReg(Reg, RegState::Define);
One important issue that the code generator needs to be aware of is the -presence of fixed registers. In particular, there are often places in the -instruction stream where the register allocator must arrange for a -particular value to be in a particular register. This can occur due to -limitations of the instruction set (e.g., the X86 can only do a 32-bit divide -with the EAX/EDX registers), or external factors like calling -conventions. In any case, the instruction selector should emit code that -copies a virtual register into or out of a physical register when needed.
+ presence of fixed registers. In particular, there are often places in the + instruction stream where the register allocator must arrange for a + particular value to be in a particular register. This can occur due to + limitations of the instruction set (e.g., the X86 can only do a 32-bit divide + with the EAX/EDX registers), or external factors like + calling conventions. In any case, the instruction selector should emit code + that copies a virtual register into or out of a physical register when + needed.For example, consider this simple LLVM example:
@@ -630,8 +635,8 @@ define i32 @test(i32 %X, i32 %Y) {The X86 instruction selector produces this machine code for the div -and ret (use -"llc X.bc -march=x86 -print-machineinstrs" to get this):
+ and ret (use "llc X.bc -march=x86 -print-machineinstrs" to + get this):@@ -648,9 +653,9 @@ ret
By the end of code generation, the register allocator has coalesced -the registers and deleted the resultant identity moves producing the -following code:
+By the end of code generation, the register allocator has coalesced the + registers and deleted the resultant identity moves producing the following + code:
@@ -662,14 +667,14 @@ ret
This approach is extremely general (if it can handle the X86 architecture, -it can handle anything!) and allows all of the target specific -knowledge about the instruction stream to be isolated in the instruction -selector. Note that physical registers should have a short lifetime for good -code generation, and all physical registers are assumed dead on entry to and -exit from basic blocks (before register allocation). Thus, if you need a value -to be live across basic block boundaries, it must live in a virtual -register.
+This approach is extremely general (if it can handle the X86 architecture, it + can handle anything!) and allows all of the target specific knowledge about + the instruction stream to be isolated in the instruction selector. Note that + physical registers should have a short lifetime for good code generation, and + all physical registers are assumed dead on entry to and exit from basic + blocks (before register allocation). Thus, if you need a value to be live + across basic block boundaries, it must live in a virtual + register.
MachineInstr's are initially selected in SSA-form, and -are maintained in SSA-form until register allocation happens. For the most -part, this is trivially simple since LLVM is already in SSA form; LLVM PHI nodes -become machine code PHI nodes, and virtual registers are only allowed to have a -single definition.
+MachineInstr's are initially selected in SSA-form, and are + maintained in SSA-form until register allocation happens. For the most part, + this is trivially simple since LLVM is already in SSA form; LLVM PHI nodes + become machine code PHI nodes, and virtual registers are only allowed to have + a single definition.
-After register allocation, machine code is no longer in SSA-form because there -are no virtual registers left in the code.
+After register allocation, machine code is no longer in SSA-form because + there are no virtual registers left in the code.
The MachineBasicBlock class contains a list of machine instructions -(MachineInstr instances). It roughly -corresponds to the LLVM code input to the instruction selector, but there can be -a one-to-many mapping (i.e. one LLVM basic block can map to multiple machine -basic blocks). The MachineBasicBlock class has a -"getBasicBlock" method, which returns the LLVM basic block that it -comes from.
+ (MachineInstr instances). It roughly + corresponds to the LLVM code input to the instruction selector, but there can + be a one-to-many mapping (i.e. one LLVM basic block can map to multiple + machine basic blocks). The MachineBasicBlock class has a + "getBasicBlock" method, which returns the LLVM basic block that it + comes from.The MachineFunction class contains a list of machine basic blocks -(MachineBasicBlock instances). It -corresponds one-to-one with the LLVM function input to the instruction selector. -In addition to a list of basic blocks, the MachineFunction contains a -a MachineConstantPool, a MachineFrameInfo, a -MachineFunctionInfo, and a MachineRegisterInfo. See -include/llvm/CodeGen/MachineFunction.h for more information.
+ (MachineBasicBlock instances). It + corresponds one-to-one with the LLVM function input to the instruction + selector. In addition to a list of basic blocks, + the MachineFunction contains a a MachineConstantPool, + a MachineFrameInfo, a MachineFunctionInfo, and a + MachineRegisterInfo. See + include/llvm/CodeGen/MachineFunction.h for more information.This section documents the phases described in the high-level design of the code generator. It -explains how they work and some of the rationale behind their design.
+This section documents the phases described in the + high-level design of the code generator. + It explains how they work and some of the rationale behind their design.
-Instruction Selection is the process of translating LLVM code presented to the -code generator into target-specific machine instructions. There are several -well-known ways to do this in the literature. LLVM uses a SelectionDAG based -instruction selector. -
-Portions of the DAG instruction selector are generated from the target -description (*.td) files. Our goal is for the entire instruction -selector to be generated from these .td files, though currently -there are still things that require custom C++ code.
+Instruction Selection is the process of translating LLVM code presented to + the code generator into target-specific machine instructions. There are + several well-known ways to do this in the literature. LLVM uses a + SelectionDAG based instruction selector.
+ +Portions of the DAG instruction selector are generated from the target + description (*.td) files. Our goal is for the entire instruction + selector to be generated from these .td files, though currently + there are still things that require custom C++ code.
+The SelectionDAG provides an abstraction for code representation in a way -that is amenable to instruction selection using automatic techniques -(e.g. dynamic-programming based optimal pattern matching selectors). It is also -well-suited to other phases of code generation; in particular, -instruction scheduling (SelectionDAG's are very close to scheduling DAGs -post-selection). Additionally, the SelectionDAG provides a host representation -where a large variety of very-low-level (but target-independent) -optimizations may be -performed; ones which require extensive information about the instructions -efficiently supported by the target.
+ that is amenable to instruction selection using automatic techniques + (e.g. dynamic-programming based optimal pattern matching selectors). It is + also well-suited to other phases of code generation; in particular, + instruction scheduling (SelectionDAG's are very close to scheduling DAGs + post-selection). Additionally, the SelectionDAG provides a host + representation where a large variety of very-low-level (but + target-independent) optimizations may be + performed; ones which require extensive information about the instructions + efficiently supported by the target.The SelectionDAG is a Directed-Acyclic-Graph whose nodes are instances of the -SDNode class. The primary payload of the SDNode is its -operation code (Opcode) that indicates what operation the node performs and -the operands to the operation. -The various operation node types are described at the top of the -include/llvm/CodeGen/SelectionDAGNodes.h file.
- -Although most operations define a single value, each node in the graph may -define multiple values. For example, a combined div/rem operation will define -both the dividend and the remainder. Many other situations require multiple -values as well. Each node also has some number of operands, which are edges -to the node defining the used value. Because nodes may define multiple values, -edges are represented by instances of the SDValue class, which is -a <SDNode, unsigned> pair, indicating the node and result -value being used, respectively. Each value produced by an SDNode has -an associated MVT (Machine Value Type) indicating what the type of the -value is.
