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:-
-
- Abstract target description interfaces which -capture important properties about various aspects of the machine, independently -of how they will be used. These interfaces are defined in -include/llvm/Target/. - -
- Classes used to represent the machine code being -generated for a target. These classes are intended to be abstract enough to -represent the machine code for any target machine. These classes are -defined in include/llvm/CodeGen/. - -
- Target-independent algorithms used to implement -various phases of native code generation (register allocation, scheduling, stack -frame representation, etc). This code lives in lib/CodeGen/. - -
- Implementations of the abstract target description -interfaces for particular targets. These machine descriptions make use of -the components provided by LLVM, and can optionally provide custom -target-specific passes, to build complete code generators for a specific target. -Target descriptions live in lib/Target/. - -
- The target-independent JIT components. The LLVM JIT is -completely target independent (it uses the TargetJITInfo structure to -interface for target-specific issues. The code for the target-independent -JIT lives in lib/ExecutionEngine/JIT. - +
- Abstract target description interfaces which + capture important properties about various aspects of the machine, + independently of how they will be used. These interfaces are defined in + include/llvm/Target/. + +
- Classes used to represent the machine code + being generated for a target. These classes are intended to be abstract + enough to represent the machine code for any target machine. These + classes are defined in include/llvm/CodeGen/. + +
- Target-independent algorithms used to implement + various phases of native code generation (register allocation, scheduling, + stack frame representation, etc). This code lives + in lib/CodeGen/. + +
- Implementations of the abstract target description + interfaces for particular targets. These machine descriptions make + use of the components provided by LLVM, and can optionally provide custom + target-specific passes, to build complete code generators for a specific + target. Target descriptions live in lib/Target/. + +
- The target-independent JIT components. The LLVM JIT is + completely target independent (it uses the TargetJITInfo + structure to interface for target-specific issues. The code for the + target-independent JIT lives in lib/ExecutionEngine/JIT.
-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:
-
-
- Instruction Selection - This phase -determines an efficient way to express the input LLVM code in the target -instruction set. -This stage produces the initial code for the program in the target instruction -set, then makes use of virtual registers in SSA form and physical registers that -represent any required register assignments due to target constraints or calling -conventions. This step turns the LLVM code into a DAG of target -instructions. - -
- Scheduling and Formation - This -phase takes the DAG of target instructions produced by the instruction selection -phase, determines an ordering of the instructions, then emits the instructions -as MachineInstrs with that ordering. Note -that we describe this in the instruction selection -section because it operates on a SelectionDAG. - - -
- SSA-based Machine Code Optimizations - This -optional stage consists of a series of machine-code optimizations that -operate on the SSA-form produced by the instruction selector. Optimizations -like modulo-scheduling or peephole optimization work here. - - -
- Register Allocation - The -target code is transformed from an infinite virtual register file in SSA form -to the concrete register file used by the target. This phase introduces spill -code and eliminates all virtual register references from the program. - -
- Prolog/Epilog Code Insertion - Once the -machine code has been generated for the function and the amount of stack space -required is known (used for LLVM alloca's and spill slots), the prolog and -epilog code for the function can be inserted and "abstract stack location -references" can be eliminated. This stage is responsible for implementing -optimizations like frame-pointer elimination and stack packing. - -
- Late Machine Code Optimizations - Optimizations -that operate on "final" machine code can go here, such as spill code scheduling -and peephole optimizations. - -
- Code Emission - The final stage actually -puts out the code for the current function, either in the target assembler -format or in machine code. - +
- Instruction Selection — This phase + determines an efficient way to express the input LLVM code in the target + instruction set. This stage produces the initial code for the program in + the target instruction set, then makes use of virtual registers in SSA + form and physical registers that represent any required register + assignments due to target constraints or calling conventions. This step + turns the LLVM code into a DAG of target instructions. + +
- Scheduling and Formation — + This phase takes the DAG of target instructions produced by the + instruction selection phase, determines an ordering of the instructions, + then emits the instructions + as MachineInstrs with that ordering. + Note that we describe this in the instruction + selection section because it operates on + a SelectionDAG. + +
- SSA-based Machine Code Optimizations — + This optional stage consists of a series of machine-code optimizations + that operate on the SSA-form produced by the instruction selector. + Optimizations like modulo-scheduling or peephole optimization work + here. + +
