blob: 267f60a204728ff685a8dcd07f1ddadb1773802e [file] [log] [blame]
Chris Lattner086c0142006-02-03 06:21:43 +00001Target Independent Opportunities:
2
Chris Lattnerf308ea02006-09-28 06:01:17 +00003//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
4
Chris Lattner9b62b452006-11-14 01:57:53 +00005With the recent changes to make the implicit def/use set explicit in
6machineinstrs, we should change the target descriptions for 'call' instructions
7so that the .td files don't list all the call-clobbered registers as implicit
8defs. Instead, these should be added by the code generator (e.g. on the dag).
9
10This has a number of uses:
11
121. PPC32/64 and X86 32/64 can avoid having multiple copies of call instructions
13 for their different impdef sets.
142. Targets with multiple calling convs (e.g. x86) which have different clobber
15 sets don't need copies of call instructions.
163. 'Interprocedural register allocation' can be done to reduce the clobber sets
17 of calls.
18
19//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
20
Nate Begeman81e80972006-03-17 01:40:33 +000021Make the PPC branch selector target independant
22
23//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner086c0142006-02-03 06:21:43 +000024
25Get the C front-end to expand hypot(x,y) -> llvm.sqrt(x*x+y*y) when errno and
Chris Lattner2dae65d2008-12-10 01:30:48 +000026precision don't matter (ffastmath). Misc/mandel will like this. :) This isn't
27safe in general, even on darwin. See the libm implementation of hypot for
28examples (which special case when x/y are exactly zero to get signed zeros etc
29right).
Chris Lattner086c0142006-02-03 06:21:43 +000030
Chris Lattner086c0142006-02-03 06:21:43 +000031//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
32
33Solve this DAG isel folding deficiency:
34
35int X, Y;
36
37void fn1(void)
38{
39 X = X | (Y << 3);
40}
41
42compiles to
43
44fn1:
45 movl Y, %eax
46 shll $3, %eax
47 orl X, %eax
48 movl %eax, X
49 ret
50
51The problem is the store's chain operand is not the load X but rather
52a TokenFactor of the load X and load Y, which prevents the folding.
53
54There are two ways to fix this:
55
561. The dag combiner can start using alias analysis to realize that y/x
57 don't alias, making the store to X not dependent on the load from Y.
582. The generated isel could be made smarter in the case it can't
59 disambiguate the pointers.
60
61Number 1 is the preferred solution.
62
Evan Chenge617b082006-03-13 23:19:10 +000063This has been "fixed" by a TableGen hack. But that is a short term workaround
64which will be removed once the proper fix is made.
65
Chris Lattner086c0142006-02-03 06:21:43 +000066//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
67
Chris Lattnerb27b69f2006-03-04 01:19:34 +000068On targets with expensive 64-bit multiply, we could LSR this:
69
70for (i = ...; ++i) {
71 x = 1ULL << i;
72
73into:
74 long long tmp = 1;
75 for (i = ...; ++i, tmp+=tmp)
76 x = tmp;
77
78This would be a win on ppc32, but not x86 or ppc64.
79
Chris Lattnerad019932006-03-04 08:44:51 +000080//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner5b0fe7d2006-03-05 20:00:08 +000081
82Shrink: (setlt (loadi32 P), 0) -> (setlt (loadi8 Phi), 0)
83
84//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner549f27d22006-03-07 02:46:26 +000085
Chris Lattnerc20995e2006-03-11 20:17:08 +000086Reassociate should turn: X*X*X*X -> t=(X*X) (t*t) to eliminate a multiply.
87
88//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
89
Chris Lattner74cfb7d2006-03-11 20:20:40 +000090Interesting? testcase for add/shift/mul reassoc:
91
92int bar(int x, int y) {
93 return x*x*x+y+x*x*x*x*x*y*y*y*y;
94}
95int foo(int z, int n) {
96 return bar(z, n) + bar(2*z, 2*n);
97}
98
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +000099Reassociate should handle the example in GCC PR16157.
100
Chris Lattner74cfb7d2006-03-11 20:20:40 +0000101//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
102
Chris Lattner82c78b22006-03-09 20:13:21 +0000103These two functions should generate the same code on big-endian systems:
104
105int g(int *j,int *l) { return memcmp(j,l,4); }
106int h(int *j, int *l) { return *j - *l; }
107
108this could be done in SelectionDAGISel.cpp, along with other special cases,
109for 1,2,4,8 bytes.
110
111//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
112
Chris Lattnerc04b4232006-03-22 07:33:46 +0000113It would be nice to revert this patch:
114http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20060213/031986.html
115
116And teach the dag combiner enough to simplify the code expanded before
117legalize. It seems plausible that this knowledge would let it simplify other
118stuff too.
119
Chris Lattnere6cd96d2006-03-24 19:59:17 +0000120//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
121
Reid Spencerac9dcb92007-02-15 03:39:18 +0000122For vector types, TargetData.cpp::getTypeInfo() returns alignment that is equal
Evan Cheng67d3d4c2006-03-31 22:35:14 +0000123to the type size. It works but can be overly conservative as the alignment of
Reid Spencerac9dcb92007-02-15 03:39:18 +0000124specific vector types are target dependent.
Chris Lattnereaa7c062006-04-01 04:08:29 +0000125
126//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
127
Dan Gohman1f3be1a2009-05-11 18:51:16 +0000128We should produce an unaligned load from code like this:
Chris Lattnereaa7c062006-04-01 04:08:29 +0000129
130v4sf example(float *P) {
131 return (v4sf){P[0], P[1], P[2], P[3] };
132}
133
134//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
135
Chris Lattner16abfdf2006-05-18 18:26:13 +0000136Add support for conditional increments, and other related patterns. Instead
137of:
138
139 movl 136(%esp), %eax
140 cmpl $0, %eax
141 je LBB16_2 #cond_next
142LBB16_1: #cond_true
143 incl _foo
144LBB16_2: #cond_next
145
146emit:
147 movl _foo, %eax
148 cmpl $1, %edi
149 sbbl $-1, %eax
150 movl %eax, _foo
151
152//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner870cf1b2006-05-19 20:45:08 +0000153
154Combine: a = sin(x), b = cos(x) into a,b = sincos(x).
