forked from OSchip/llvm-project
61b305edfd
This patch introduces a new pass that computes the safe point to insert the prologue and epilogue of the function. The interest is to find safe points that are cheaper than the entry and exits blocks. As an example and to avoid regressions to be introduce, this patch also implements the required bits to enable the shrink-wrapping pass for AArch64. ** Context ** Currently we insert the prologue and epilogue of the method/function in the entry and exits blocks. Although this is correct, we can do a better job when those are not immediately required and insert them at less frequently executed places. The job of the shrink-wrapping pass is to identify such places. ** Motivating example ** Let us consider the following function that perform a call only in one branch of a if: define i32 @f(i32 %a, i32 %b) { %tmp = alloca i32, align 4 %tmp2 = icmp slt i32 %a, %b br i1 %tmp2, label %true, label %false true: store i32 %a, i32* %tmp, align 4 %tmp4 = call i32 @doSomething(i32 0, i32* %tmp) br label %false false: %tmp.0 = phi i32 [ %tmp4, %true ], [ %a, %0 ] ret i32 %tmp.0 } On AArch64 this code generates (removing the cfi directives to ease readabilities): _f: ; @f ; BB#0: stp x29, x30, [sp, #-16]! mov x29, sp sub sp, sp, #16 ; =16 cmp w0, w1 b.ge LBB0_2 ; BB#1: ; %true stur w0, [x29, #-4] sub x1, x29, #4 ; =4 mov w0, wzr bl _doSomething LBB0_2: ; %false mov sp, x29 ldp x29, x30, [sp], #16 ret With shrink-wrapping we could generate: _f: ; @f ; BB#0: cmp w0, w1 b.ge LBB0_2 ; BB#1: ; %true stp x29, x30, [sp, #-16]! mov x29, sp sub sp, sp, #16 ; =16 stur w0, [x29, #-4] sub x1, x29, #4 ; =4 mov w0, wzr bl _doSomething add sp, x29, #16 ; =16 ldp x29, x30, [sp], #16 LBB0_2: ; %false ret Therefore, we would pay the overhead of setting up/destroying the frame only if we actually do the call. ** Proposed Solution ** This patch introduces a new machine pass that perform the shrink-wrapping analysis (See the comments at the beginning of ShrinkWrap.cpp for more details). It then stores the safe save and restore point into the MachineFrameInfo attached to the MachineFunction. This information is then used by the PrologEpilogInserter (PEI) to place the related code at the right place. This pass runs right before the PEI. Unlike the original paper of Chow from PLDI’88, this implementation of shrink-wrapping does not use expensive data-flow analysis and does not need hack to properly avoid frequently executed point. Instead, it relies on dominance and loop properties. The pass is off by default and each target can opt-in by setting the EnableShrinkWrap boolean to true in their derived class of TargetPassConfig. This setting can also be overwritten on the command line by using -enable-shrink-wrap. Before you try out the pass for your target, make sure you properly fix your emitProlog/emitEpilog/adjustForXXX method to cope with basic blocks that are not necessarily the entry block. ** Design Decisions ** 1. ShrinkWrap is its own pass right now. It could frankly be merged into PEI but for debugging and clarity I thought it was best to have its own file. 2. Right now, we only support one save point and one restore point. At some point we can expand this to several save point and restore point, the impacted component would then be: - The pass itself: New algorithm needed. - MachineFrameInfo: Hold a list or set of Save/Restore point instead of one pointer. - PEI: Should loop over the save point and restore point. Anyhow, at least for this first iteration, I do not believe this is interesting to support the complex cases. We should revisit that when we motivating examples. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9210 <rdar://problem/3201744> llvm-svn: 236507 |
||
---|---|---|
.. | ||
AsmParser | ||
Disassembler | ||
InstPrinter | ||
MCTargetDesc | ||
TargetInfo | ||
CMakeLists.txt | ||
LLVMBuild.txt | ||
Makefile | ||
README.txt | ||
SystemZ.h | ||
SystemZ.td | ||
SystemZAsmPrinter.cpp | ||
SystemZAsmPrinter.h | ||
SystemZCallingConv.cpp | ||
SystemZCallingConv.h | ||
SystemZCallingConv.td | ||
SystemZConstantPoolValue.cpp | ||
SystemZConstantPoolValue.h | ||
SystemZElimCompare.cpp | ||
SystemZFrameLowering.cpp | ||
SystemZFrameLowering.h | ||
SystemZISelDAGToDAG.cpp | ||
SystemZISelLowering.cpp | ||
SystemZISelLowering.h | ||
SystemZInstrBuilder.h | ||
SystemZInstrFP.td | ||
SystemZInstrFormats.td | ||
SystemZInstrInfo.cpp | ||
SystemZInstrInfo.h | ||
SystemZInstrInfo.td | ||
SystemZLDCleanup.cpp | ||
SystemZLongBranch.cpp | ||
SystemZMCInstLower.cpp | ||
SystemZMCInstLower.h | ||
