Summary:
This avoids needing an isel pattern for each condition code. And it removes translation switches for converting between SETcc instructions and condition codes.
Now the printer, encoder and disassembler take care of converting the immediate. We use InstAliases to handle the assembly matching. But we print using the asm string in the instruction definition. The instruction itself is marked IsCodeGenOnly=1 to hide it from the assembly parser.
Reviewers: andreadb, courbet, RKSimon, spatel, lebedev.ri
Reviewed By: andreadb
Subscribers: hiraditya, lebedev.ri, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60138
llvm-svn: 357801
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
Reverse iterators to doubly-linked lists can be simpler (and cheaper)
than std::reverse_iterator. Make it so.
In particular, change ilist<T>::reverse_iterator so that it is *never*
invalidated unless the node it references is deleted. This matches the
guarantees of ilist<T>::iterator.
(Note: MachineBasicBlock::iterator is *not* an ilist iterator, but a
MachineInstrBundleIterator<MachineInstr>. This commit does not change
MachineBasicBlock::reverse_iterator, but it does update
MachineBasicBlock::reverse_instr_iterator. See note at end of commit
message for details on bundle iterators.)
Given the list (with the Sentinel showing twice for simplicity):
[Sentinel] <-> A <-> B <-> [Sentinel]
the following is now true:
1. begin() represents A.
2. begin() holds the pointer for A.
3. end() represents [Sentinel].
4. end() holds the poitner for [Sentinel].
5. rbegin() represents B.
6. rbegin() holds the pointer for B.
7. rend() represents [Sentinel].
8. rend() holds the pointer for [Sentinel].
The changes are #6 and #8. Here are some properties from the old
scheme (which used std::reverse_iterator):
- rbegin() held the pointer for [Sentinel] and rend() held the pointer
for A;
- operator*() cost two dereferences instead of one;
- converting from a valid iterator to its valid reverse_iterator
involved a confusing increment; and
- "RI++->erase()" left RI invalid. The unintuitive replacement was
"RI->erase(), RE = end()".
With vector-like data structures these properties are hard to avoid
(since past-the-beginning is not a valid pointer), and don't impose a
real cost (since there's still only one dereference, and all iterators
are invalidated on erase). But with lists, this was a poor design.
Specifically, the following code (which obviously works with normal
iterators) now works with ilist::reverse_iterator as well:
for (auto RI = L.rbegin(), RE = L.rend(); RI != RE;)
fooThatMightRemoveArgFromList(*RI++);
Converting between iterator and reverse_iterator for the same node uses
the getReverse() function.
reverse_iterator iterator::getReverse();
iterator reverse_iterator::getReverse();
Why doesn't iterator <=> reverse_iterator conversion use constructors?
In order to catch and update old code, reverse_iterator does not even
have an explicit conversion from iterator. It wouldn't be safe because
there would be no reasonable way to catch all the bugs from the changed
semantic (see the changes at call sites that are part of this patch).
Old code used this API:
std::reverse_iterator::reverse_iterator(iterator);
iterator std::reverse_iterator::base();
Here's how to update from old code to new (that incorporates the
semantic change), assuming I is an ilist<>::iterator and RI is an
ilist<>::reverse_iterator:
[Old] ==> [New]
reverse_iterator(I) (--I).getReverse()
reverse_iterator(I) ++I.getReverse()
--reverse_iterator(I) I.getReverse()
reverse_iterator(++I) I.getReverse()
RI.base() (--RI).getReverse()
RI.base() ++RI.getReverse()
--RI.base() RI.getReverse()
(++RI).base() RI.getReverse()
delete &*RI, RE = end() delete &*RI++
RI->erase(), RE = end() RI++->erase()
=======================================
Note: bundle iterators are out of scope
=======================================
MachineBasicBlock::iterator, also known as
MachineInstrBundleIterator<MachineInstr>, is a wrapper to represent
MachineInstr bundles. The idea is that each operator++ takes you to the
beginning of the next bundle. Implementing a sane reverse iterator for
this is harder than ilist. Here are the options:
- Use std::reverse_iterator<MBB::i>. Store a handle to the beginning of
the next bundle. A call to operator*() runs a loop (usually
operator--() will be called 1 time, for unbundled instructions).
Increment/decrement just works. This is the status quo.
- Store a handle to the final node in the bundle. A call to operator*()
still runs a loop, but it iterates one time fewer (usually
operator--() will be called 0 times, for unbundled instructions).
Increment/decrement just works.
- Make the ilist_sentinel<MachineInstr> *always* store that it's the
sentinel (instead of just in asserts mode). Then the bundle iterator
can sniff the sentinel bit in operator++().
I initially tried implementing the end() option as part of this commit,
but updating iterator/reverse_iterator conversion call sites was
error-prone. I have a WIP series of patches that implements the final
option.
llvm-svn: 280032
xorl + setcc is generally the preferred sequence due to the partial register
stall setcc + movzbl suffers from. As a bonus, it also encodes one byte smaller.
This fixes PR28146.
The original commit tried inserting an 8bit-subreg into a GR32 (not GR32_ABCD)
which was not appreciated by fast regalloc on 32-bit.
llvm-svn: 274802
xorl + setcc is generally the preferred sequence due to the partial register
stall setcc + movzbl suffers from. As a bonus, it also encodes one byte smaller.
This fixes PR28146.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21774
llvm-svn: 274692
Craig Topper