+ SDNode class. The primary payload of the SDNode is its + operation code (Opcode) that indicates what operation the node performs and + the operands to the operation. The various operation node types are + described at the top of the include/llvm/CodeGen/SelectionDAGNodes.h + file. + +Although most operations define a single value, each node in the graph may + define multiple values. For example, a combined div/rem operation will + define both the dividend and the remainder. Many other situations require + multiple values as well. Each node also has some number of operands, which + are edges to the node defining the used value. Because nodes may define + multiple values, edges are represented by instances of the SDValue + class, which is a <SDNode, unsigned> pair, indicating the node + and result value being used, respectively. Each value produced by + an SDNode has an associated MVT (Machine Value Type) + indicating what the type of the value is.
SelectionDAGs contain two different kinds of values: those that represent -data flow and those that represent control flow dependencies. Data values are -simple edges with an integer or floating point value type. Control edges are -represented as "chain" edges which are of type MVT::Other. These edges -provide an ordering between nodes that have side effects (such as -loads, stores, calls, returns, etc). All nodes that have side effects should -take a token chain as input and produce a new one as output. By convention, -token chain inputs are always operand #0, and chain results are always the last -value produced by an operation.
+ data flow and those that represent control flow dependencies. Data values + are simple edges with an integer or floating point value type. Control edges + are represented as "chain" edges which are of type MVT::Other. + These edges provide an ordering between nodes that have side effects (such as + loads, stores, calls, returns, etc). All nodes that have side effects should + take a token chain as input and produce a new one as output. By convention, + token chain inputs are always operand #0, and chain results are always the + last value produced by an operation.A SelectionDAG has designated "Entry" and "Root" nodes. The Entry node is -always a marker node with an Opcode of ISD::EntryToken. The Root node -is the final side-effecting node in the token chain. For example, in a single -basic block function it would be the return node.
+ always a marker node with an Opcode of ISD::EntryToken. The Root + node is the final side-effecting node in the token chain. For example, in a + single basic block function it would be the return node.One important concept for SelectionDAGs is the notion of a "legal" vs. -"illegal" DAG. A legal DAG for a target is one that only uses supported -operations and supported types. On a 32-bit PowerPC, for example, a DAG with -a value of type i1, i8, i16, or i64 would be illegal, as would a DAG that uses a -SREM or UREM operation. The -legalize types and -legalize operations phases are -responsible for turning an illegal DAG into a legal DAG.
+ "illegal" DAG. A legal DAG for a target is one that only uses supported + operations and supported types. On a 32-bit PowerPC, for example, a DAG with + a value of type i1, i8, i16, or i64 would be illegal, as would a DAG that + uses a SREM or UREM operation. The + legalize types and + legalize operations phases are + responsible for turning an illegal DAG into a legal DAG.SelectionDAG-based instruction selection consists of the following steps:
After all of these steps are complete, the SelectionDAG is destroyed and the -rest of the code generation passes are run.
+ rest of the code generation passes are run. -One great way to visualize what is going on here is to take advantage of a -few LLC command line options. The following options pop up a window displaying -the SelectionDAG at specific times (if you only get errors printed to the console -while using this, you probably -need to configure your system to -add support for it).
+One great way to visualize what is going on here is to take advantage of a + few LLC command line options. The following options pop up a window + displaying the SelectionDAG at specific times (if you only get errors printed + to the console while using this, you probably + need to configure your system + to add support for it).
The -view-sunit-dags displays the Scheduler's dependency graph. -This graph is based on the final SelectionDAG, with nodes that must be -scheduled together bundled into a single scheduling-unit node, and with -immediate operands and other nodes that aren't relevant for scheduling -omitted. -
+ This graph is based on the final SelectionDAG, with nodes that must be + scheduled together bundled into a single scheduling-unit node, and with + immediate operands and other nodes that aren't relevant for scheduling + omitted. @@ -898,14 +915,15 @@ omitted.The initial SelectionDAG is naïvely peephole expanded from the LLVM -input by the SelectionDAGLowering class in the -lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGISel.cpp file. The intent of this -pass is to expose as much low-level, target-specific details to the SelectionDAG -as possible. This pass is mostly hard-coded (e.g. an LLVM add turns -into an SDNode add while a getelementptr is expanded into the -obvious arithmetic). This pass requires target-specific hooks to lower calls, -returns, varargs, etc. For these features, the -TargetLowering interface is used.
+ input by the SelectionDAGLowering class in the + lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGISel.cpp file. The intent of + this pass is to expose as much low-level, target-specific details to the + SelectionDAG as possible. This pass is mostly hard-coded (e.g. an + LLVM add turns into an SDNode add while a + getelementptr is expanded into the obvious arithmetic). This pass + requires target-specific hooks to lower calls, returns, varargs, etc. For + these features, the TargetLowering + interface is used.The Legalize phase is in charge of converting a DAG to only use the types -that are natively supported by the target.
- -There are two main ways of converting values of unsupported scalar types - to values of supported types: converting small types to - larger types ("promoting"), and breaking up large integer types - into smaller ones ("expanding"). For example, a target might require - that all f32 values are promoted to f64 and that all i1/i8/i16 values - are promoted to i32. The same target might require that all i64 values - be expanded into pairs of i32 values. These changes can insert sign and - zero extensions as needed to make sure that the final code has the same - behavior as the input.
- -There are two main ways of converting values of unsupported vector types - to value of supported types: splitting vector types, multiple times if - necessary, until a legal type is found, and extending vector types by - adding elements to the end to round them out to legal types ("widening"). - If a vector gets split all the way down to single-element parts with - no supported vector type being found, the elements are converted to - scalars ("scalarizing").
- -A target implementation tells the legalizer which types are supported - (and which register class to use for them) by calling the + that are natively supported by the target.
+ +There are two main ways of converting values of unsupported scalar types to + values of supported types: converting small types to larger types + ("promoting"), and breaking up large integer types into smaller ones + ("expanding"). For example, a target might require that all f32 values are + promoted to f64 and that all i1/i8/i16 values are promoted to i32. The same + target might require that all i64 values be expanded into pairs of i32 + values. These changes can insert sign and zero extensions as needed to make + sure that the final code has the same behavior as the input.
+ +There are two main ways of converting values of unsupported vector types to + value of supported types: splitting vector types, multiple times if + necessary, until a legal type is found, and extending vector types by adding + elements to the end to round them out to legal types ("widening"). If a + vector gets split all the way down to single-element parts with no supported + vector type being found, the elements are converted to scalars + ("scalarizing").
+ +A target implementation tells the legalizer which types are supported (and + which register class to use for them) by calling the addRegisterClass method in its TargetLowering constructor.
The Legalize phase is in charge of converting a DAG to only use the -operations that are natively supported by the target.