155
156Expand these to calls of sin/cos and stores:
157 double sincos(double x, double *sin, double *cos);
158 float sincosf(float x, float *sin, float *cos);
159 long double sincosl(long double x, long double *sin, long double *cos);
160
161Doing so could allow SROA of the destination pointers. See also:
162http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17687
163
Chris Lattner2dae65d2008-12-10 01:30:48 +0000164This is now easily doable with MRVs. We could even make an intrinsic for this
165if anyone cared enough about sincos.
166
Chris Lattner870cf1b2006-05-19 20:45:08 +0000167//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnerf00f68a2006-05-19 21:01:38 +0000168
Chris Lattnere8263e62006-05-21 03:57:07 +0000169Turn this into a single byte store with no load (the other 3 bytes are
170unmodified):
171
Dan Gohman5c8274b2009-05-11 18:04:52 +0000172define void @test(i32* %P) {
173 %tmp = load i32* %P
174 %tmp14 = or i32 %tmp, 3305111552
175 %tmp15 = and i32 %tmp14, 3321888767
176 store i32 %tmp15, i32* %P
Chris Lattnere8263e62006-05-21 03:57:07 +0000177 ret void
178}
179
Chris Lattner9e18ef52006-05-30 21:29:15 +0000180//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
181
182dag/inst combine "clz(x)>>5 -> x==0" for 32-bit x.
183
184Compile:
185
186int bar(int x)
187{
188 int t = __builtin_clz(x);
189 return -(t>>5);
190}
191
192to:
193
194_bar: addic r3,r3,-1
195 subfe r3,r3,r3
196 blr
197
Chris Lattnercbce2f62006-09-15 20:31:36 +0000198//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
199
Chris Lattner7ed96ab2006-09-16 23:57:51 +0000200quantum_sigma_x in 462.libquantum contains the following loop:
201
202 for(i=0; i<reg->size; i++)
203 {
204 /* Flip the target bit of each basis state */
205 reg->node[i].state ^= ((MAX_UNSIGNED) 1 << target);
206 }
207
208Where MAX_UNSIGNED/state is a 64-bit int. On a 32-bit platform it would be just
209so cool to turn it into something like:
210
Chris Lattnerb33a42a2006-09-18 04:54:35 +0000211 long long Res = ((MAX_UNSIGNED) 1 << target);
Chris Lattner7ed96ab2006-09-16 23:57:51 +0000212 if (target < 32) {
213 for(i=0; i<reg->size; i++)
Chris Lattnerb33a42a2006-09-18 04:54:35 +0000214 reg->node[i].state ^= Res & 0xFFFFFFFFULL;
Chris Lattner7ed96ab2006-09-16 23:57:51 +0000215 } else {
216 for(i=0; i<reg->size; i++)
Chris Lattnerb33a42a2006-09-18 04:54:35 +0000217 reg->node[i].state ^= Res & 0xFFFFFFFF00000000ULL
Chris Lattner7ed96ab2006-09-16 23:57:51 +0000218 }
219
220... which would only do one 32-bit XOR per loop iteration instead of two.
221
222It would also be nice to recognize the reg->size doesn't alias reg->node[i], but
Chris Lattner9c6a0dc2009-11-26 01:51:18 +0000223this requires TBAA.
Chris Lattnerfaa6adf2009-09-21 06:04:07 +0000224
225//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
226
227This should be optimized to one 'and' and one 'or', from PR4216:
228
229define i32 @test_bitfield(i32 %bf.prev.low) nounwind ssp {
230entry:
231 %bf.prev.lo.cleared10 = or i32 %bf.prev.low, 32962 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
232 %0 = and i32 %bf.prev.low, -65536 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
233 %1 = and i32 %bf.prev.lo.cleared10, 40186 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
234 %2 = or i32 %1, %0 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
235 ret i32 %2
236}
Chris Lattner7ed96ab2006-09-16 23:57:51 +0000237
238//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnerfb981f32006-09-25 17:12:14 +0000239
Chris Lattnerb1ac7692008-10-05 02:16:12 +0000240This isn't recognized as bswap by instcombine (yes, it really is bswap):
Chris Lattnerf9bae432006-12-08 02:01:32 +0000241
242unsigned long reverse(unsigned v) {
243 unsigned t;
244 t = v ^ ((v << 16) | (v >> 16));
245 t &= ~0xff0000;
246 v = (v << 24) | (v >> 8);
247 return v ^ (t >> 8);
248}
249
Chris Lattnerfb981f32006-09-25 17:12:14 +0000250//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
251
Chris Lattnerf4fee2a2008-10-15 16:02:15 +0000252These idioms should be recognized as popcount (see PR1488):
253
254unsigned countbits_slow(unsigned v) {
255 unsigned c;
256 for (c = 0; v; v >>= 1)
257 c += v & 1;
258 return c;
259}
260unsigned countbits_fast(unsigned v){
261 unsigned c;
262 for (c = 0; v; c++)
263 v &= v - 1; // clear the least significant bit set
264 return c;
265}
266
267BITBOARD = unsigned long long
268int PopCnt(register BITBOARD a) {
269 register int c=0;
270 while(a) {
271 c++;
272 a &= a - 1;
273 }
274 return c;
275}
276unsigned int popcount(unsigned int input) {
277 unsigned int count = 0;
278 for (unsigned int i = 0; i < 4 * 8; i++)
279 count += (input >> i) & i;
280 return count;
281}
282
Chris Lattner9c6a0dc2009-11-26 01:51:18 +0000283This is a form of idiom recognition for loops, the same thing that could be
284useful for recognizing memset/memcpy.
285
Chris Lattnerf4fee2a2008-10-15 16:02:15 +0000286//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
287
Chris Lattnerfb981f32006-09-25 17:12:14 +0000288These should turn into single 16-bit (unaligned?) loads on little/big endian
289processors.
290
291unsigned short read_16_le(const unsigned char *adr) {
292 return adr[0] | (adr[1] << 8);
293}
294unsigned short read_16_be(const unsigned char *adr) {
295 return (adr[0] << 8) | adr[1];
296}
297
298//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnercf103912006-10-24 16:12:47 +0000299
Reid Spencer1628cec2006-10-26 06:15:43 +0000300-instcombine should handle this transform:
Reid Spencere4d87aa2006-12-23 06:05:41 +0000301 icmp pred (sdiv X / C1 ), C2
Reid Spencer1628cec2006-10-26 06:15:43 +0000302when X, C1, and C2 are unsigned. Similarly for udiv and signed operands.
303
304Currently InstCombine avoids this transform but will do it when the signs of
305the operands and the sign of the divide match. See the FIXME in
306InstructionCombining.cpp in the visitSetCondInst method after the switch case
307for Instruction::UDiv (around line 4447) for more details.
