Dan implemented one multiply issue. Replace it with another. :)
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@47431 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
diff --git a/lib/Target/X86/README.txt b/lib/Target/X86/README.txt
index f6a0b78..736e299 100644
--- a/lib/Target/X86/README.txt
+++ b/lib/Target/X86/README.txt
@@ -1392,22 +1392,43 @@
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-We're missing an obvious fold of a load into imul:
+We're codegen'ing multiply of long longs inefficiently:
-int test(long a, long b) { return a * b; }
+unsigned long long LLM(unsigned long long arg1, unsigned long long arg2) {
+ return arg1 * arg2;
+}
-LLVM produces:
-_test:
- movl 4(%esp), %ecx
- movl 8(%esp), %eax
- imull %ecx, %eax
+We compile to (fomit-frame-pointer):
+
+_LLM:
+ pushl %esi
+ movl 8(%esp), %ecx
+ movl 16(%esp), %esi
+ movl %esi, %eax
+ mull %ecx
+ imull 12(%esp), %esi
+ addl %edx, %esi
+ imull 20(%esp), %ecx
+ movl %esi, %edx
+ addl %ecx, %edx
+ popl %esi
+ ret
+
+This looks like a scheduling deficiency and lack of remat of the load from
+the argument area. ICC apparently produces:
+
+ movl 8(%esp), %ecx
+ imull 12(%esp), %ecx
+ movl 16(%esp), %eax
+ imull 4(%esp), %eax
+ addl %eax, %ecx
+ movl 4(%esp), %eax
+ mull 12(%esp)
+ addl %ecx, %edx
ret
-vs:
-_test:
- movl 8(%esp), %eax
- imull 4(%esp), %eax
- ret
+Note that it remat'd loads from 4(esp) and 12(esp). See this GCC PR:
+http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17236
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//