Commit Graph

4 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Sanjay Patel 3e80019275 [DAGCombiner] form 'not' ops ahead of shifts (PR39657)
We fail to canonicalize IR this way (prefer 'not' ops to arbitrary 'xor'),
but that would not matter without this patch because DAGCombiner was 
reversing that transform. I think we need this transform in the backend 
regardless of what happens in IR to catch cases where the shift-xor 
is formed late from GEP or other ops.

https://rise4fun.com/Alive/NC1

  Name: shl
  Pre: (-1 << C2) == C1
  %shl = shl i8 %x, C2
  %r = xor i8 %shl, C1
  =>
  %not = xor i8 %x, -1
  %r = shl i8 %not, C2
  
  Name: shr
  Pre: (-1 u>> C2) == C1
  %sh = lshr i8 %x, C2
  %r = xor i8 %sh, C1
  =>
  %not = xor i8 %x, -1
  %r = lshr i8 %not, C2

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39657

llvm-svn: 347478
2018-11-22 19:24:10 +00:00
Francis Visoiu Mistrih 25528d6de7 [CodeGen] Unify MBB reference format in both MIR and debug output
As part of the unification of the debug format and the MIR format, print
MBB references as '%bb.5'.

The MIR printer prints the IR name of a MBB only for block definitions.

* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#" << ([a-zA-Z0-9_]+)->getNumber\(\)/" << printMBBReference(*\1)/g'
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#" << ([a-zA-Z0-9_]+)\.getNumber\(\)/" << printMBBReference(\1)/g'
* find . \( -name "*.txt" -o -name "*.s" -o -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#([0-9]+)/%bb.\1/g'
* grep -nr 'BB#' and fix

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40422

llvm-svn: 319665
2017-12-04 17:18:51 +00:00
Amaury Sechet 681472cd0f Do full codegen for various tests. NFC
llvm-svn: 296305
2017-02-27 01:15:57 +00:00
Ehsan Amiri 85818684c6 [PPC][DAGCombine] Convert SETCC to subtract when the result is zero extended
When we see a SETCC whose only users are zero extend operations, we can replace
it with a subtraction. This results in doing all calculations in GPRs and
avoids CR use.

Currently we do this only for ULT, ULE, UGT and UGE condition codes. There are
ways that this can be extended. For example for signed condition codes. In that
case we will be introducing additional sign extend instructions, so more careful
profitability analysis may be required.

Another direction to extend this is for equal, not equal conditions. Also when
users of SETCC are any_ext or sign_ext, we might be able to do something 
similar.

llvm-svn: 287329
2016-11-18 10:41:44 +00:00