- Register Allocation — The target code + is transformed from an infinite virtual register file in SSA form to the + concrete register file used by the target. This phase introduces spill + code and eliminates all virtual register references from the program. + +
- Prolog/Epilog Code Insertion — Once + the machine code has been generated for the function and the amount of + stack space required is known (used for LLVM alloca's and spill slots), + the prolog and epilog code for the function can be inserted and "abstract + stack location references" can be eliminated. This stage is responsible + for implementing optimizations like frame-pointer elimination and stack + packing. + +
- Late Machine Code Optimizations — + Optimizations that operate on "final" machine code can go here, such as + spill code scheduling and peephole optimizations. + +
- Code Emission — The final stage + actually puts out the code for the current function, either in the target + assembler format or in machine code.
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:-
-
- an initial register class to use for various ValueTypes -
- which operations are natively supported by the target machine -
- the return type of setcc operations -
- the type to use for shift amounts +
- an initial register class to use for various ValueTypes, + +
- which operations are natively supported by the target machine, + +
- the return type of setcc operations, + +
- the type to use for shift amounts, and +
- various high-level characteristics, like whether it is profitable to turn division by a constant into a multiplication sequence - +
The MRegisterInfo class (which will eventually be renamed to -TargetRegisterInfo) 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 MRegisterInfo 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.
+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.
--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:
@@ -532,9 +551,8 @@ 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:@@ -575,15 +593,15 @@ 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:
-int %test(int %X, int %Y) {
- %Z = div int %X, %Y
- ret int %Z
+define i32 @test(i32 %X, i32 %Y) {
+ %Z = udiv i32 %X, %Y
+ ret i32 %Z
}
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):@@ -635,9 +654,9 @@ 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:
@@ -649,14 +668,14 @@ 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, a SSARegMap, and a set of live in and -live out registers for the function. 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. In LLVM there are two main forms: -the SelectionDAG based instruction selector framework and an old-style 'simple' -instruction selector, which effectively peephole selects each LLVM instruction -into a series of machine instructions. We recommend that all targets use the -SelectionDAG infrastructure. -
-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.
+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 SDOperand 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::ValueType indicating what type 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 phase is 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:
-
-
- Build initial DAG - This stage - performs a simple translation from the input LLVM code to an illegal - SelectionDAG. -
- Optimize SelectionDAG - This stage - performs simple optimizations on the SelectionDAG to simplify it, and - recognize meta instructions (like rotates and div/rem - pairs) for targets that support these meta operations. This makes the - resultant code more efficient and the select - instructions from DAG phase (below) simpler. -
- Legalize SelectionDAG - This stage - converts the illegal SelectionDAG to a legal SelectionDAG by eliminating - unsupported operations and data types. -
- Optimize SelectionDAG (#2) - This - second run of the SelectionDAG optimizes the newly legalized DAG to - eliminate inefficiencies introduced by legalization. -
- Select instructions from DAG - Finally, - the target instruction selector matches the DAG operations to target - instructions. This process translates the target-independent input DAG into - another DAG of target instructions. -
- SelectionDAG Scheduling and Formation - - The last phase assigns a linear order to the instructions in the - target-instruction DAG and emits them into the MachineFunction being - compiled. This step uses traditional prepass scheduling techniques. +
- Build initial DAG — This stage + performs a simple translation from the input LLVM code to an illegal + SelectionDAG. + +
- Optimize SelectionDAG — This + stage performs simple optimizations on the SelectionDAG to simplify it, + and recognize meta instructions (like rotates + and div/rem pairs) for targets that support these meta + operations. This makes the resultant code more efficient and + the select instructions from DAG phase + (below) simpler. + +
- Legalize SelectionDAG Types + — This stage transforms SelectionDAG nodes to eliminate any types + that are unsupported on the target. + +
- Optimize SelectionDAG — The + SelectionDAG optimizer is run to clean up redundancies exposed by type + legalization. + +
- Legalize SelectionDAG Types — + This stage transforms SelectionDAG nodes to eliminate any types that are + unsupported on the target. + +
- Optimize SelectionDAG — The + SelectionDAG optimizer is run to eliminate inefficiencies introduced by + operation legalization. + +
- Select instructions from DAG — + Finally, the target instruction selector matches the DAG operations to + target instructions. This process translates the target-independent input + DAG into another DAG of target instructions. + +
- SelectionDAG Scheduling and Formation + — The last phase assigns a linear order to the instructions in the + target-instruction DAG and emits them into the MachineFunction being + compiled. This step uses traditional prepass scheduling techniques.