SystemZMachineFunctionInfo.cpp | ||
SystemZMachineFunctionInfo.h | ||
SystemZOperands.td | ||
SystemZOperators.td | ||
SystemZPatterns.td | ||
SystemZProcessors.td | ||
SystemZRegisterInfo.cpp | ||
SystemZRegisterInfo.h | ||
SystemZRegisterInfo.td | ||
SystemZSelectionDAGInfo.cpp | ||
SystemZSelectionDAGInfo.h | ||
SystemZShortenInst.cpp | ||
SystemZSubtarget.cpp | ||
SystemZSubtarget.h | ||
SystemZTargetMachine.cpp | ||
SystemZTargetMachine.h | ||
SystemZTargetTransformInfo.cpp | ||
SystemZTargetTransformInfo.h |
README.txt
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// // Random notes about and ideas for the SystemZ backend. //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// The initial backend is deliberately restricted to z10. We should add support for later architectures at some point. -- SystemZDAGToDAGISel::SelectInlineAsmMemoryOperand() is passed "m" for all inline asm memory constraints; it doesn't get to see the original constraint. This means that it must conservatively treat all inline asm constraints as the most restricted type, "R". -- If an inline asm ties an i32 "r" result to an i64 input, the input will be treated as an i32, leaving the upper bits uninitialised. For example: define void @f4(i32 *%dst) { %val = call i32 asm "blah $0", "=r,0" (i64 103) store i32 %val, i32 *%dst ret void } from CodeGen/SystemZ/asm-09.ll will use LHI rather than LGHI. to load 103. This seems to be a general target-independent problem. -- The tuning of the choice between LOAD ADDRESS (LA) and addition in SystemZISelDAGToDAG.cpp is suspect. It should be tweaked based on performance measurements. -- There is no scheduling support. -- We don't use the BRANCH ON INDEX instructions. -- We might want to use BRANCH ON CONDITION for conditional indirect calls and conditional returns. -- We don't use the TEST DATA CLASS instructions. -- We could use the generic floating-point forms of LOAD COMPLEMENT, LOAD NEGATIVE and LOAD POSITIVE in cases where we don't need the condition codes. For example, we could use LCDFR instead of LCDBR. -- We only use MVC, XC and CLC for constant-length block operations. We could extend them to variable-length operations too, using EXECUTE RELATIVE LONG. MVCIN, MVCLE and CLCLE may be worthwhile too. -- We don't use CUSE or the TRANSLATE family of instructions for string operations. The TRANSLATE ones are probably more difficult to exploit. -- We don't take full advantage of builtins like fabsl because the calling conventions require f128s to be returned by invisible reference. -- ADD LOGICAL WITH SIGNED IMMEDIATE could be useful when we need to produce a carry. SUBTRACT LOGICAL IMMEDIATE could be useful when we need to produce a borrow. (Note that there are no memory forms of ADD LOGICAL WITH CARRY and SUBTRACT LOGICAL WITH BORROW, so the high part of 128-bit memory operations would probably need to be done via a register.) -- We don't use the halfword forms of LOAD REVERSED and STORE REVERSED (LRVH and STRVH). -- We don't use ICM or STCM. -- DAGCombiner doesn't yet fold truncations of extended loads. Functions like: unsigned long f (unsigned long x, unsigned short *y) { return (x << 32) | *y; } therefore end up as: sllg %r2, %r2, 32 llgh %r0, 0(%r3) lr %r2, %r0 br %r14 but truncating the load would give: sllg %r2, %r2, 32 lh %r2, 0(%r3) br %r14 -- Functions like: define i64 @f1(i64 %a) { %and = and i64 %a, 1 ret i64 %and } ought to be implemented as: lhi %r0, 1 ngr %r2, %r0 br %r14 but two-address optimisations reverse the order of the AND and force: lhi %r0, 1 ngr %r0, %r2 lgr %r2, %r0 br %r14 CodeGen/SystemZ/and-04.ll has several examples of this. -- Out-of-range displacements are usually handled by loading the full address into a register. In many cases it would be better to create an anchor point instead. E.g. for: define void @f4a(i128 *%aptr, i64 %base) { %addr = add i64 %base, 524288 %bptr = inttoptr i64 %addr to i128 * %a = load volatile i128 *%aptr %b = load i128 *%bptr %add = add i128 %a, %b store i128 %add, i128 *%aptr ret void } (from CodeGen/SystemZ/int-add-08.ll) we load %base+524288 and %base+524296 into separate registers, rather than using %base+524288 as a base for both. -- Dynamic stack allocations round the size to 8 bytes and then allocate that rounded amount. It would be simpler to subtract the unrounded size from the copy of the stack pointer and then align the result. See CodeGen/SystemZ/alloca-01.ll for an example. -- If needed, we can support 16-byte atomics using LPQ, STPQ and CSDG. -- We might want to model all access registers and use them to spill 32-bit values.