LLVM normally prefers to minimize the number of bits set in an AND
immediate, but that doesn't always match the available ARM instructions.
In Thumb1 mode, prefer uxtb or uxth where possible; otherwise, prefer
a two-instruction sequence movs+ands or movs+bics.
Some potential improvements outlined in
ARMTargetLowering::targetShrinkDemandedConstant, but seems to work
pretty well already.
The ARMISelDAGToDAG fix ensures we don't generate an invalid UBFX
instruction due to a larger-than-expected mask. (It's orthogonal, in
some sense, but as far as I can tell it's either impossible or nearly
impossible to reproduce the bug without this change.)
According to my testing, this seems to consistently improve codesize by
a small amount by forming bic more often for ISD::AND with an immediate.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50030
llvm-svn: 339472
The important thing I was missing was ensuring newly added constants were kept in topological order. Repositioning the node is correct if the constant is newly added (so it has no topological ordering) but wrong if it already existed - positioning it next in the worklist would break the topological ordering.
Original commit message:
[Thumb] Select a BIC instead of AND if the immediate can be encoded more optimally negated
If an immediate is only used in an AND node, it is possible that the immediate can be more optimally materialized when negated. If this is the case, we can negate the immediate and use a BIC instead;
int i(int a) {
return a & 0xfffffeec;
}
Used to produce:
ldr r1, [CONSTPOOL]
ands r0, r1
CONSTPOOL: 0xfffffeec
And now produces:
movs r1, #255
adds r1, #20 ; Less costly immediate generation
bics r0, r1
llvm-svn: 274543
We were using DAG->getConstant instead of DAG->getTargetConstant. This meant that we could inadvertently increase the use count of a constant if stars aligned, which it did in this testcase. Increasing the use count of the constant could cause ISel to fall over (because DAGToDAG lowering assumed the constant had only one use!)
Original commit message:
[Thumb] Select a BIC instead of AND if the immediate can be encoded more optimally negated
If an immediate is only used in an AND node, it is possible that the immediate can be more optimally materialized when negated. If this is the case, we can negate the immediate and use a BIC instead;
int i(int a) {
return a & 0xfffffeec;
}
Used to produce:
ldr r1, [CONSTPOOL]
ands r0, r1
CONSTPOOL: 0xfffffeec
And now produces:
movs r1, #255
adds r1, #20 ; Less costly immediate generation
bics r0, r1
llvm-svn: 274510
If an immediate is only used in an AND node, it is possible that the immediate can be more optimally materialized when negated. If this is the case, we can negate the immediate and use a BIC instead;
int i(int a) {
return a & 0xfffffeec;
}
Used to produce:
ldr r1, [CONSTPOOL]
ands r0, r1
CONSTPOOL: 0xfffffeec
And now produces:
movs r1, #255
adds r1, #20 ; Less costly immediate generation
bics r0, r1
llvm-svn: 272251
Eli Friedman