Original message:
The attached is the fix to radar://11663049. The optimization can be outlined by following rules:
(select (x != c), e, c) -> select (x != c), e, x),
(select (x == c), c, e) -> select (x == c), x, e)
where the <c> is an integer constant.
The reason for this change is that : on x86, conditional-move-from-constant needs two instructions;
however, conditional-move-from-register need only one instruction.
While the LowerSELECT() sounds to be the most convenient place for this optimization, it turns out to be a bad place. The reason is that by replacing the constant <c> with a symbolic value, it obscure some instruction-combining opportunities which would otherwise be very easy to spot. For that reason, I have to postpone the change to last instruction-combining phase.
The change passes the test of "make check-all -C <build-root/test" and "make -C project/test-suite/SingleSource".
Original message since r165661:
My previous change has a bug: I negated the condition code of a CMOV, and go ahead creating a new CMOV using the *ORIGINAL* condition code.
llvm-svn: 166017
Original message:
The attached is the fix to radar://11663049. The optimization can be outlined by following rules:
(select (x != c), e, c) -> select (x != c), e, x),
(select (x == c), c, e) -> select (x == c), x, e)
where the <c> is an integer constant.
The reason for this change is that : on x86, conditional-move-from-constant needs two instructions;
however, conditional-move-from-register need only one instruction.
While the LowerSELECT() sounds to be the most convenient place for this optimization, it turns out to be a bad place. The reason is that by replacing the constant <c> with a symbolic value, it obscure some instruction-combining opportunities which would otherwise be very easy to spot. For that reason, I have to postpone the change to last instruction-combining phase.
The change passes the test of "make check-all -C <build-root/test" and "make -C project/test-suite/SingleSource".
llvm-svn: 165661
NAKAMURA Takumi