308
309The SingleSource/Benchmarks/Shootout-C++/hash and hash2 tests have examples of
310this construct.
Chris Lattnerd7c628d2006-11-03 22:27:39 +0000311
312//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
313
Chris Lattner578d2df2006-11-10 00:23:26 +0000314viterbi speeds up *significantly* if the various "history" related copy loops
315are turned into memcpy calls at the source level. We need a "loops to memcpy"
316pass.
317
318//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Nick Lewyckybf637342006-11-13 00:23:28 +0000319
Chris Lattner03a6d962007-01-16 06:39:48 +0000320Consider:
321
322typedef unsigned U32;
323typedef unsigned long long U64;
324int test (U32 *inst, U64 *regs) {
325 U64 effective_addr2;
326 U32 temp = *inst;
327 int r1 = (temp >> 20) & 0xf;
328 int b2 = (temp >> 16) & 0xf;
329 effective_addr2 = temp & 0xfff;
330 if (b2) effective_addr2 += regs[b2];
331 b2 = (temp >> 12) & 0xf;
332 if (b2) effective_addr2 += regs[b2];
333 effective_addr2 &= regs[4];
334 if ((effective_addr2 & 3) == 0)
335 return 1;
336 return 0;
337}
338
339Note that only the low 2 bits of effective_addr2 are used. On 32-bit systems,
340we don't eliminate the computation of the top half of effective_addr2 because
341we don't have whole-function selection dags. On x86, this means we use one
342extra register for the function when effective_addr2 is declared as U64 than
343when it is declared U32.
344
Chris Lattner17424982009-11-10 23:47:45 +0000345PHI Slicing could be extended to do this.
346
Chris Lattner03a6d962007-01-16 06:39:48 +0000347//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
348
Chris Lattner9c6a0dc2009-11-26 01:51:18 +0000349LSR should know what GPR types a target has from TargetData. This code:
Chris Lattner1a77a552007-03-24 06:01:32 +0000350
351volatile short X, Y; // globals
352
353void foo(int N) {
354 int i;
355 for (i = 0; i < N; i++) { X = i; Y = i*4; }
356}
357
Chris Lattnerc1491f32009-09-20 17:37:38 +0000358produces two near identical IV's (after promotion) on PPC/ARM:
Chris Lattner1a77a552007-03-24 06:01:32 +0000359
Chris Lattnerc1491f32009-09-20 17:37:38 +0000360LBB1_2:
361 ldr r3, LCPI1_0
362 ldr r3, [r3]
363 strh r2, [r3]
364 ldr r3, LCPI1_1
365 ldr r3, [r3]
366 strh r1, [r3]
367 add r1, r1, #4
368 add r2, r2, #1 <- [0,+,1]
369 sub r0, r0, #1 <- [0,-,1]
370 cmp r0, #0
371 bne LBB1_2
372
373LSR should reuse the "+" IV for the exit test.
Chris Lattner1a77a552007-03-24 06:01:32 +0000374
Chris Lattner1a77a552007-03-24 06:01:32 +0000375//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
376
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000377Tail call elim should be more aggressive, checking to see if the call is
378followed by an uncond branch to an exit block.
379
380; This testcase is due to tail-duplication not wanting to copy the return
381; instruction into the terminating blocks because there was other code
382; optimized out of the function after the taildup happened.
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000383; RUN: llvm-as < %s | opt -tailcallelim | llvm-dis | not grep call
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000384
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000385define i32 @t4(i32 %a) {
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000386entry:
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000387 %tmp.1 = and i32 %a, 1 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
388 %tmp.2 = icmp ne i32 %tmp.1, 0 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
389 br i1 %tmp.2, label %then.0, label %else.0
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000390
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000391then.0: ; preds = %entry
392 %tmp.5 = add i32 %a, -1 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
393 %tmp.3 = call i32 @t4( i32 %tmp.5 ) ; <i32> [#uses=1]
394 br label %return
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000395
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000396else.0: ; preds = %entry
397 %tmp.7 = icmp ne i32 %a, 0 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
398 br i1 %tmp.7, label %then.1, label %return
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000399
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000400then.1: ; preds = %else.0
401 %tmp.11 = add i32 %a, -2 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
402 %tmp.9 = call i32 @t4( i32 %tmp.11 ) ; <i32> [#uses=1]
403 br label %return
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000404
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000405return: ; preds = %then.1, %else.0, %then.0
406 %result.0 = phi i32 [ 0, %else.0 ], [ %tmp.3, %then.0 ],
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000407 [ %tmp.9, %then.1 ]
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000408 ret i32 %result.0
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000409}
Chris Lattnerf110a2b2007-05-05 22:44:08 +0000410
411//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
412
Chris Lattnerc90b8662008-08-10 00:47:21 +0000413Tail recursion elimination should handle:
414
415int pow2m1(int n) {
416 if (n == 0)
417 return 0;
418 return 2 * pow2m1 (n - 1) + 1;
419}
420
421Also, multiplies can be turned into SHL's, so they should be handled as if
422they were associative. "return foo() << 1" can be tail recursion eliminated.
423
424//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
425
Chris Lattnerf110a2b2007-05-05 22:44:08 +0000426Argument promotion should promote arguments for recursive functions, like
427this:
428
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000429; RUN: llvm-as < %s | opt -argpromotion | llvm-dis | grep x.val
Chris Lattnerf110a2b2007-05-05 22:44:08 +0000430
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000431define internal i32 @foo(i32* %x) {
Chris Lattnerf110a2b2007-05-05 22:44:08 +0000432entry:
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000433 %tmp = load i32* %x ; <i32> [#uses=0]
434 %tmp.foo = call i32 @foo( i32* %x ) ; <i32> [#uses=1]
435 ret i32 %tmp.foo
Chris Lattnerf110a2b2007-05-05 22:44:08 +0000436}
437
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000438define i32 @bar(i32* %x) {
Chris Lattnerf110a2b2007-05-05 22:44:08 +0000439entry:
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000440 %tmp3 = call i32 @foo( i32* %x ) ; <i32> [#uses=1]
441 ret i32 %tmp3
Chris Lattnerf110a2b2007-05-05 22:44:08 +0000442}
443
Chris Lattner81f2d712007-12-05 23:05:06 +0000444//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner166a2682007-12-28 04:42:05 +0000445
Chris Lattnera1643ba2007-12-28 22:30:05 +0000446We should investigate an instruction sinking pass. Consider this silly
447example in pic mode:
448
449#include <assert.h>
450void foo(int x) {
451 assert(x);
452 //...