+ operations that are natively supported by the target. -Targets often have weird constraints, such as not supporting every - operation on every supported datatype (e.g. X86 does not support byte - conditional moves and PowerPC does not support sign-extending loads from - a 16-bit memory location). Legalize takes care of this by open-coding - another sequence of operations to emulate the operation ("expansion"), by - promoting one type to a larger type that supports the operation - ("promotion"), or by using a target-specific hook to implement the - legalization ("custom").
+Targets often have weird constraints, such as not supporting every operation + on every supported datatype (e.g. X86 does not support byte conditional moves + and PowerPC does not support sign-extending loads from a 16-bit memory + location). Legalize takes care of this by open-coding another sequence of + operations to emulate the operation ("expansion"), by promoting one type to a + larger type that supports the operation ("promotion"), or by using a + target-specific hook to implement the legalization ("custom").
A target implementation tells the legalizer which operations are not supported (and which of the above three actions to take) by calling the @@ -968,11 +984,11 @@ operations that are natively supported by the target.
constructor.Prior to the existence of the Legalize passes, we required that every target -selector supported and handled every -operator and type even if they are not natively supported. The introduction of -the Legalize phases allows all of the canonicalization patterns to be shared -across targets, and makes it very easy to optimize the canonicalized code -because it is still in the form of a DAG.
+ selector supported and handled every + operator and type even if they are not natively supported. The introduction + of the Legalize phases allows all of the canonicalization patterns to be + shared across targets, and makes it very easy to optimize the canonicalized + code because it is still in the form of a DAG.The SelectionDAG optimization phase is run multiple times for code generation, -immediately after the DAG is built and once after each legalization. The first -run of the pass allows the initial code to be cleaned up (e.g. performing -optimizations that depend on knowing that the operators have restricted type -inputs). Subsequent runs of the pass clean up the messy code generated by the -Legalize passes, which allows Legalize to be very simple (it can focus on making -code legal instead of focusing on generating good and legal code).
+The SelectionDAG optimization phase is run multiple times for code + generation, immediately after the DAG is built and once after each + legalization. The first run of the pass allows the initial code to be + cleaned up (e.g. performing optimizations that depend on knowing that the + operators have restricted type inputs). Subsequent runs of the pass clean up + the messy code generated by the Legalize passes, which allows Legalize to be + very simple (it can focus on making code legal instead of focusing on + generating good and legal code).
One important class of optimizations performed is optimizing inserted sign -and zero extension instructions. We currently use ad-hoc techniques, but could -move to more rigorous techniques in the future. Here are some good papers on -the subject:
+ and zero extension instructions. We currently use ad-hoc techniques, but + could move to more rigorous techniques in the future. Here are some good + papers on the subject: -
- "Widening
- integer arithmetic"
- Kevin Redwine and Norman Ramsey
- International Conference on Compiler Construction (CC) 2004
-
"Widening
+ integer arithmetic"
+ Kevin Redwine and Norman Ramsey
+ International Conference on Compiler Construction (CC) 2004
- "Effective
- sign extension elimination"
- Motohiro Kawahito, Hideaki Komatsu, and Toshio Nakatani
- Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2002 Conference on Programming Language Design
- and Implementation.
-
"Effective
+ sign extension elimination"
+ Motohiro Kawahito, Hideaki Komatsu, and Toshio Nakatani
+ Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2002 Conference on Programming Language Design
+ and Implementation.
The Select phase is the bulk of the target-specific code for instruction -selection. This phase takes a legal SelectionDAG as input, pattern matches the -instructions supported by the target to this DAG, and produces a new DAG of -target code. For example, consider the following LLVM fragment:
+ selection. This phase takes a legal SelectionDAG as input, pattern matches + the instructions supported by the target to this DAG, and produces a new DAG + of target code. For example, consider the following LLVM fragment:@@ -1036,7 +1048,7 @@ target code. For example, consider the following LLVM fragment:
This LLVM code corresponds to a SelectionDAG that looks basically like -this:
+ this:@@ -1044,9 +1056,9 @@ this:
If a target supports floating point multiply-and-add (FMA) operations, one -of the adds can be merged with the multiply. On the PowerPC, for example, the -output of the instruction selector might look like this DAG:
+If a target supports floating point multiply-and-add (FMA) operations, one of + the adds can be merged with the multiply. On the PowerPC, for example, the + output of the instruction selector might look like this DAG:
@@ -1075,92 +1087,104 @@ def FADDS : AForm_2<59, 21,
The portion of the instruction definition in bold indicates the pattern used -to match the instruction. The DAG operators (like fmul/fadd) -are defined in the lib/Target/TargetSelectionDAG.td file. -"F4RC" is the register class of the input and result values.
+ to match the instruction. The DAG operators + (like fmul/fadd) are defined in + the lib/Target/TargetSelectionDAG.td file. "F4RC" is the + register class of the input and result values. -The TableGen DAG instruction selector generator reads the instruction -patterns in the .td file and automatically builds parts of the pattern -matching code for your target. It has the following strengths:
+The TableGen DAG instruction selector generator reads the instruction + patterns in the .td file and automatically builds parts of the + pattern matching code for your target. It has the following strengths:
+
// Arbitrary immediate support. Implement in terms of LIS/ORI.
def : Pat<(i32 imm:$imm),
(ORI (LIS (HI16 imm:$imm)), (LO16 imm:$imm))>;
-
- While it has many strengths, the system currently has some limitations, -primarily because it is a work in progress and is not yet finished:
+ primarily because it is a work in progress and is not yet finished:Despite these limitations, the instruction selector generator is still quite -useful for most of the binary and logical operations in typical instruction -sets. If you run into any problems or can't figure out how to do something, -please let Chris know!
+ useful for most of the binary and logical operations in typical instruction + sets. If you run into any problems or can't figure out how to do something, + please let Chris know!The scheduling phase takes the DAG of target instructions from the selection -phase and assigns an order. The scheduler can pick an order depending on -various constraints of the machines (i.e. order for minimal register pressure or -try to cover instruction latencies). Once an order is established, the DAG is -converted to a list of MachineInstrs and -the SelectionDAG is destroyed.
+ phase and assigns an order. The scheduler can pick an order depending on + various constraints of the machines (i.e. order for minimal register pressure + or try to cover instruction latencies). Once an order is established, the + DAG is converted to a list + of MachineInstrs and the SelectionDAG is + destroyed.Note that this phase is logically separate from the instruction selection -phase, but is tied to it closely in the code because it operates on -SelectionDAGs.
+ phase, but is tied to it closely in the code because it operates on + SelectionDAGs.Live Intervals are the ranges (intervals) where a variable is live. -They are used by some register allocator passes to -determine if two or more virtual registers which require the same physical -register are live at the same point in the program (i.e., they conflict). When -this situation occurs, one virtual register must be spilled.
