Change match/apply functions into methods of new target specific combiner
helper class. Use reference to MachineIRBuilder from helper instead of
constructing new MachineIRBuilder each time new instruction needs to made.
Allows correct tracking of newly created instructions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90623
This combine previously tried to take sequences like:
%cond = G_ICMP pred, a, b
G_BRCOND %cond, %truebb
G_BR %falsebb
%truebb:
...
%falsebb:
...
and by inverting the compare predicate and swapping branch targets, delete the
G_BR and instead have a single conditional branch to the falsebb. Since in an
earlier patch we have a combine to fold not(icmp) into just an inverted icmp,
we don't need this combine to do as much. This patch instead generalizes the
combine by just looking for:
G_BRCOND %cond, %truebb
G_BR %falsebb
%truebb:
...
%falsebb:
...
and then inverting the condition using a not (xor). The xor can be folded away
in a separate combine. This change also lets us avoid some optimization code
in the IRTranslator.
I also think that deleting G_BRs in the combiner is unnecessary. That's
something that targets can decide to do at selection time and could simplify
generic code in future.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86664
Previously we weren't adding the LegalizerInfo to the post-legalizer
combiner. Since that's fixed, we don't need to try to filter out the
one case that was breaking.
Ports the existing DAG combines, minus the simplify demanded bits
which seems to have no equivalent now. Without these, this isn't
particularly helpful in most of the IR sample cases.
Selection would fail after the post legalize combiner put an illegal
zextload back together.
The base combiner has parameter to only allow legal operations, but
they appear to not be used. I also don't see a nice way to remove a
single entry from all_combines, so just hack around this.
The current set of custom combines are only really useful after
legalization, so move them there. There is a lot of overlap in the
boilerplate here, but I think we do want a pretty different set of
combines before and after legalize. I think we will want a lot of
overlap between the post-legalize and a post-regbankselect combiner.
Try out using combine definition rules.
This really should be a post-legalizer combine, but the combiner pass
is currently pre-legalize. Most of the target combines are really
post-legalize, so we should probably move the pass.
Petar Avramovic