453}
454
455we compile this to:
456_foo:
457 subl $28, %esp
458 call "L1$pb"
459"L1$pb":
460 popl %eax
461 cmpl $0, 32(%esp)
462 je LBB1_2 # cond_true
463LBB1_1: # return
464 # ...
465 addl $28, %esp
466 ret
467LBB1_2: # cond_true
468...
469
470The PIC base computation (call+popl) is only used on one path through the
471code, but is currently always computed in the entry block. It would be
472better to sink the picbase computation down into the block for the
473assertion, as it is the only one that uses it. This happens for a lot of
474code with early outs.
475
Chris Lattner92c06a02007-12-29 01:05:01 +0000476Another example is loads of arguments, which are usually emitted into the
477entry block on targets like x86. If not used in all paths through a
478function, they should be sunk into the ones that do.
479
Chris Lattnera1643ba2007-12-28 22:30:05 +0000480In this case, whole-function-isel would also handle this.
Chris Lattner166a2682007-12-28 04:42:05 +0000481
482//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnerb3041942008-01-07 21:38:14 +0000483
484Investigate lowering of sparse switch statements into perfect hash tables:
485http://burtleburtle.net/bob/hash/perfect.html
486
487//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnerf61b63e2008-01-09 00:17:57 +0000488
489We should turn things like "load+fabs+store" and "load+fneg+store" into the
490corresponding integer operations. On a yonah, this loop:
491
492double a[256];
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000493void foo() {
494 int i, b;
495 for (b = 0; b < 10000000; b++)
496 for (i = 0; i < 256; i++)
497 a[i] = -a[i];
498}
Chris Lattnerf61b63e2008-01-09 00:17:57 +0000499
500is twice as slow as this loop:
501
502long long a[256];
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000503void foo() {
504 int i, b;
505 for (b = 0; b < 10000000; b++)
506 for (i = 0; i < 256; i++)
507 a[i] ^= (1ULL << 63);
508}
Chris Lattnerf61b63e2008-01-09 00:17:57 +0000509
510and I suspect other processors are similar. On X86 in particular this is a
511big win because doing this with integers allows the use of read/modify/write
512instructions.
513
514//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner83726012008-01-10 18:25:41 +0000515
516DAG Combiner should try to combine small loads into larger loads when
517profitable. For example, we compile this C++ example:
518
519struct THotKey { short Key; bool Control; bool Shift; bool Alt; };
520extern THotKey m_HotKey;
521THotKey GetHotKey () { return m_HotKey; }
522
523into (-O3 -fno-exceptions -static -fomit-frame-pointer):
524
525__Z9GetHotKeyv:
526 pushl %esi
527 movl 8(%esp), %eax
528 movb _m_HotKey+3, %cl
529 movb _m_HotKey+4, %dl
530 movb _m_HotKey+2, %ch
531 movw _m_HotKey, %si
532 movw %si, (%eax)
533 movb %ch, 2(%eax)
534 movb %cl, 3(%eax)
535 movb %dl, 4(%eax)
536 popl %esi
537 ret $4
538
539GCC produces:
540
541__Z9GetHotKeyv:
542 movl _m_HotKey, %edx
543 movl 4(%esp), %eax
544 movl %edx, (%eax)
545 movzwl _m_HotKey+4, %edx
546 movw %dx, 4(%eax)
547 ret $4
548
549The LLVM IR contains the needed alignment info, so we should be able to
550merge the loads and stores into 4-byte loads:
551
552 %struct.THotKey = type { i16, i8, i8, i8 }
553define void @_Z9GetHotKeyv(%struct.THotKey* sret %agg.result) nounwind {
554...
555 %tmp2 = load i16* getelementptr (@m_HotKey, i32 0, i32 0), align 8
556 %tmp5 = load i8* getelementptr (@m_HotKey, i32 0, i32 1), align 2
557 %tmp8 = load i8* getelementptr (@m_HotKey, i32 0, i32 2), align 1
558 %tmp11 = load i8* getelementptr (@m_HotKey, i32 0, i32 3), align 2
559
560Alternatively, we should use a small amount of base-offset alias analysis
561to make it so the scheduler doesn't need to hold all the loads in regs at
562once.
563
564//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner497b7e92008-01-11 06:17:47 +0000565
Nate Begemane9fe65c2008-02-18 18:39:23 +0000566We should add an FRINT node to the DAG to model targets that have legal
567implementations of ceil/floor/rint.
Chris Lattner48840f82008-02-28 05:34:27 +0000568
569//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
570
571Consider:
572
573int test() {
574 long long input[8] = {1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1};
575 foo(input);
576}
577
578We currently compile this into a memcpy from a global array since the
579initializer is fairly large and not memset'able. This is good, but the memcpy
580gets lowered to load/stores in the code generator. This is also ok, except
581that the codegen lowering for memcpy doesn't handle the case when the source
582is a constant global. This gives us atrocious code like this:
583
584 call "L1$pb"
585"L1$pb":
586 popl %eax
587 movl _C.0.1444-"L1$pb"+32(%eax), %ecx
588 movl %ecx, 40(%esp)
589 movl _C.0.1444-"L1$pb"+20(%eax), %ecx
590 movl %ecx, 28(%esp)
591 movl _C.0.1444-"L1$pb"+36(%eax), %ecx
592 movl %ecx, 44(%esp)
593 movl _C.0.1444-"L1$pb"+44(%eax), %ecx
594 movl %ecx, 52(%esp)
595 movl _C.0.1444-"L1$pb"+40(%eax), %ecx
596 movl %ecx, 48(%esp)
597 movl _C.0.1444-"L1$pb"+12(%eax), %ecx
598 movl %ecx, 20(%esp)
599 movl _C.0.1444-"L1$pb"+4(%eax), %ecx
600...
601
602instead of:
603 movl $1, 16(%esp)
604 movl $0, 20(%esp)
605 movl $1, 24(%esp)
606 movl $0, 28(%esp)
607 movl $1, 32(%esp)
608 movl $0, 36(%esp)
609 ...
