forked from OSchip/llvm-project
[docs][PerformanceTips] Add text on allocas and alignment
This summarizes two recent llvm-dev discussions. Most of the text provided by David Chisnall and Benoit Belley with minor editting by me. llvm-svn: 247301
This commit is contained in:
parent
a938bcb89a
commit
fba81bc076
|
@ -46,6 +46,22 @@ The Basics
|
|||
perform badly with confronted with such structures. The only exception to
|
||||
this guidance is that a unified return block with high in-degree is fine.
|
||||
|
||||
Use of allocas
|
||||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||||
|
||||
An alloca instruction can be used to represent a function scoped stack slot,
|
||||
but can also represent dynamic frame expansion. When representing function
|
||||
scoped variables or locations, placing alloca instructions at the beginning of
|
||||
the entry block should be preferred. In particular, place them before any
|
||||
call instructions. Call instructions might get inlined and replaced with
|
||||
multiple basic blocks. The end result is that a following alloca instruction
|
||||
would no longer be in the entry basic block afterward.
|
||||
|
||||
The SROA (Scalar Replacement Of Aggregates) and Mem2Reg passes only attempt
|
||||
to eliminate alloca instructions that are in the entry basic block. Given
|
||||
SSA is the canonical form expected by much of the optimizer; if allocas can
|
||||
not be eliminated by Mem2Reg or SROA, the optimizer is likely to be less
|
||||
effective than it could be.
|
||||
|
||||
Avoid loads and stores of large aggregate type
|
||||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||||
|
@ -79,6 +95,31 @@ operations for safety. If your source language provides information about
|
|||
the range of the index, you may wish to manually extend indices to machine
|
||||
register width using a zext instruction.
|
||||
|
||||
When to specify alignment
|
||||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||||
LLVM will always generate correct code if you don’t specify alignment, but may
|
||||
generate inefficient code. For example, if you are targeting MIPS (or older
|
||||
ARM ISAs) then the hardware does not handle unaligned loads and stores, and
|
||||
so you will enter a trap-and-emulate path if you do a load or store with
|
||||
lower-than-natural alignment. To avoid this, LLVM will emit a slower
|
||||
sequence of loads, shifts and masks (or load-right + load-left on MIPS) for
|
||||
all cases where the load / store does not have a sufficiently high alignment
|
||||
in the IR.
|
||||
|
||||
The alignment is used to guarantee the alignment on allocas and globals,
|
||||
though in most cases this is unnecessary (most targets have a sufficiently
|
||||
high default alignment that they’ll be fine). It is also used to provide a
|
||||
contract to the back end saying ‘either this load/store has this alignment, or
|
||||
it is undefined behavior’. This means that the back end is free to emit
|
||||
instructions that rely on that alignment (and mid-level optimizers are free to
|
||||
perform transforms that require that alignment). For x86, it doesn’t make
|
||||
much difference, as almost all instructions are alignment-independent. For
|
||||
MIPS, it can make a big difference.
|
||||
|
||||
Note that if your loads and stores are atomic, the backend will be unable to
|
||||
lower an under aligned access into a sequence of natively aligned accesses.
|
||||
As a result, alignment is mandatory for atomic loads and stores.
|
||||
|
||||
Other Things to Consider
|
||||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue