Commit Graph

5 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Kyle Butt 7fbec9bdf1 Codegen: Make chains from trellis-shaped CFGs
Lay out trellis-shaped CFGs optimally.
A trellis of the shape below:

  A     B
  |\   /|
  | \ / |
  |  X  |
  | / \ |
  |/   \|
  C     D

would be laid out A; B->C ; D by the current layout algorithm. Now we identify
trellises and lay them out either A->C; B->D or A->D; B->C. This scales with an
increasing number of predecessors. A trellis is a a group of 2 or more
predecessor blocks that all have the same successors.

because of this we can tail duplicate to extend existing trellises.

As an example consider the following CFG:

    B   D   F   H
   / \ / \ / \ / \
  A---C---E---G---Ret

Where A,C,E,G are all small (Currently 2 instructions).

The CFG preserving layout is then A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,Ret.

The current code will copy C into B, E into D and G into F and yield the layout
A,C,B(C),E,D(E),F(G),G,H,ret

define void @straight_test(i32 %tag) {
entry:
  br label %test1
test1: ; A
  %tagbit1 = and i32 %tag, 1
  %tagbit1eq0 = icmp eq i32 %tagbit1, 0
  br i1 %tagbit1eq0, label %test2, label %optional1
optional1: ; B
  call void @a()
  br label %test2
test2: ; C
  %tagbit2 = and i32 %tag, 2
  %tagbit2eq0 = icmp eq i32 %tagbit2, 0
  br i1 %tagbit2eq0, label %test3, label %optional2
optional2: ; D
  call void @b()
  br label %test3
test3: ; E
  %tagbit3 = and i32 %tag, 4
  %tagbit3eq0 = icmp eq i32 %tagbit3, 0
  br i1 %tagbit3eq0, label %test4, label %optional3
optional3: ; F
  call void @c()
  br label %test4
test4: ; G
  %tagbit4 = and i32 %tag, 8
  %tagbit4eq0 = icmp eq i32 %tagbit4, 0
  br i1 %tagbit4eq0, label %exit, label %optional4
optional4: ; H
  call void @d()
  br label %exit
exit:
  ret void
}

here is the layout after D27742:
straight_test:                          # @straight_test
; ... Prologue elided
; BB#0:                                 # %entry ; A (merged with test1)
; ... More prologue elided
	mr 30, 3
	andi. 3, 30, 1
	bc 12, 1, .LBB0_2
; BB#1:                                 # %test2 ; C
	rlwinm. 3, 30, 0, 30, 30
	beq	 0, .LBB0_3
	b .LBB0_4
.LBB0_2:                                # %optional1 ; B (copy of C)
	bl a
	nop
	rlwinm. 3, 30, 0, 30, 30
	bne	 0, .LBB0_4
.LBB0_3:                                # %test3 ; E
	rlwinm. 3, 30, 0, 29, 29
	beq	 0, .LBB0_5
	b .LBB0_6
.LBB0_4:                                # %optional2 ; D (copy of E)
	bl b
	nop
	rlwinm. 3, 30, 0, 29, 29
	bne	 0, .LBB0_6
.LBB0_5:                                # %test4 ; G
	rlwinm. 3, 30, 0, 28, 28
	beq	 0, .LBB0_8
	b .LBB0_7
.LBB0_6:                                # %optional3 ; F (copy of G)
	bl c
	nop
	rlwinm. 3, 30, 0, 28, 28
	beq	 0, .LBB0_8
.LBB0_7:                                # %optional4 ; H
	bl d
	nop
.LBB0_8:                                # %exit ; Ret
	ld 30, 96(1)                    # 8-byte Folded Reload
	addi 1, 1, 112
	ld 0, 16(1)
	mtlr 0
	blr

The tail-duplication has produced some benefit, but it has also produced a
trellis which is not laid out optimally. With this patch, we improve the layouts
of such trellises, and decrease the cost calculation for tail-duplication
accordingly.

This patch produces the layout A,C,E,G,B,D,F,H,Ret. This layout does have
back edges, which is a negative, but it has a bigger compensating
positive, which is that it handles the case where there are long strings
of skipped blocks much better than the original layout. Both layouts
handle runs of executed blocks equally well. Branch prediction also
improves if there is any correlation between subsequent optional blocks.

Here is the resulting concrete layout:

straight_test:                          # @straight_test
; BB#0:                                 # %entry ; A (merged with test1)
	mr 30, 3
	andi. 3, 30, 1
	bc 12, 1, .LBB0_4
; BB#1:                                 # %test2 ; C
	rlwinm. 3, 30, 0, 30, 30
	bne	 0, .LBB0_5
.LBB0_2:                                # %test3 ; E
	rlwinm. 3, 30, 0, 29, 29
	bne	 0, .LBB0_6
.LBB0_3:                                # %test4 ; G
	rlwinm. 3, 30, 0, 28, 28
	bne	 0, .LBB0_7
	b .LBB0_8
.LBB0_4:                                # %optional1 ; B (Copy of C)
	bl a
	nop
	rlwinm. 3, 30, 0, 30, 30
	beq	 0, .LBB0_2
.LBB0_5:                                # %optional2 ; D (Copy of E)
	bl b
	nop
	rlwinm. 3, 30, 0, 29, 29
	beq	 0, .LBB0_3
.LBB0_6:                                # %optional3 ; F (Copy of G)
	bl c
	nop
	rlwinm. 3, 30, 0, 28, 28
	beq	 0, .LBB0_8
.LBB0_7:                                # %optional4 ; H
	bl d
	nop
.LBB0_8:                                # %exit

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28522

llvm-svn: 295223
2017-02-15 19:49:14 +00:00
Kyle Butt b15c06677c CodeGen: Allow small copyable blocks to "break" the CFG.
When choosing the best successor for a block, ordinarily we would have preferred
a block that preserves the CFG unless there is a strong probability the other
direction. For small blocks that can be duplicated we now skip that requirement
as well, subject to some simple frequency calculations.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28583

llvm-svn: 293716
2017-01-31 23:48:32 +00:00
Kyle Butt efe56fed12 Revert "CodeGen: Allow small copyable blocks to "break" the CFG."
This reverts commit ada6595a526d71df04988eb0a4b4fe84df398ded.

This needs a simple probability check because there are some cases where it is
not profitable.

llvm-svn: 291695
2017-01-11 19:55:19 +00:00
Kyle Butt df27aa8c89 CodeGen: Allow small copyable blocks to "break" the CFG.
When choosing the best successor for a block, ordinarily we would have preferred
a block that preserves the CFG unless there is a strong probability the other
direction. For small blocks that can be duplicated we now skip that requirement
as well.

Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27742

llvm-svn: 291609
2017-01-10 23:04:30 +00:00
Chris Dewhurst 69fa1926db [Sparc] Implement __builtin_setjmp, __builtin_longjmp back-end.
This code implements builtin_setjmp and builtin_longjmp exception handling intrinsics for 32-bit Sparc back-ends.

The code started as a mash-up of the PowerPC and X86 versions, although there are sufficient differences to both that had to be made for Sparc handling.

Note: I have manual tests running. I'll work on a unit test and add that to the rest of this diff in the next day.

Also, this implementation is only for 32-bit Sparc. I haven't focussed on a 64-bit version, although I have left the code in a prepared state for implementing this, including detecting pointer size and comments indicating where I suspect there may be differences.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19798

llvm-svn: 268483
2016-05-04 09:33:30 +00:00