610
611//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnera11deb02008-03-02 02:51:40 +0000612
613http://llvm.org/PR717:
614
615The following code should compile into "ret int undef". Instead, LLVM
616produces "ret int 0":
617
618int f() {
619 int x = 4;
620 int y;
621 if (x == 3) y = 0;
622 return y;
623}
624
625//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner53b72772008-03-02 19:29:42 +0000626
627The loop unroller should partially unroll loops (instead of peeling them)
628when code growth isn't too bad and when an unroll count allows simplification
629of some code within the loop. One trivial example is:
630
631#include <stdio.h>
632int main() {
633 int nRet = 17;
634 int nLoop;
635 for ( nLoop = 0; nLoop < 1000; nLoop++ ) {
636 if ( nLoop & 1 )
637 nRet += 2;
638 else
639 nRet -= 1;
640 }
641 return nRet;
642}
643
644Unrolling by 2 would eliminate the '&1' in both copies, leading to a net
645reduction in code size. The resultant code would then also be suitable for
646exit value computation.
647
648//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner349155b2008-03-17 01:47:51 +0000649
650We miss a bunch of rotate opportunities on various targets, including ppc, x86,
651etc. On X86, we miss a bunch of 'rotate by variable' cases because the rotate
652matching code in dag combine doesn't look through truncates aggressively
653enough. Here are some testcases reduces from GCC PR17886:
654
655unsigned long long f(unsigned long long x, int y) {
656 return (x << y) | (x >> 64-y);
657}
658unsigned f2(unsigned x, int y){
659 return (x << y) | (x >> 32-y);
660}
661unsigned long long f3(unsigned long long x){
662 int y = 9;
663 return (x << y) | (x >> 64-y);
664}
665unsigned f4(unsigned x){
666 int y = 10;
667 return (x << y) | (x >> 32-y);
668}
669unsigned long long f5(unsigned long long x, unsigned long long y) {
670 return (x << 8) | ((y >> 48) & 0xffull);
671}
672unsigned long long f6(unsigned long long x, unsigned long long y, int z) {
673 switch(z) {
674 case 1:
675 return (x << 8) | ((y >> 48) & 0xffull);
676 case 2:
677 return (x << 16) | ((y >> 40) & 0xffffull);
678 case 3:
679 return (x << 24) | ((y >> 32) & 0xffffffull);
680 case 4:
681 return (x << 32) | ((y >> 24) & 0xffffffffull);
682 default:
683 return (x << 40) | ((y >> 16) & 0xffffffffffull);
684 }
685}
686
Dan Gohmancb747c52008-10-17 21:39:27 +0000687On X86-64, we only handle f2/f3/f4 right. On x86-32, a few of these
Chris Lattner349155b2008-03-17 01:47:51 +0000688generate truly horrible code, instead of using shld and friends. On
689ARM, we end up with calls to L___lshrdi3/L___ashldi3 in f, which is
690badness. PPC64 misses f, f5 and f6. CellSPU aborts in isel.
691
692//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnerf70107f2008-03-20 04:46:13 +0000693
694We do a number of simplifications in simplify libcalls to strength reduce
695standard library functions, but we don't currently merge them together. For
696example, it is useful to merge memcpy(a,b,strlen(b)) -> strcpy. This can only
697be done safely if "b" isn't modified between the strlen and memcpy of course.
698
699//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
700
Chris Lattner10c5d362008-07-14 00:19:59 +0000701Reassociate should turn things like:
702
703int factorial(int X) {
704 return X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X;
705}
706
707into llvm.powi calls, allowing the code generator to produce balanced
708multiplication trees.
709
710//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
711
Chris Lattner26e150f2008-08-10 01:14:08 +0000712We generate a horrible libcall for llvm.powi. For example, we compile:
713
714#include <cmath>
715double f(double a) { return std::pow(a, 4); }
716
717into:
718
719__Z1fd:
720 subl $12, %esp
721 movsd 16(%esp), %xmm0
722 movsd %xmm0, (%esp)
723 movl $4, 8(%esp)
724 call L___powidf2$stub
725 addl $12, %esp
726 ret
727
728GCC produces:
729
730__Z1fd:
731 subl $12, %esp
732 movsd 16(%esp), %xmm0
733 mulsd %xmm0, %xmm0
734 mulsd %xmm0, %xmm0
735 movsd %xmm0, (%esp)
736 fldl (%esp)
737 addl $12, %esp
738 ret
739
740//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
741
742We compile this program: (from GCC PR11680)
743http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=4487
744
745Into code that runs the same speed in fast/slow modes, but both modes run 2x
746slower than when compile with GCC (either 4.0 or 4.2):
747
748$ llvm-g++ perf.cpp -O3 -fno-exceptions
749$ time ./a.out fast
7501.821u 0.003s 0:01.82 100.0% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
751
752$ g++ perf.cpp -O3 -fno-exceptions
753$ time ./a.out fast
7540.821u 0.001s 0:00.82 100.0% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
755
756It looks like we are making the same inlining decisions, so this may be raw
757codegen badness or something else (haven't investigated).
758
759//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
760
761We miss some instcombines for stuff like this:
762void bar (void);
763void foo (unsigned int a) {
764 /* This one is equivalent to a >= (3 << 2). */
765 if ((a >> 2) >= 3)
766 bar ();
767}
768
769A few other related ones are in GCC PR14753.
770
771//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
772
773Divisibility by constant can be simplified (according to GCC PR12849) from
774being a mulhi to being a mul lo (cheaper). Testcase:
775
776void bar(unsigned n) {
777 if (n % 3 == 0)
778 true();
779}
780
781I think this basically amounts to a dag combine to simplify comparisons against
782multiply hi's into a comparison against the mullo.
783
784//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner23f35bc2008-08-19 06:22:16 +0000785
Chris Lattnerdb039832008-10-15 16:06:03 +0000786Better mod/ref analysis for scanf would allow us to eliminate the vtable and a
787bunch of other stuff from this example (see PR1604):
788
789#include <cstdio>
790struct test {
791 int val;
792 virtual ~test() {}
793};
794
795int main() {
796 test t;
797 std::scanf("%d", &t.val);
798 std::printf("%d\n", t.val);
799}
800
801//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
802
Chris Lattner3b364cb2008-10-15 16:33:52 +0000803Instcombine will merge comparisons like (x >= 10) && (x < 20) by producing (x -
80410) u< 10, but only when the comparisons have matching sign.
805
806This could be converted with a similiar technique. (PR1941)
807
808define i1 @test(i8 %x) {
809 %A = icmp uge i8 %x, 5
810 %B = icmp slt i8 %x, 20
811 %C = and i1 %A, %B
812 ret i1 %C
813}
814
815//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Nick Lewyckydf563ca2008-11-27 22:12:22 +0000816
Nick Lewyckyd2f0db12008-11-27 22:41:45 +0000817These functions perform the same computation, but produce different assembly.