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).
+ +-
+
- -view-dag-combine1-dags displays the DAG after being built, + before the first optimization pass. -
- -view-legalize-dags displays the DAG before Legalization. + +
- -view-dag-combine2-dags displays the DAG before the second + optimization pass. + +
- -view-isel-dags displays the DAG before the Select phase. + +
- -view-sched-dags displays the DAG before Scheduling. +
One great way to visualize what is going on here is to take advantage of a -few LLC command line options. In particular, the -view-isel-dags -option pops up a window with the SelectionDAG input to the Select phase for all -of the code compiled (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-sched-dags option -views the SelectionDAG output from the Select phase and input to the Scheduler -phase.
+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.
@@ -865,14 +916,48 @@ phase.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 geteelementptr 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 + addRegisterClass method in its TargetLowering constructor.
The Legalize phase is in charge of converting a DAG to only use the types and -operations that are natively supported by the target. This involves two major -tasks:
+The Legalize phase is in charge of converting a DAG to only use the + operations that are natively supported by the target.
--
-
Convert values of unsupported types to values of supported types.
-There are two main ways of doing this: 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 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.
-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.
-
-
-Eliminate operations that are not 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").
-A target implementation tells the legalizer which operations are not - supported (and which of the above three actions to take) by calling the - setOperationAction method in its TargetLowering - constructor.
-
-
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 + setOperationAction method in its TargetLowering + constructor.
-Prior to the existance of the Legalize pass, 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 phase allows all of the cannonicalization patterns to be shared -across targets, and makes it very easy to optimize the cannonicalized code -because it is still in the form of a DAG.
+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.