+ They are used by some register allocator passes to + determine if two or more virtual registers which require the same physical + register are live at the same point in the program (i.e., they conflict). + When this situation occurs, one virtual register must be spilled.The first step in determining the live intervals of variables is to -calculate the set of registers that are immediately dead after the -instruction (i.e., the instruction calculates the value, but it is -never used) and the set of registers that are used by the instruction, -but are never used after the instruction (i.e., they are killed). Live -variable information is computed for each virtual register and -register allocatable physical register in the function. This -is done in a very efficient manner because it uses SSA to sparsely -compute lifetime information for virtual registers (which are in SSA -form) and only has to track physical registers within a block. Before -register allocation, LLVM can assume that physical registers are only -live within a single basic block. This allows it to do a single, -local analysis to resolve physical register lifetimes within each -basic block. If a physical register is not register allocatable (e.g., -a stack pointer or condition codes), it is not tracked.
- -Physical registers may be live in to or out of a function. Live in values -are typically arguments in registers. Live out values are typically return -values in registers. Live in values are marked as such, and are given a dummy -"defining" instruction during live intervals analysis. If the last basic block -of a function is a return, then it's marked as using all live out -values in the function.
- -PHI nodes need to be handled specially, because the calculation -of the live variable information from a depth first traversal of the CFG of -the function won't guarantee that a virtual register used by the PHI -node is defined before it's used. When a PHI node is encountered, only -the definition is handled, because the uses will be handled in other basic -blocks.
+The first step in determining the live intervals of variables is to calculate + the set of registers that are immediately dead after the instruction (i.e., + the instruction calculates the value, but it is never used) and the set of + registers that are used by the instruction, but are never used after the + instruction (i.e., they are killed). Live variable information is computed + for each virtual register and register allocatable physical + register in the function. This is done in a very efficient manner because it + uses SSA to sparsely compute lifetime information for virtual registers + (which are in SSA form) and only has to track physical registers within a + block. Before register allocation, LLVM can assume that physical registers + are only live within a single basic block. This allows it to do a single, + local analysis to resolve physical register lifetimes within each basic + block. If a physical register is not register allocatable (e.g., a stack + pointer or condition codes), it is not tracked.
+ +Physical registers may be live in to or out of a function. Live in values are + typically arguments in registers. Live out values are typically return values + in registers. Live in values are marked as such, and are given a dummy + "defining" instruction during live intervals analysis. If the last basic + block of a function is a return, then it's marked as using all live + out values in the function.
+ +PHI nodes need to be handled specially, because the calculation of + the live variable information from a depth first traversal of the CFG of the + function won't guarantee that a virtual register used by the PHI + node is defined before it's used. When a PHI node is encountered, + only the definition is handled, because the uses will be handled in other + basic blocks.
For each PHI node of the current basic block, we simulate an -assignment at the end of the current basic block and traverse the successor -basic blocks. If a successor basic block has a PHI node and one of -the PHI node's operands is coming from the current basic block, -then the variable is marked as alive within the current basic block -and all of its predecessor basic blocks, until the basic block with the -defining instruction is encountered.
+ assignment at the end of the current basic block and traverse the successor + basic blocks. If a successor basic block has a PHI node and one of + the PHI node's operands is coming from the current basic block, then + the variable is marked as alive within the current basic block and all + of its predecessor basic blocks, until the basic block with the defining + instruction is encountered.We now have the information available to perform the live intervals analysis -and build the live intervals themselves. We start off by numbering the basic -blocks and machine instructions. We then handle the "live-in" values. These -are in physical registers, so the physical register is assumed to be killed by -the end of the basic block. Live intervals for virtual registers are computed -for some ordering of the machine instructions [1, N]. A live interval -is an interval [i, j), where 1 <= i <= j < N, for which a -variable is live.
+ and build the live intervals themselves. We start off by numbering the basic + blocks and machine instructions. We then handle the "live-in" values. These + are in physical registers, so the physical register is assumed to be killed + by the end of the basic block. Live intervals for virtual registers are + computed for some ordering of the machine instructions [1, N]. A + live interval is an interval [i, j), where 1 <= i <= j + < N, for which a variable is live.More to come...
@@ -1294,13 +1319,12 @@ variable is live.The Register Allocation problem consists in mapping a program -Pv, that can use an unbounded number of virtual -registers, to a program Pp that contains a finite -(possibly small) number of physical registers. Each target architecture has -a different number of physical registers. If the number of physical -registers is not enough to accommodate all the virtual registers, some of -them will have to be mapped into memory. These virtuals are called -spilled virtuals.
+ Pv, that can use an unbounded number of virtual registers, + to a program Pp that contains a finite (possibly small) + number of physical registers. Each target architecture has a different number + of physical registers. If the number of physical registers is not enough to + accommodate all the virtual registers, some of them will have to be mapped + into memory. These virtuals are called spilled virtuals.In LLVM, physical registers are denoted by integer numbers that -normally range from 1 to 1023. To see how this numbering is defined -for a particular architecture, you can read the -GenRegisterNames.inc file for that architecture. For -instance, by inspecting -lib/Target/X86/X86GenRegisterNames.inc we see that the 32-bit -register EAX is denoted by 15, and the MMX register -MM0 is mapped to 48.
- -Some architectures contain registers that share the same physical -location. A notable example is the X86 platform. For instance, in the -X86 architecture, the registers EAX, AX and -AL share the first eight bits. These physical registers are -marked as aliased in LLVM. Given a particular architecture, you -can check which registers are aliased by inspecting its -RegisterInfo.td file. Moreover, the method -TargetRegisterInfo::getAliasSet(p_reg) returns an array containing -all the physical registers aliased to the register p_reg.
+In LLVM, physical registers are denoted by integer numbers that normally + range from 1 to 1023. To see how this numbering is defined for a particular + architecture, you can read the GenRegisterNames.inc file for that + architecture. For instance, by + inspecting lib/Target/X86/X86GenRegisterNames.inc we see that the + 32-bit register EAX is denoted by 15, and the MMX register + MM0 is mapped to 48.
+ +Some architectures contain registers that share the same physical location. A + notable example is the X86 platform. For instance, in the X86 architecture, + the registers EAX, AX and AL share the first eight + bits. These physical registers are marked as aliased in LLVM. Given a + particular architecture, you can check which registers are aliased by + inspecting its RegisterInfo.td file. Moreover, the method + TargetRegisterInfo::getAliasSet(p_reg) returns an array containing + all the physical registers aliased to the register p_reg.
Physical registers, in LLVM, are grouped in Register Classes. -Elements in the same register class are functionally equivalent, and can -be interchangeably used. Each virtual register can only be mapped to -physical registers of a particular class. For instance, in the X86 -architecture, some virtuals can only be allocated to 8 bit registers. -A register class is described by TargetRegisterClass objects. -To discover if a virtual register is compatible with a given physical, -this code can be used: -
+ Elements in the same register class are functionally equivalent, and can be + interchangeably used. Each virtual register can only be mapped to physical + registers of a particular class. For instance, in the X86 architecture, some + virtuals can only be allocated to 8 bit registers. A register class is + described by TargetRegisterClass objects. To discover if a virtual + register is compatible with a given physical, this code can be used:@@ -1354,69 +1374,63 @@ bool RegMapping_Fer::compatible_class(MachineFunction &mf,
Sometimes, mostly for debugging purposes, it is useful to change -the number of physical registers available in the target -architecture. This must be done statically, inside the -TargetRegsterInfo.td file. Just grep for -RegisterClass, the last parameter of which is a list of -registers. Just commenting some out is one simple way to avoid them -being used. A more polite way is to explicitly exclude some registers -from the allocation order. See the definition of the -GR register class in -lib/Target/IA64/IA64RegisterInfo.td for an example of this -(e.g., numReservedRegs registers are hidden.)