Nick Lewyckydf563ca2008-11-27 22:12:22 +0000818
819define i8 @select(i8 %x) readnone nounwind {
820 %A = icmp ult i8 %x, 250
821 %B = select i1 %A, i8 0, i8 1
822 ret i8 %B
823}
824
825define i8 @addshr(i8 %x) readnone nounwind {
826 %A = zext i8 %x to i9
827 %B = add i9 %A, 6 ;; 256 - 250 == 6
828 %C = lshr i9 %B, 8
829 %D = trunc i9 %C to i8
830 ret i8 %D
831}
832
833//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Eli Friedman4e16b292008-11-30 07:36:04 +0000834
835From gcc bug 24696:
836int
837f (unsigned long a, unsigned long b, unsigned long c)
838{
839 return ((a & (c - 1)) != 0) || ((b & (c - 1)) != 0);
840}
841int
842f (unsigned long a, unsigned long b, unsigned long c)
843{
844 return ((a & (c - 1)) != 0) | ((b & (c - 1)) != 0);
845}
846Both should combine to ((a|b) & (c-1)) != 0. Currently not optimized with
847"clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
848
849//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
850
851From GCC Bug 20192:
852#define PMD_MASK (~((1UL << 23) - 1))
853void clear_pmd_range(unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
854{
855 if (!(start & ~PMD_MASK) && !(end & ~PMD_MASK))
856 f();
857}
858The expression should optimize to something like
859"!((start|end)&~PMD_MASK). Currently not optimized with "clang
860-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
861
862//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
863
864From GCC Bug 15241:
865unsigned int
866foo (unsigned int a, unsigned int b)
867{
868 if (a <= 7 && b <= 7)
869 baz ();
870}
871Should combine to "(a|b) <= 7". Currently not optimized with "clang
872-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
873
874//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
875
876From GCC Bug 3756:
877int
878pn (int n)
879{
880 return (n >= 0 ? 1 : -1);
881}
882Should combine to (n >> 31) | 1. Currently not optimized with "clang
883-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts | llc".
884
885//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
886
887From GCC Bug 28685:
888int test(int a, int b)
889{
890 int lt = a < b;
891 int eq = a == b;
892
893 return (lt || eq);
894}
895Should combine to "a <= b". Currently not optimized with "clang
896-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts | llc".
897
898//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
899
900void a(int variable)
901{
902 if (variable == 4 || variable == 6)
903 bar();
904}
905This should optimize to "if ((variable | 2) == 6)". Currently not
906optimized with "clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts | llc".
907
908//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
909
910unsigned int f(unsigned int i, unsigned int n) {++i; if (i == n) ++i; return
911i;}
912unsigned int f2(unsigned int i, unsigned int n) {++i; i += i == n; return i;}
913These should combine to the same thing. Currently, the first function
914produces better code on X86.
915
916//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
917
Eli Friedman4e16b292008-11-30 07:36:04 +0000918From GCC Bug 15784:
919#define abs(x) x>0?x:-x
920int f(int x, int y)
921{
922 return (abs(x)) >= 0;
923}
924This should optimize to x == INT_MIN. (With -fwrapv.) Currently not
925optimized with "clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
926
927//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
928
929From GCC Bug 14753:
930void
931rotate_cst (unsigned int a)
932{
933 a = (a << 10) | (a >> 22);
934 if (a == 123)
935 bar ();
936}
937void
938minus_cst (unsigned int a)
939{
940 unsigned int tem;
941
942 tem = 20 - a;
943 if (tem == 5)
944 bar ();
945}
946void
947mask_gt (unsigned int a)
948{
949 /* This is equivalent to a > 15. */
950 if ((a & ~7) > 8)
951 bar ();
952}
953void
954rshift_gt (unsigned int a)
955{
956 /* This is equivalent to a > 23. */
957 if ((a >> 2) > 5)
958 bar ();
959}
960All should simplify to a single comparison. All of these are
961currently not optimized with "clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt
962-std-compile-opts".
963
964//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
965
966From GCC Bug 32605:
967int c(int* x) {return (char*)x+2 == (char*)x;}
968Should combine to 0. Currently not optimized with "clang
969-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts" (although llc can optimize it).
970
971//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
972
973int a(unsigned char* b) {return *b > 99;}
974There's an unnecessary zext in the generated code with "clang
975-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
976
977//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
978
Eli Friedman4e16b292008-11-30 07:36:04 +0000979int a(unsigned b) {return ((b << 31) | (b << 30)) >> 31;}
980Should be combined to "((b >> 1) | b) & 1". Currently not optimized
981with "clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
982
983//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
984
985unsigned a(unsigned x, unsigned y) { return x | (y & 1) | (y & 2);}
986Should combine to "x | (y & 3)". Currently not optimized with "clang
987-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
988
989//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
990
991unsigned a(unsigned a) {return ((a | 1) & 3) | (a & -4);}
992Should combine to "a | 1". Currently not optimized with "clang
993-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
994
995//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
996
Eli Friedman4e16b292008-11-30 07:36:04 +0000997int a(int a, int b, int c) {return (~a & c) | ((c|a) & b);}
998Should fold to "(~a & c) | (a & b)". Currently not optimized with
999"clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1000
1001//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1002
1003int a(int a,int b) {return (~(a|b))|a;}
1004Should fold to "a|~b". Currently not optimized with "clang
1005-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1006
1007//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1008
1009int a(int a, int b) {return (a&&b) || (a&&!b);}
1010Should fold to "a". Currently not optimized with "clang -emit-llvm-bc
1011| opt -std-compile-opts".