The SelectionDAG optimization phase is run twice for code generation: once -immediately after the DAG is built and once after 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). The second run of the pass cleans up the messy code generated by the -Legalize pass, 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:
- -
- "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:-%t1 = add float %W, %X -%t2 = mul float %t1, %Y -%t3 = add float %t2, %Z +%t1 = fadd float %W, %X +%t2 = fmul float %t1, %Y +%t3 = fadd float %t2, %Z
This LLVM code corresponds to a SelectionDAG that looks basically like -this:
+ this:@@ -995,9 +1057,9 @@ 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:
@@ -1026,91 +1088,104 @@ 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 include/llvm/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:
-
-
- At compiler-compiler time, it analyzes your instruction patterns and tells - you if your patterns make sense or not. -
- It can handle arbitrary constraints on operands for the pattern match. In - particular, it is straight-forward to say things like "match any immediate - that is a 13-bit sign-extended value". For examples, see the - immSExt16 and related tblgen classes in the PowerPC - backend. -
- It knows several important identities for the patterns defined. For - example, it knows that addition is commutative, so it allows the - FMADDS pattern above to match "(fadd X, (fmul Y, Z))" as - well as "(fadd (fmul X, Y), Z)", without the target author having - to specially handle this case. -
- It has a full-featured type-inferencing system. In particular, you should - rarely have to explicitly tell the system what type parts of your patterns - are. In the FMADDS case above, we didn't have to tell - tblgen that all of the nodes in the pattern are of type 'f32'. It - was able to infer and propagate this knowledge from the fact that - F4RC has type 'f32'. -
- Targets can define their own (and rely on built-in) "pattern fragments". - Pattern fragments are chunks of reusable patterns that get inlined into your - patterns during compiler-compiler time. For example, the integer - "(not x)" operation is actually defined as a pattern fragment that - expands as "(xor x, -1)", since the SelectionDAG does not have a - native 'not' operation. Targets can define their own short-hand - fragments as they see fit. See the definition of 'not' and - 'ineg' for examples. -
- In addition to instructions, targets can specify arbitrary patterns that
- map to one or more instructions using the 'Pat' class. For example,
- the PowerPC has no way to load an arbitrary integer immediate into a
- register in one instruction. To tell tblgen how to do this, it defines:
-
-
--++
- At compiler-compiler time, it analyzes your instruction patterns and tells + you if your patterns make sense or not.
+ +- It can handle arbitrary constraints on operands for the pattern match. In + particular, it is straight-forward to say things like "match any immediate + that is a 13-bit sign-extended value". For examples, see the + immSExt16 and related tblgen classes in the PowerPC + backend.
+ +- It knows several important identities for the patterns defined. For + example, it knows that addition is commutative, so it allows the + FMADDS pattern above to match "(fadd X, (fmul Y, Z))" as + well as "(fadd (fmul X, Y), Z)", without the target author having + to specially handle this case.
+ +- It has a full-featured type-inferencing system. In particular, you should + rarely have to explicitly tell the system what type parts of your patterns + are. In the FMADDS case above, we didn't have to tell + tblgen that all of the nodes in the pattern are of type 'f32'. + It was able to infer and propagate this knowledge from the fact that + F4RC has type 'f32'.
+ +- Targets can define their own (and rely on built-in) "pattern fragments". + Pattern fragments are chunks of reusable patterns that get inlined into + your patterns during compiler-compiler time. For example, the integer + "(not x)" operation is actually defined as a pattern fragment + that expands as "(xor x, -1)", since the SelectionDAG does not + have a native 'not' operation. Targets can define their own + short-hand fragments as they see fit. See the definition of + 'not' and 'ineg' for examples.
+ +- In addition to instructions, targets can specify arbitrary patterns that + map to one or more instructions using the 'Pat' class. For example, the + PowerPC has no way to load an arbitrary integer immediate into a register + in one instruction. To tell tblgen how to do this, it defines: +
-
+
++-// Arbitrary immediate support. Implement in terms of LIS/ORI. def : Pat<(i32 imm:$imm), (ORI (LIS (HI16 imm:$imm)), (LO16 imm:$imm))>; --
- If none of the single-instruction patterns for loading an immediate into a - register match, this will be used. This rule says "match an arbitrary i32 - immediate, turning it into an ORI ('or a 16-bit immediate') and an - LIS ('load 16-bit immediate, where the immediate is shifted to the - left 16 bits') instruction". To make this work, the - LO16/HI16 node transformations are used to manipulate the - input immediate (in this case, take the high or low 16-bits of the - immediate).- While the system does automate a lot, it still allows you to write custom - C++ code to match special cases if there is something that is hard to - express.
+ +
+ If none of the single-instruction patterns for loading an immediate into a + register match, this will be used. This rule says "match an arbitrary i32 + immediate, turning it into an ORI ('or a 16-bit immediate') and + an LIS ('load 16-bit immediate, where the immediate is shifted to + the left 16 bits') instruction". To make this work, the + LO16/HI16 node transformations are used to manipulate + the input immediate (in this case, take the high or low 16-bits of the + immediate).
