Summary:
It seems it's main effect is to create addition copies when values are inr register that do not support this trick, which increase register pressure and makes the code bigger.
Reviewers: craig.topper, niravd, spatel, hfinkel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42646
llvm-svn: 323888
Summary:
It seems it's main effect is to create addition copies when values are inr register that do not support this trick, which increase register pressure and makes the code bigger.
The main noteworthy regression I was able to observe was pattern of the type (setcc (trunc (and X, C)), 0) where C is such as it would benefit from the hi register trick. To prevent this, a new pattern is added to materialize such pattern using a 32 bits test. This has the added benefit of working with any constant that is materializable as a 32bits immediate, not just the ones that can leverage the high register trick, as demonstrated by the test case in test-shrink.ll using the constant 2049 .
Reviewers: craig.topper, niravd, spatel, hfinkel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42646
llvm-svn: 323690
This header includes CodeGen headers, and is not, itself, included by
any Target headers, so move it into CodeGen to match the layering of its
implementation.
llvm-svn: 317647
Summary:
Intel documentation shows the memory operand as the first operand. But we currently treat it as the second operand. Conceptually the order doesn't matter since it doesn't write memory. We have aliases to parse with the operands in either order and the isel matching is commutable.
For the register®ister form order does matter for the assembly parser. PR22995 was previously filed and fixed by changing the register®ister form from MRMSrcReg to MRMDestReg to match gas. Ideally the memory form should match by using MRMDestMem.
I believe this supercedes D38025 which was trying to switch the register®ister form back to pre-PR22995.
Reviewers: aymanmus, RKSimon, zvi
Reviewed By: aymanmus
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38120
llvm-svn: 314639
Summary:
Currently we determine if macro fusion is supported based on the AVX flag as a proxy for the processor being Sandy Bridge".
This is really strange as now AMD supports AVX. It also means if user explicitly disables AVX we disable macro fusion.
This patch adds an explicit macro fusion feature. I've also enabled for the generic 64-bit CPU (which doesn't have AVX)
This is probably another candidate for being in the MI layer, but for now I at least wanted to correct the overloading of the AVX feature.
Reviewers: spatel, chandlerc, RKSimon, zvi
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37280
llvm-svn: 312097
Use llvm::make_unique to avoid ambiguity with MSVC.
This patch adds a generic MacroFusion pass, that is used on X86 and
AArch64, which both define target-specific shouldScheduleAdjacent
functions. This generic pass should make it easier for other targets to
implement macro fusion and I intend to add macro fusion for ARM shortly.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34144
llvm-svn: 305690
Summary:
This patch adds a generic MacroFusion pass, that is used on X86 and
AArch64, which both define target-specific shouldScheduleAdjacent
functions. This generic pass should make it easier for other targets to
implement macro fusion and I intend to add macro fusion for ARM shortly.
Reviewers: craig.topper, evandro, t.p.northover, atrick, MatzeB
Reviewed By: MatzeB
Subscribers: atrick, aemerson, mgorny, javed.absar, kristof.beyls, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34144
llvm-svn: 305677
In order to make it easier to parse information about the performance of
MacroFusion, this patch adds the function and the instruction names to the
debug output of this pass.
llvm-svn: 297504
This patch moves the class for scheduling adjacent instructions,
MacroFusion, to the target.
In AArch64, it also expands the fusion to all instructions pairs in a
scheduling block, beyond just among the predecessors of the branch at the
end.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28489
llvm-svn: 293737
Amaury Sechet