1012
1013//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1014
1015int a(int a, int b, int c) {return (a&&b) || (!a&&c);}
1016Should fold to "a ? b : c", or at least something sane. Currently not
1017optimized with "clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1018
1019//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1020
1021int a(int a, int b, int c) {return (a&&b) || (a&&c) || (a&&b&&c);}
1022Should fold to a && (b || c). Currently not optimized with "clang
1023-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1024
1025//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1026
1027int a(int x) {return x | ((x & 8) ^ 8);}
1028Should combine to x | 8. Currently not optimized with "clang
1029-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1030
1031//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1032
1033int a(int x) {return x ^ ((x & 8) ^ 8);}
1034Should also combine to x | 8. Currently not optimized with "clang
1035-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1036
1037//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1038
1039int a(int x) {return (x & 8) == 0 ? -1 : -9;}
1040Should combine to (x | -9) ^ 8. Currently not optimized with "clang
1041-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1042
1043//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1044
1045int a(int x) {return (x & 8) == 0 ? -9 : -1;}
1046Should combine to x | -9. Currently not optimized with "clang
1047-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1048
1049//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1050
1051int a(int x) {return ((x | -9) ^ 8) & x;}
1052Should combine to x & -9. Currently not optimized with "clang
1053-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1054
1055//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1056
1057unsigned a(unsigned a) {return a * 0x11111111 >> 28 & 1;}
1058Should combine to "a * 0x88888888 >> 31". Currently not optimized
1059with "clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1060
1061//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1062
1063unsigned a(char* x) {if ((*x & 32) == 0) return b();}
1064There's an unnecessary zext in the generated code with "clang
1065-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1066
1067//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1068
1069unsigned a(unsigned long long x) {return 40 * (x >> 1);}
1070Should combine to "20 * (((unsigned)x) & -2)". Currently not
1071optimized with "clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1072
1073//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Bill Wendling3bdcda82008-12-02 05:12:47 +00001074
Chris Lattner88d84b22008-12-02 06:32:34 +00001075This was noticed in the entryblock for grokdeclarator in 403.gcc:
1076
1077 %tmp = icmp eq i32 %decl_context, 4
1078 %decl_context_addr.0 = select i1 %tmp, i32 3, i32 %decl_context
1079 %tmp1 = icmp eq i32 %decl_context_addr.0, 1
1080 %decl_context_addr.1 = select i1 %tmp1, i32 0, i32 %decl_context_addr.0
1081
1082tmp1 should be simplified to something like:
1083 (!tmp || decl_context == 1)
1084
1085This allows recursive simplifications, tmp1 is used all over the place in
1086the function, e.g. by:
1087
1088 %tmp23 = icmp eq i32 %decl_context_addr.1, 0 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
1089 %tmp24 = xor i1 %tmp1, true ; <i1> [#uses=1]
1090 %or.cond8 = and i1 %tmp23, %tmp24 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
1091
1092later.
1093
Chris Lattner78a7e7c2008-12-06 19:28:22 +00001094//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1095
1096Store sinking: This code:
1097
1098void f (int n, int *cond, int *res) {
1099 int i;
1100 *res = 0;
1101 for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
1102 if (*cond)
1103 *res ^= 234; /* (*) */
1104}
1105
1106On this function GVN hoists the fully redundant value of *res, but nothing
1107moves the store out. This gives us this code:
1108
1109bb: ; preds = %bb2, %entry
1110 %.rle = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %.rle6, %bb2 ]
1111 %i.05 = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %indvar.next, %bb2 ]
1112 %1 = load i32* %cond, align 4
1113 %2 = icmp eq i32 %1, 0
1114 br i1 %2, label %bb2, label %bb1
1115
1116bb1: ; preds = %bb
1117 %3 = xor i32 %.rle, 234
1118 store i32 %3, i32* %res, align 4
1119 br label %bb2
1120
1121bb2: ; preds = %bb, %bb1
1122 %.rle6 = phi i32 [ %3, %bb1 ], [ %.rle, %bb ]
1123 %indvar.next = add i32 %i.05, 1
1124 %exitcond = icmp eq i32 %indvar.next, %n
1125 br i1 %exitcond, label %return, label %bb
1126
1127DSE should sink partially dead stores to get the store out of the loop.
1128
Chris Lattner6a09a742008-12-06 22:52:12 +00001129Here's another partial dead case:
1130http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12395
1131
Chris Lattner78a7e7c2008-12-06 19:28:22 +00001132//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1133
1134Scalar PRE hoists the mul in the common block up to the else:
1135
1136int test (int a, int b, int c, int g) {
1137 int d, e;
1138 if (a)
1139 d = b * c;
1140 else
1141 d = b - c;
1142 e = b * c + g;
1143 return d + e;
1144}
1145
1146It would be better to do the mul once to reduce codesize above the if.
1147This is GCC PR38204.
1148
1149//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1150
1151GCC PR37810 is an interesting case where we should sink load/store reload
1152into the if block and outside the loop, so we don't reload/store it on the
1153non-call path.
1154
1155for () {
1156 *P += 1;
1157 if ()
1158 call();
1159 else
1160 ...
1161->
1162tmp = *P
1163for () {
1164 tmp += 1;
1165 if () {
1166 *P = tmp;
1167 call();
1168 tmp = *P;
1169 } else ...
1170}
1171*P = tmp;
1172
Chris Lattner8f416f32008-12-15 07:49:24 +00001173We now hoist the reload after the call (Transforms/GVN/lpre-call-wrap.ll), but
1174we don't sink the store. We need partially dead store sinking.
1175
Chris Lattner78a7e7c2008-12-06 19:28:22 +00001176//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1177
Chris Lattner6d949262009-11-27 16:53:57 +00001178[LOAD PRE with NON-AVAILABLE ADDRESS]
Chris Lattner8f416f32008-12-15 07:49:24 +00001179
Chris Lattner78a7e7c2008-12-06 19:28:22 +00001180GCC PR37166: Sinking of loads prevents SROA'ing the "g" struct on the stack
1181leading to excess stack traffic. This could be handled by GVN with some crazy
1182symbolic phi translation. The code we get looks like (g is on the stack):
1183
1184bb2: ; preds = %bb1
1185..
1186 %9 = getelementptr %struct.f* %g, i32 0, i32 0
1187 store i32 %8, i32* %9, align bel %bb3
1188
1189bb3: ; preds = %bb1, %bb2, %bb
1190 %c_addr.0 = phi %struct.f* [ %g, %bb2 ], [ %c, %bb ], [ %c, %bb1 ]
1191 %b_addr.0 = phi %struct.f* [ %b, %bb2 ], [ %g, %bb ], [ %b, %bb1 ]
1192 %10 = getelementptr %struct.f* %c_addr.0, i32 0, i32 0
1193 %11 = load i32* %10, align 4
1194
Chris Lattner6d949262009-11-27 16:53:57 +00001195%11 is partially redundant, an in BB2 it should have the value %8.
Chris Lattner78a7e7c2008-12-06 19:28:22 +00001196
Chris Lattner6a09a742008-12-06 22:52:12 +00001197GCC PR33344 is a similar case.