+
+ - While the system does automate a lot, it still allows you to write custom + C++ code to match special cases if there is something that is hard to + express.
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:-
-
- Overall, there is no way to define or match SelectionDAG nodes that define - multiple values (e.g. ADD_PARTS, LOAD, CALL, - etc). This is the biggest reason that you currently still have to - write custom C++ code for your instruction selector. -
- There is no great way to support matching complex addressing modes yet. In - the future, we will extend pattern fragments to allow them to define - multiple values (e.g. the four operands of the X86 - addressing mode). In addition, we'll extend fragments so that a - fragment can match multiple different patterns. -
- We don't automatically infer flags like isStore/isLoad yet. -
- We don't automatically generate the set of supported registers and - operations for the Legalizer yet. -
- We don't have a way of tying in custom legalized nodes yet. +
- Overall, there is no way to define or match SelectionDAG nodes that define + multiple values (e.g. SMUL_LOHI, LOAD, CALL, + etc). This is the biggest reason that you currently still have + to write custom C++ code for your instruction selector. + +
- There is no great way to support matching complex addressing modes yet. + In the future, we will extend pattern fragments to allow them to define + multiple values (e.g. the four operands of the X86 + addressing mode, which are currently matched with custom C++ code). + In addition, we'll extend fragments so that a fragment can match multiple + different patterns. + +
- We don't automatically infer flags like isStore/isLoad yet. + +
- We don't automatically generate the set of supported registers and + operations for the Legalizer + yet. + +
- We don't have a way of tying in custom legalized nodes yet.
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.-
-
- Optional function-at-a-time selection. -
- Auto-generate entire selector from .td file. - +
- Optional function-at-a-time selection. + +
- Auto-generate entire selector from .td file.
To Be Written
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.
+ +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.
+ +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.
+ +More to come...
+ +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.
+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.
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 -MRegisterInfo::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:
-bool RegMapping_Fer::compatible_class(MachineFunction &mf,
+bool RegMapping_Fer::compatible_class(MachineFunction &mf,
unsigned v_reg,
unsigned p_reg) {
- assert(MRegisterInfo::isPhysicalRegister(p_reg) &&
+ assert(TargetRegisterInfo::isPhysicalRegister(p_reg) &&
"Target register must be physical");
- const TargetRegisterClass *trc = mf.getSSARegMap()->getRegClass(v_reg);
- return trc->contains(p_reg);
+ const TargetRegisterClass *trc = mf.getRegInfo().getRegClass(v_reg);
+ return trc->contains(p_reg);
}
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 -MRegisterInfo::FirstVirtualRegister. Any register whose -number is greater than or equal to -MRegisterInfo::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 -SSARegMap::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 bytecode 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 are 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 MRegisterInfo, -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 -MRegisterInfo::storeRegToStackSlot(...), and to insert a load -instruction, use MRegisterInfo::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:%a = MOVE %b -%a = ADD %a %b +%a = ADD %a %c
Notice that, internally, the second instruction is represented as -ADD %a[def/use] %b. 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 nlib/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:
@@ -1425,7 +1564,7 @@ instance, a sequence of instructions such as:
can be safely substituted by the single instruction: +
can be safely substituted by the single instruction:
@@ -1433,12 +1572,13 @@ instance, a sequence of instructions such as:
Instructions can be folded with the -MRegisterInfo::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:
-
-
- Simple - This is a very simple implementation that does - not keep values in registers across instructions. This register - allocator immediately spills every value right after it is - computed, and reloads all used operands from memory to temporary - registers before each instruction. -
- Local - This register allocator is an improvement on the - Simple implementation. It allocates registers on a basic - block level, attempting to keep values in registers and reusing - registers as appropriate. -
