this code:
store [stack slot #0], R10
= add R14, [stack slot #0]
The spiller didn't know that the store made the value of [stackslot#0] available
in R10 *IF* the store came from a copy instruction with the store folded into it.
This patch teaches VirtRegMap to look at these stores and recognize the values
they make available. In one case Evan provided, this code:
divsd %XMM0, %XMM1
movsd %XMM1, QWORD PTR [%ESP + 40]
1) movsd QWORD PTR [%ESP + 48], %XMM1
2) movsd %XMM1, QWORD PTR [%ESP + 48]
addsd %XMM1, %XMM0
3) movsd QWORD PTR [%ESP + 48], %XMM1
movsd QWORD PTR [%ESP + 4], %XMM0
turns into:
divsd %XMM0, %XMM1
movsd %XMM1, QWORD PTR [%ESP + 40]
addsd %XMM1, %XMM0
3) movsd QWORD PTR [%ESP + 48], %XMM1
movsd QWORD PTR [%ESP + 4], %XMM0
In this case, instruction #2 was removed because of the value made
available by #1, and inst #1 was later deleted because it is now
never used before the stack slot is redefined by #3.
This occurs here and there in a lot of code with high spilling, on PPC
most of the removed loads/stores are LSU-reject-causing loads, which is
nice.
On X86, things are much better (because it spills more), where we nuke
about 1% of the instructions from SMG2000 and several hundred from eon.
More improvements to come...
llvm-svn: 25917
and instruction. This allows us to compile stuff like this:
bool %X(int %X) {
%Y = add int %X, 14
%Z = setne int %Y, 12345
ret bool %Z
}
to this:
_X:
cmpl $12331, 4(%esp)
setne %al
movzbl %al, %eax
ret
instead of this:
_X:
cmpl $12331, 4(%esp)
setne %al
movzbl %al, %eax
andl $1, %eax
ret
This occurs quite a bit with the X86 backend. For example, 25 times in
lambda, 30 times in 177.mesa, 14 times in galgel, 70 times in fma3d,
25 times in vpr, several hundred times in gcc, ~45 times in crafty,
~60 times in parser, ~140 times in eon, 110 times in perlbmk, 55 on gap,
16 times on bzip2, 14 times on twolf, and 1-2 times in many other SPEC2K
programs.
llvm-svn: 25901
%C = call int asm "xyz $0, $1, $2, $3", "=r,r,r,0"(int %A, int %B, int 4)
and get:
xyz r2, r3, r4, r2
note that the r2's are pinned together. Yaay for 2-address instructions.
2342 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
llvm-svn: 25893
substituted operands. For this testcase:
int %test(int %A, int %B) {
%C = call int asm "xyz $0, $1, $2", "=r,r,r"(int %A, int %B)
ret int %C
}
we now emit:
_test:
or r2, r3, r3
or r3, r4, r4
xyz r2, r2, r3 ;; look here
or r3, r2, r2
blr
... note the substituted operands. :)
llvm-svn: 25886
- Added a new format for instructions where the source register is implied
and it is same as the destination register. Used for pseudo instructions
that clear the destination register.
llvm-svn: 25872
Chris Lattner