- -Virtual registers are also denoted by integer numbers. Contrary to -physical registers, different virtual registers never share the same -number. The smallest virtual register is normally assigned the number -1024. This may change, so, in order to know which is the first virtual -register, you should access -TargetRegisterInfo::FirstVirtualRegister. Any register whose -number is greater than or equal to -TargetRegisterInfo::FirstVirtualRegister is considered a virtual -register. Whereas physical registers are statically defined in a -TargetRegisterInfo.td file and cannot be created by the -application developer, that is not the case with virtual registers. -In order to create new virtual registers, use the method -MachineRegisterInfo::createVirtualRegister(). This method will return a -virtual register with the highest code. -
- -Before register allocation, the operands of an instruction are -mostly virtual registers, although physical registers may also be -used. In order to check if a given machine operand is a register, use -the boolean function MachineOperand::isRegister(). To obtain -the integer code of a register, use -MachineOperand::getReg(). An instruction may define or use a -register. For instance, ADD reg:1026 := reg:1025 reg:1024 -defines the registers 1024, and uses registers 1025 and 1026. Given a -register operand, the method MachineOperand::isUse() informs -if that register is being used by the instruction. The method -MachineOperand::isDef() informs if that registers is being -defined.
- -We will call physical registers present in the LLVM bitcode before -register allocation pre-colored registers. Pre-colored -registers are used in many different situations, for instance, to pass -parameters of functions calls, and to store results of particular -instructions. There are two types of pre-colored registers: the ones -implicitly defined, and those explicitly -defined. Explicitly defined registers are normal operands, and can be -accessed with MachineInstr::getOperand(int)::getReg(). In -order to check which registers are implicitly defined by an -instruction, use the -TargetInstrInfo::get(opcode)::ImplicitDefs, where -opcode is the opcode of the target instruction. One important -difference between explicit and implicit physical registers is that -the latter are defined statically for each instruction, whereas the -former may vary depending on the program being compiled. For example, -an instruction that represents a function call will always implicitly -define or use the same set of physical registers. To read the -registers implicitly used by an instruction, use -TargetInstrInfo::get(opcode)::ImplicitUses. Pre-colored -registers impose constraints on any register allocation algorithm. The -register allocator must make sure that none of them is been -overwritten by the values of virtual registers while still alive.
+Sometimes, mostly for debugging purposes, it is useful to change the number + of physical registers available in the target architecture. This must be done + statically, inside the TargetRegsterInfo.td file. Just grep + for RegisterClass, the last parameter of which is a list of + registers. Just commenting some out is one simple way to avoid them being + used. A more polite way is to explicitly exclude some registers from + the allocation order. See the definition of the GR8 register + class in lib/Target/X86/X86RegisterInfo.td for an example of this. +
+ +Virtual registers are also denoted by integer numbers. Contrary to physical + registers, different virtual registers never share the same number. The + smallest virtual register is normally assigned the number 1024. This may + change, so, in order to know which is the first virtual register, you should + access TargetRegisterInfo::FirstVirtualRegister. Any register whose + number is greater than or equal + to TargetRegisterInfo::FirstVirtualRegister is considered a virtual + register. Whereas physical registers are statically defined in + a TargetRegisterInfo.td file and cannot be created by the + application developer, that is not the case with virtual registers. In order + to create new virtual registers, use the + method MachineRegisterInfo::createVirtualRegister(). This method + will return a virtual register with the highest code.
+ +Before register allocation, the operands of an instruction are mostly virtual + registers, although physical registers may also be used. In order to check if + a given machine operand is a register, use the boolean + function MachineOperand::isRegister(). To obtain the integer code of + a register, use MachineOperand::getReg(). An instruction may define + or use a register. For instance, ADD reg:1026 := reg:1025 reg:1024 + defines the registers 1024, and uses registers 1025 and 1026. Given a + register operand, the method MachineOperand::isUse() informs if that + register is being used by the instruction. The + method MachineOperand::isDef() informs if that registers is being + defined.
+ +We will call physical registers present in the LLVM bitcode before register + allocation pre-colored registers. Pre-colored registers are used in + many different situations, for instance, to pass parameters of functions + calls, and to store results of particular instructions. There are two types + of pre-colored registers: the ones implicitly defined, and + those explicitly defined. Explicitly defined registers are normal + operands, and can be accessed + with MachineInstr::getOperand(int)::getReg(). In order to check + which registers are implicitly defined by an instruction, use + the TargetInstrInfo::get(opcode)::ImplicitDefs, + where opcode is the opcode of the target instruction. One important + difference between explicit and implicit physical registers is that the + latter are defined statically for each instruction, whereas the former may + vary depending on the program being compiled. For example, an instruction + that represents a function call will always implicitly define or use the same + set of physical registers. To read the registers implicitly used by an + instruction, + use TargetInstrInfo::get(opcode)::ImplicitUses. Pre-colored + registers impose constraints on any register allocation algorithm. The + register allocator must make sure that none of them is been overwritten by + the values of virtual registers while still alive.
There are two ways to map virtual registers to physical registers (or to -memory slots). The first way, that we will call direct mapping, -is based on the use of methods of the classes TargetRegisterInfo, -and MachineOperand. The second way, that we will call -indirect mapping, relies on the VirtRegMap class in -order to insert loads and stores sending and getting values to and from -memory.
- -The direct mapping provides more flexibility to the developer of -the register allocator; however, it is more error prone, and demands -more implementation work. Basically, the programmer will have to -specify where load and store instructions should be inserted in the -target function being compiled in order to get and store values in -memory. To assign a physical register to a virtual register present in -a given operand, use MachineOperand::setReg(p_reg). To insert -a store instruction, use -TargetRegisterInfo::storeRegToStackSlot(...), and to insert a load -instruction, use TargetRegisterInfo::loadRegFromStackSlot.
- -The indirect mapping shields the application developer from the -complexities of inserting load and store instructions. In order to map -a virtual register to a physical one, use -VirtRegMap::assignVirt2Phys(vreg, preg). In order to map a -certain virtual register to memory, use -VirtRegMap::assignVirt2StackSlot(vreg). This method will -return the stack slot where vreg's value will be located. If -it is necessary to map another virtual register to the same stack -slot, use VirtRegMap::assignVirt2StackSlot(vreg, -stack_location). One important point to consider when using the -indirect mapping, is that even if a virtual register is mapped to -memory, it still needs to be mapped to a physical register. This -physical register is the location where the virtual register is -supposed to be found before being stored or after being reloaded.