- Linear Scan - The default allocator. This is the +
- Simple — This is a very simple implementation that does not + keep values in registers across instructions. This register allocator + immediately spills every value right after it is computed, and reloads all + used operands from memory to temporary registers before each + instruction. + +
- Local — This register allocator is an improvement on the + Simple implementation. It allocates registers on a basic block + level, attempting to keep values in registers and reusing registers as + appropriate. + +
- Linear Scan — The default allocator. This is the well-know linear scan register allocator. Whereas the Simple and Local algorithms use a direct mapping implementation technique, the Linear Scan implementation @@ -1471,13 +1613,13 @@ 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:
+ +-
+
- Caller and callee have the calling convention fastcc or + cc 10 (GHC call convention). + +
- The call is a tail call - in tail position (ret immediately follows call + and ret uses value of call or is void). + +
- Option -tailcallopt is enabled. + +
- Platform specific constraints are met. +
x86/x86-64 constraints:
+ +-
+
- No variable argument lists are used. + +
- On x86-64 when generating GOT/PIC code only module-local calls (visibility + = hidden or protected) are supported. +
PowerPC constraints:
+ +-
+
- No variable argument lists are used. + +
- No byval parameters are used. + +
- On ppc32/64 GOT/PIC only module-local calls (visibility = hidden or protected) are supported. +
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.
Sibling call optimization is a restricted form of tail call optimization. + Unlike tail call optimization described in the previous section, it can be + performed automatically on any tail calls when -tailcallopt option + is not specified.
+ +Sibling call optimization is currently performed on x86/x86-64 when the + following constraints are met:
+ +-
+
- Caller and callee have the same calling convention. It can be either + c or fastcc. + +
- The call is a tail call - in tail position (ret immediately follows call + and ret uses value of call or is void). + +
- Caller and callee have matching return type or the callee result is not + used. + +
- If any of the callee arguments are being passed in stack, they must be + available in caller's own incoming argument stack and the frame offsets + must be the same. +
Example:
+
+declare i32 @bar(i32, i32)
+
+define i32 @foo(i32 %a, i32 %b, i32 %c) {
+entry:
+ %0 = tail call i32 @bar(i32 %a, i32 %b)
+ ret i32 %0
+}
+
+The X86 code generator lives in the lib/Target/X86 directory. This -code generator currently targets a generic P6-like processor. As such, it -produces a few P6-and-above instructions (like conditional moves), but it does -not make use of newer features like MMX or SSE. In the future, the X86 backend -will have sub-target support added for specific processor families and -implementations.
+ 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.
+ +-
+
- i686-pc-linux-gnu — Linux + +
- i386-unknown-freebsd5.3 — FreeBSD 5.3 + +
- i686-pc-cygwin — Cygwin on Win32 + +
- i686-pc-mingw32 — MingW on Win32 + +
- i386-pc-mingw32msvc — MingW crosscompiler on Linux + +
- i686-apple-darwin* — Apple Darwin on X86 + +
- x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu — Linux +
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:
-
-
- i686-pc-linux-gnu - Linux -
- i386-unknown-freebsd5.3 - FreeBSD 5.3 -
- i686-pc-cygwin - Cygwin on Win32 -
- i686-pc-mingw32 - MingW on Win32 -
- i686-apple-darwin* - Apple Darwin on X86 +
- x86_StdCall — stdcall calling convention seen on Microsoft + Windows platform (CC ID = 64). + +
- x86_FastCall — fastcall calling convention seen on Microsoft + Windows platform (CC ID = 65).
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. 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.
+ +Stores, and all other instructions, treat the four memory operands in the -same way and in the same order.
+ + + +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 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 ++
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.
+ +
-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
-
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.
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.
+ +An invocation frame is laid out as follows (low memory at top);
+ +| 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) | +
64 bit linkage area
+ +| 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 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.
+ +TODO - More to come.
+ +
+ src="http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/images/vcss-blue" alt="Valid CSS">
The LLVM Compiler Infrastructure