This patch adds a simple Cortex-M4 schedule, renaming the existing M3
schedule to M4 and filling in the latencies as-per the Cortex-M4 TRM:
https://developer.arm.com/docs/ddi0439/latest
Most of these are 1, with the important exception being loads taking 2
cycles. A few others are also higher, but I don't believe they make a
large difference. I've repurposed the M3 schedule as the latencies are
mostly the same between the two cores, with the M4 having more FP and
DSP instructions. We also turn on MISched and UseAA for the cores that
now use this.
It also adds some schedule Write's to various instruction to make things
simpler.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54142
llvm-svn: 360768
Summary:
This pass sinks COPY instructions into a successor block, if the COPY is not
used in the current block and the COPY is live-in to a single successor
(i.e., doesn't require the COPY to be duplicated). This avoids executing the
the copy on paths where their results aren't needed. This also exposes
additional opportunites for dead copy elimination and shrink wrapping.
These copies were either not handled by or are inserted after the MachineSink
pass. As an example of the former case, the MachineSink pass cannot sink
COPY instructions with allocatable source registers; for AArch64 these type
of copy instructions are frequently used to move function parameters (PhyReg)
into virtual registers in the entry block..
For the machine IR below, this pass will sink %w19 in the entry into its
successor (%bb.1) because %w19 is only live-in in %bb.1.
```
%bb.0:
%wzr = SUBSWri %w1, 1
%w19 = COPY %w0
Bcc 11, %bb.2
%bb.1:
Live Ins: %w19
BL @fun
%w0 = ADDWrr %w0, %w19
RET %w0
%bb.2:
%w0 = COPY %wzr
RET %w0
```
As we sink %w19 (CSR in AArch64) into %bb.1, the shrink-wrapping pass will be
able to see %bb.0 as a candidate.
With this change I observed 12% more shrink-wrapping candidate and 13% more dead copies deleted in spec2000/2006/2017 on AArch64.
Reviewers: qcolombet, MatzeB, thegameg, mcrosier, gberry, hfinkel, john.brawn, twoh, RKSimon, sebpop, kparzysz
Reviewed By: sebpop
Subscribers: evandro, sebpop, sfertile, aemerson, mgorny, javed.absar, kristof.beyls, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41463
llvm-svn: 328237
When we have a diamond ifcvt the fallthough block will have a branch at the end
of it that disappears when predicated, so discount it from the predication cost.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34952
llvm-svn: 307788
The current heuristic in isProfitableToIfCvt assumes we have a branch predictor,
and so gives the wrong answer in some cases when we don't. This patch adds a
subtarget feature to indicate that a subtarget has no branch predictor, and
changes the heuristic in isProfitableToiIfCvt when it's present. This gives a
slight overall improvement in a set of embedded benchmarks on Cortex-M4 and
Cortex-M33.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34398
llvm-svn: 306547
David Green