- -If the indirect strategy is used, after all the virtual registers -have been mapped to physical registers or stack slots, it is necessary -to use a spiller object to place load and store instructions in the -code. Every virtual that has been mapped to a stack slot will be -stored to memory after been defined and will be loaded before being -used. The implementation of the spiller tries to recycle load/store -instructions, avoiding unnecessary instructions. For an example of how -to invoke the spiller, see -RegAllocLinearScan::runOnMachineFunction in -lib/CodeGen/RegAllocLinearScan.cpp.
+ memory slots). The first way, that we will call direct mapping, is + based on the use of methods of the classes TargetRegisterInfo, + and MachineOperand. The second way, that we will call indirect + mapping, relies on the VirtRegMap class in order to insert loads + and stores sending and getting values to and from memory. + +The direct mapping provides more flexibility to the developer of the register + allocator; however, it is more error prone, and demands more implementation + work. Basically, the programmer will have to specify where load and store + instructions should be inserted in the target function being compiled in + order to get and store values in memory. To assign a physical register to a + virtual register present in a given operand, + use MachineOperand::setReg(p_reg). To insert a store instruction, + use TargetRegisterInfo::storeRegToStackSlot(...), and to insert a + load instruction, use TargetRegisterInfo::loadRegFromStackSlot.
+ +The indirect mapping shields the application developer from the complexities + of inserting load and store instructions. In order to map a virtual register + to a physical one, use VirtRegMap::assignVirt2Phys(vreg, preg). In + order to map a certain virtual register to memory, + use VirtRegMap::assignVirt2StackSlot(vreg). This method will return + the stack slot where vreg's value will be located. If it is + necessary to map another virtual register to the same stack slot, + use VirtRegMap::assignVirt2StackSlot(vreg, stack_location). One + important point to consider when using the indirect mapping, is that even if + a virtual register is mapped to memory, it still needs to be mapped to a + physical register. This physical register is the location where the virtual + register is supposed to be found before being stored or after being + reloaded.
+ +If the indirect strategy is used, after all the virtual registers have been + mapped to physical registers or stack slots, it is necessary to use a spiller + object to place load and store instructions in the code. Every virtual that + has been mapped to a stack slot will be stored to memory after been defined + and will be loaded before being used. The implementation of the spiller tries + to recycle load/store instructions, avoiding unnecessary instructions. For an + example of how to invoke the spiller, + see RegAllocLinearScan::runOnMachineFunction + in lib/CodeGen/RegAllocLinearScan.cpp.
With very rare exceptions (e.g., function calls), the LLVM machine -code instructions are three address instructions. That is, each -instruction is expected to define at most one register, and to use at -most two registers. However, some architectures use two address -instructions. In this case, the defined register is also one of the -used register. For instance, an instruction such as ADD %EAX, -%EBX, in X86 is actually equivalent to %EAX = %EAX + -%EBX.
+With very rare exceptions (e.g., function calls), the LLVM machine code + instructions are three address instructions. That is, each instruction is + expected to define at most one register, and to use at most two registers. + However, some architectures use two address instructions. In this case, the + defined register is also one of the used register. For instance, an + instruction such as ADD %EAX, %EBX, in X86 is actually equivalent + to %EAX = %EAX + %EBX.
In order to produce correct code, LLVM must convert three address -instructions that represent two address instructions into true two -address instructions. LLVM provides the pass -TwoAddressInstructionPass for this specific purpose. It must -be run before register allocation takes place. After its execution, -the resulting code may no longer be in SSA form. This happens, for -instance, in situations where an instruction such as %a = ADD %b -%c is converted to two instructions such as:
+ instructions that represent two address instructions into true two address + instructions. LLVM provides the pass TwoAddressInstructionPass for + this specific purpose. It must be run before register allocation takes + place. After its execution, the resulting code may no longer be in SSA + form. This happens, for instance, in situations where an instruction such + as %a = ADD %b %c is converted to two instructions such as:@@ -1508,8 +1516,8 @@ instance, in situations where an instruction such as %a = ADD %b
Notice that, internally, the second instruction is represented as -ADD %a[def/use] %c. I.e., the register operand %a is -both used and defined by the instruction.
+ ADD %a[def/use] %c. I.e., the register operand %a is both + used and defined by the instruction.An important transformation that happens during register allocation is called -the SSA Deconstruction Phase. The SSA form simplifies many -analyses that are performed on the control flow graph of -programs. However, traditional instruction sets do not implement -PHI instructions. Thus, in order to generate executable code, compilers -must replace PHI instructions with other instructions that preserve their -semantics.
+ the SSA Deconstruction Phase. The SSA form simplifies many analyses + that are performed on the control flow graph of programs. However, + traditional instruction sets do not implement PHI instructions. Thus, in + order to generate executable code, compilers must replace PHI instructions + with other instructions that preserve their semantics. -There are many ways in which PHI instructions can safely be removed -from the target code. The most traditional PHI deconstruction -algorithm replaces PHI instructions with copy instructions. That is -the strategy adopted by LLVM. The SSA deconstruction algorithm is -implemented in lib/CodeGen/PHIElimination.cpp. In order to -invoke this pass, the identifier PHIEliminationID must be -marked as required in the code of the register allocator.
+There are many ways in which PHI instructions can safely be removed from the + target code. The most traditional PHI deconstruction algorithm replaces PHI + instructions with copy instructions. That is the strategy adopted by + LLVM. The SSA deconstruction algorithm is implemented + in lib/CodeGen/PHIElimination.cpp. In order to invoke this pass, the + identifier PHIEliminationID must be marked as required in the code + of the register allocator.
Instruction folding is an optimization performed during -register allocation that removes unnecessary copy instructions. For -instance, a sequence of instructions such as:
+Instruction folding is an optimization performed during register + allocation that removes unnecessary copy instructions. For instance, a + sequence of instructions such as:
@@ -1564,12 +1571,13 @@ instance, a sequence of instructions such as:
Instructions can be folded with the -TargetRegisterInfo::foldMemoryOperand(...) method. Care must be -taken when folding instructions; a folded instruction can be quite -different from the original instruction. See -LiveIntervals::addIntervalsForSpills in -lib/CodeGen/LiveIntervalAnalysis.cpp for an example of its use.
+Instructions can be folded with + the TargetRegisterInfo::foldMemoryOperand(...) method. Care must be + taken when folding instructions; a folded instruction can be quite different + from the original + instruction. See LiveIntervals::addIntervalsForSpills + in lib/CodeGen/LiveIntervalAnalysis.cpp for an example of its + use.
The LLVM infrastructure provides the application developer with -three different register allocators:
+The LLVM infrastructure provides the application developer with three + different register allocators:
The type of register allocator used in llc can be chosen with the -command line option -regalloc=...:
+ command line option -regalloc=...:-$ llc -f -regalloc=simple file.bc -o sp.s; -$ llc -f -regalloc=local file.bc -o lc.s; -$ llc -f -regalloc=linearscan file.bc -o ln.s; +$ llc -regalloc=simple file.bc -o sp.s; +$ llc -regalloc=local file.bc -o lc.s; +$ llc -regalloc=linearscan file.bc -o ln.s;
This section of the document explains features or design decisions that -are specific to the code generator for a particular target.
+This section of the document explains features or design decisions that are + specific to the code generator for a particular target.
Tail call optimization, callee reusing the stack of the caller, is currently supported on x86/x86-64 and PowerPC. It is performed if: -
x86/x86-64 constraints: -
PowerPC constraints: -
Example:
-Call as llc -tailcallopt test.ll. -
+Tail call optimization, callee reusing the stack of the caller, is currently + supported on x86/x86-64 and PowerPC. It is performed if:
+ +
x86/x86-64 constraints:
+ +PowerPC constraints:
+ +Example:
+ +Call as llc -tailcallopt test.ll.
+ +
declare fastcc i32 @tailcallee(i32 inreg %a1, i32 inreg %a2, i32 %a3, i32 %a4)
define fastcc i32 @tailcaller(i32 %in1, i32 %in2) {
%l1 = add i32 %in1, %in2
%tmp = tail call fastcc i32 @tailcallee(i32 %in1 inreg, i32 %in2 inreg, i32 %in1, i32 %l1)
ret i32 %tmp
-}
- Implications of -tailcallopt:
-To support tail call optimization in situations where the callee has more arguments than the caller a 'callee pops arguments' convention is used. This currently causes each fastcc call that is not tail call optimized (because one or more of above constraints are not met) to be followed by a readjustment of the stack. So performance might be worse in such cases.
-On x86 and x86-64 one register is reserved for indirect tail calls (e.g via a function pointer). So there is one less register for integer argument passing. For x86 this means 2 registers (if inreg parameter attribute is used) and for x86-64 this means 5 register are used.
+} + +Implications of -tailcallopt:
+ +To support tail call optimization in situations where the callee has more + arguments than the caller a 'callee pops arguments' convention is used. This + currently causes each fastcc call that is not tail call optimized + (because one or more of above constraints are not met) to be followed by a + readjustment of the stack. So performance might be worse in such cases.
+ +On x86 and x86-64 one register is reserved for indirect tail calls (e.g via a + function pointer). So there is one less register for integer argument + passing. For x86 this means 2 registers (if inreg parameter + attribute is used) and for x86-64 this means 5 register are used.
+The X86 code generator lives in the lib/Target/X86 directory. This -code generator is capable of targeting a variety of x86-32 and x86-64 -processors, and includes support for ISA extensions such as MMX and SSE. -
+ code generator is capable of targeting a variety of x86-32 and x86-64 + processors, and includes support for ISA extensions such as MMX and SSE.The following are the known target triples that are supported by the X86 -backend. This is not an exhaustive list, and it would be useful to add those -that people test.
+The following are the known target triples that are supported by the X86 + backend. This is not an exhaustive list, and it would be useful to add those + that people test.
The following target-specific calling conventions are known to backend:
The x86 has a very flexible way of accessing memory. It is capable of -forming memory addresses of the following expression directly in integer -instructions (which use ModR/M addressing):
+ forming memory addresses of the following expression directly in integer + instructions (which use ModR/M addressing):-Base + [1,2,4,8] * IndexReg + Disp32 +SegmentReg: Base + [1,2,4,8] * IndexReg + Disp32
In order to represent this, LLVM tracks no less than 4 operands for each -memory operand of this form. This means that the "load" form of 'mov' -has the following MachineOperands in this order:
+In order to represent this, LLVM tracks no less than 5 operands for each + memory operand of this form. This means that the "load" form of + 'mov' has the following MachineOperands in this order:
+-Index: 0 | 1 2 3 4 -Meaning: DestReg, | BaseReg, Scale, IndexReg, Displacement -OperandTy: VirtReg, | VirtReg, UnsImm, VirtReg, SignExtImm +Index: 0 | 1 2 3 4 5 +Meaning: DestReg, | BaseReg, Scale, IndexReg, Displacement Segment +OperandTy: VirtReg, | VirtReg, UnsImm, VirtReg, SignExtImm PhysReg+
Stores, and all other instructions, treat the four memory operands in the -same way and in the same order.
+Stores, and all other instructions, treat the four memory operands in the + same way and in the same order. If the segment register is unspecified + (regno = 0), then no segment override is generated. "Lea" operations do not + have a segment register specified, so they only have 4 operands for their + memory reference.
x86 has the ability to perform loads and stores to different address spaces -via the x86 segment registers. A segment override prefix byte on an instruction -causes the instruction's memory access to go to the specified segment. LLVM -address space 0 is the default address space, which includes the stack, and -any unqualified memory accesses in a program. Address spaces 1-255 are -currently reserved for user-defined code. The GS-segment is represented by -address space 256. Other x86 segments have yet to be allocated address space -numbers. +
x86 has an experimental feature which provides + the ability to perform loads and stores to different address spaces + via the x86 segment registers. A segment override prefix byte on an + instruction causes the instruction's memory access to go to the specified + segment. LLVM address space 0 is the default address space, which includes + the stack, and any unqualified memory accesses in a program. Address spaces + 1-255 are currently reserved for user-defined code. The GS-segment is + represented by address space 256, while the FS-segment is represented by + address space 257. Other x86 segments have yet to be allocated address space + numbers.
+ +While these address spaces may seem similar to TLS via the + thread_local keyword, and often use the same underlying hardware, + there are some fundamental differences.
+ +The thread_local keyword applies to global variables and + specifies that they are to be allocated in thread-local memory. There are + no type qualifiers involved, and these variables can be pointed to with + normal pointers and accessed with normal loads and stores. + The thread_local keyword is target-independent at the LLVM IR + level (though LLVM doesn't yet have implementations of it for some + configurations).
+ +
Special address spaces, in contrast, apply to static types. Every + load and store has a particular address space in its address operand type, + and this is what determines which address space is accessed. + LLVM ignores these special address space qualifiers on global variables, + and does not provide a way to directly allocate storage in them. + At the LLVM IR level, the behavior of these special address spaces depends + in part on the underlying OS or runtime environment, and they are specific + to x86 (and LLVM doesn't yet handle them correctly in some cases).
-Some operating systems use the GS-segment to implement TLS, so care should be -taken when reading and writing to address space 256 on these platforms. +
Some operating systems and runtime environments use (or may in the future + use) the FS/GS-segment registers for various low-level purposes, so care + should be taken when considering them.
An instruction name consists of the base name, a default operand size, and a -a character per operand with an optional special size. For example:
+ a character per operand with an optional special size. For example: -
-ADD8rr -> add, 8-bit register, 8-bit register
-IMUL16rmi -> imul, 16-bit register, 16-bit memory, 16-bit immediate
-IMUL16rmi8 -> imul, 16-bit register, 16-bit memory, 8-bit immediate
-MOVSX32rm16 -> movsx, 32-bit register, 16-bit memory
-
+ADD8rr -> add, 8-bit register, 8-bit register +IMUL16rmi -> imul, 16-bit register, 16-bit memory, 16-bit immediate +IMUL16rmi8 -> imul, 16-bit register, 16-bit memory, 8-bit immediate +MOVSX32rm16 -> movsx, 32-bit register, 16-bit memory ++
The PowerPC code generator lives in the lib/Target/PowerPC directory. The -code generation is retargetable to several variations or subtargets of -the PowerPC ISA; including ppc32, ppc64 and altivec. -
+ code generation is retargetable to several variations or subtargets of + the PowerPC ISA; including ppc32, ppc64 and altivec. +LLVM follows the AIX PowerPC ABI, with two deviations. LLVM uses a PC -relative (PIC) or static addressing for accessing global values, so no TOC (r2) -is used. Second, r31 is used as a frame pointer to allow dynamic growth of a -stack frame. LLVM takes advantage of having no TOC to provide space to save -the frame pointer in the PowerPC linkage area of the caller frame. Other -details of PowerPC ABI can be found at PowerPC ABI. Note: This link describes the 32 bit ABI. The -64 bit ABI is similar except space for GPRs are 8 bytes wide (not 4) and r13 is -reserved for system use.
+ relative (PIC) or static addressing for accessing global values, so no TOC + (r2) is used. Second, r31 is used as a frame pointer to allow dynamic growth + of a stack frame. LLVM takes advantage of having no TOC to provide space to + save the frame pointer in the PowerPC linkage area of the caller frame. + Other details of PowerPC ABI can be found at PowerPC ABI. Note: This link describes the 32 bit ABI. The 64 bit ABI + is similar except space for GPRs are 8 bytes wide (not 4) and r13 is reserved + for system use. +The size of a PowerPC frame is usually fixed for the duration of a -function’s invocation. Since the frame is fixed size, all references into -the frame can be accessed via fixed offsets from the stack pointer. The -exception to this is when dynamic alloca or variable sized arrays are present, -then a base pointer (r31) is used as a proxy for the stack pointer and stack -pointer is free to grow or shrink. A base pointer is also used if llvm-gcc is -not passed the -fomit-frame-pointer flag. The stack pointer is always aligned to -16 bytes, so that space allocated for altivec vectors will be properly -aligned.
+ function's invocation. Since the frame is fixed size, all references + into the frame can be accessed via fixed offsets from the stack pointer. The + exception to this is when dynamic alloca or variable sized arrays are + present, then a base pointer (r31) is used as a proxy for the stack pointer + and stack pointer is free to grow or shrink. A base pointer is also used if + llvm-gcc is not passed the -fomit-frame-pointer flag. The stack pointer is + always aligned to 16 bytes, so that space allocated for altivec vectors will + be properly aligned. +An invocation frame is laid out as follows (low memory at top);
-| Linkage |
-
| Parameter area |
-
| Dynamic area |
-
| Locals area |
-
| Saved registers area |
-
| Previous Frame |
-
| Linkage |
+
| Parameter area |
+
| Dynamic area |
+
| Locals area |
+
| Saved registers area |
+
| Previous Frame |
+
The linkage area is used by a callee to save special registers prior -to allocating its own frame. Only three entries are relevant to LLVM. The -first entry is the previous stack pointer (sp), aka link. This allows probing -tools like gdb or exception handlers to quickly scan the frames in the stack. A -function epilog can also use the link to pop the frame from the stack. The -third entry in the linkage area is used to save the return address from the lr -register. Finally, as mentioned above, the last entry is used to save the -previous frame pointer (r31.) The entries in the linkage area are the size of a -GPR, thus the linkage area is 24 bytes long in 32 bit mode and 48 bytes in 64 -bit mode.
-32 bit linkage area
+| 0 | -Saved SP (r1) | -
| 4 | -Saved CR | -
| 8 | -Saved LR | -
| 12 | -Reserved | -
| 16 | -Reserved | -
| 20 | -Saved FP (r31) | -
| 0 | +Saved SP (r1) | +
| 4 | +Saved CR | +
| 8 | +Saved LR | +
| 12 | +Reserved | +
| 16 | +Reserved | +
| 20 | +Saved FP (r31) | +
64 bit linkage area
+| 0 | -Saved SP (r1) | -
| 8 | -Saved CR | -
| 16 | -Saved LR | -
| 24 | -Reserved | -
| 32 | -Reserved | -
| 40 | -Saved FP (r31) | -
| 0 | +Saved SP (r1) | +
| 8 | +Saved CR | +
| 16 | +Saved LR | +
| 24 | +Reserved | +
| 32 | +Reserved | +
| 40 | +Saved FP (r31) | +
The parameter area is used to store arguments being passed to a callee -function. Following the PowerPC ABI, the first few arguments are actually -passed in registers, with the space in the parameter area unused. However, if -there are not enough registers or the callee is a thunk or vararg function, -these register arguments can be spilled into the parameter area. Thus, the -parameter area must be large enough to store all the parameters for the largest -call sequence made by the caller. The size must also be minimally large enough -to spill registers r3-r10. This allows callees blind to the call signature, -such as thunks and vararg functions, enough space to cache the argument -registers. Therefore, the parameter area is minimally 32 bytes (64 bytes in 64 -bit mode.) Also note that since the parameter area is a fixed offset from the -top of the frame, that a callee can access its spilt arguments using fixed -offsets from the stack pointer (or base pointer.)
-Combining the information about the linkage, parameter areas and alignment. A -stack frame is minimally 64 bytes in 32 bit mode and 128 bytes in 64 bit -mode.
-The dynamic area starts out as size zero. If a function uses dynamic -alloca then space is added to the stack, the linkage and parameter areas are -shifted to top of stack, and the new space is available immediately below the -linkage and parameter areas. The cost of shifting the linkage and parameter -areas is minor since only the link value needs to be copied. The link value can -be easily fetched by adding the original frame size to the base pointer. Note -that allocations in the dynamic space need to observe 16 byte alignment.
-The locals area is where the llvm compiler reserves space for local -variables.
-The saved registers area is where the llvm compiler spills callee + saved registers on entry to the callee.
-The saved registers area is where the llvm compiler spills callee saved -registers on entry to the callee.
The llvm prolog and epilog are the same as described in the PowerPC ABI, with -the following exceptions. Callee saved registers are spilled after the frame is -created. This allows the llvm epilog/prolog support to be common with other -targets. The base pointer callee saved register r31 is saved in the TOC slot of -linkage area. This simplifies allocation of space for the base pointer and -makes it convenient to locate programatically and during debugging.
+ the following exceptions. Callee saved registers are spilled after the frame + is created. This allows the llvm epilog/prolog support to be common with + other targets. The base pointer callee saved register r31 is saved in the + TOC slot of linkage area. This simplifies allocation of space for the base + pointer and makes it convenient to locate programatically and during + debugging. +TODO - More to come.
+