1198
Chris Lattner6c9fab72009-11-05 18:19:19 +00001199
1200//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1201
Chris Lattner6a09a742008-12-06 22:52:12 +00001202There are many load PRE testcases in testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/loadpre* in the
1203GCC testsuite. There are many pre testcases as ssa-pre-*.c
1204
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001205//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1206
1207There are some interesting cases in testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pred-comm* in the
1208GCC testsuite. For example, predcom-1.c is:
1209
1210 for (i = 2; i < 1000; i++)
1211 fib[i] = (fib[i-1] + fib[i - 2]) & 0xffff;
1212
1213which compiles into:
1214
1215bb1: ; preds = %bb1, %bb1.thread
1216 %indvar = phi i32 [ 0, %bb1.thread ], [ %0, %bb1 ]
1217 %i.0.reg2mem.0 = add i32 %indvar, 2
1218 %0 = add i32 %indvar, 1 ; <i32> [#uses=3]
1219 %1 = getelementptr [1000 x i32]* @fib, i32 0, i32 %0
1220 %2 = load i32* %1, align 4 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1221 %3 = getelementptr [1000 x i32]* @fib, i32 0, i32 %indvar
1222 %4 = load i32* %3, align 4 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1223 %5 = add i32 %4, %2 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1224 %6 = and i32 %5, 65535 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1225 %7 = getelementptr [1000 x i32]* @fib, i32 0, i32 %i.0.reg2mem.0
1226 store i32 %6, i32* %7, align 4
1227 %exitcond = icmp eq i32 %0, 998 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
1228 br i1 %exitcond, label %return, label %bb1
1229
1230This is basically:
1231 LOAD fib[i+1]
1232 LOAD fib[i]
1233 STORE fib[i+2]
1234
1235instead of handling this as a loop or other xform, all we'd need to do is teach
1236load PRE to phi translate the %0 add (i+1) into the predecessor as (i'+1+1) =
1237(i'+2) (where i' is the previous iteration of i). This would find the store
1238which feeds it.
1239
1240predcom-2.c is apparently the same as predcom-1.c
1241predcom-3.c is very similar but needs loads feeding each other instead of
1242store->load.
1243predcom-4.c seems the same as the rest.
1244
1245
1246//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1247
Chris Lattner6a09a742008-12-06 22:52:12 +00001248Other simple load PRE cases:
Chris Lattner8f416f32008-12-15 07:49:24 +00001249http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35287 [LPRE crit edge splitting]
1250
1251http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34677 (licm does this, LPRE crit edge)
1252 llvm-gcc t2.c -S -o - -O0 -emit-llvm | llvm-as | opt -mem2reg -simplifycfg -gvn | llvm-dis
1253
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001254//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1255
1256Type based alias analysis:
Chris Lattner6a09a742008-12-06 22:52:12 +00001257http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14705
1258
1259//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1260
Chris Lattner6a09a742008-12-06 22:52:12 +00001261A/B get pinned to the stack because we turn an if/then into a select instead
1262of PRE'ing the load/store. This may be fixable in instcombine:
1263http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37892
1264
Chris Lattner93c6c772009-09-21 02:53:57 +00001265struct X { int i; };
1266int foo (int x) {
1267 struct X a;
1268 struct X b;
1269 struct X *p;
1270 a.i = 1;
1271 b.i = 2;
1272 if (x)
1273 p = &a;
1274 else
1275 p = &b;
1276 return p->i;
1277}
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001278
Chris Lattner93c6c772009-09-21 02:53:57 +00001279//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001280
Chris Lattner6a09a742008-12-06 22:52:12 +00001281Interesting missed case because of control flow flattening (should be 2 loads):
1282http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26629
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001283With: llvm-gcc t2.c -S -o - -O0 -emit-llvm | llvm-as |
1284 opt -mem2reg -gvn -instcombine | llvm-dis
1285we miss it because we need 1) GEP PHI TRAN, 2) CRIT EDGE 3) MULTIPLE DIFFERENT
1286VALS PRODUCED BY ONE BLOCK OVER DIFFERENT PATHS
Chris Lattner6a09a742008-12-06 22:52:12 +00001287
1288//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1289
1290http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19633
1291We could eliminate the branch condition here, loading from null is undefined:
1292
1293struct S { int w, x, y, z; };
1294struct T { int r; struct S s; };
1295void bar (struct S, int);
1296void foo (int a, struct T b)
1297{
1298 struct S *c = 0;
1299 if (a)
1300 c = &b.s;
1301 bar (*c, a);
1302}
1303
1304//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner88d84b22008-12-02 06:32:34 +00001305
Chris Lattner9cf8ef62008-12-23 20:52:52 +00001306simplifylibcalls should do several optimizations for strspn/strcspn:
1307
1308strcspn(x, "") -> strlen(x)
1309strcspn("", x) -> 0
1310strspn("", x) -> 0
1311strspn(x, "") -> strlen(x)
1312strspn(x, "a") -> strchr(x, 'a')-x
1313
1314strcspn(x, "a") -> inlined loop for up to 3 letters (similarly for strspn):
1315
1316size_t __strcspn_c3 (__const char *__s, int __reject1, int __reject2,
1317 int __reject3) {
1318 register size_t __result = 0;
1319 while (__s[__result] != '\0' && __s[__result] != __reject1 &&
1320 __s[__result] != __reject2 && __s[__result] != __reject3)
1321 ++__result;
1322 return __result;
1323}
1324
1325This should turn into a switch on the character. See PR3253 for some notes on
1326codegen.
1327
1328456.hmmer apparently uses strcspn and strspn a lot. 471.omnetpp uses strspn.
1329
1330//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnerd23b7992008-12-31 00:54:13 +00001331
1332"gas" uses this idiom:
1333 else if (strchr ("+-/*%|&^:[]()~", *intel_parser.op_string))
1334..
1335 else if (strchr ("<>", *intel_parser.op_string)
1336
1337Those should be turned into a switch.
1338
1339//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnerffb08f52009-01-08 06:52:57 +00001340
1341252.eon contains this interesting code:
1342
1343 %3072 = getelementptr [100 x i8]* %tempString, i32 0, i32 0
1344 %3073 = call i8* @strcpy(i8* %3072, i8* %3071) nounwind
1345 %strlen = call i32 @strlen(i8* %3072) ; uses = 1
1346 %endptr = getelementptr [100 x i8]* %tempString, i32 0, i32 %strlen
1347 call void @llvm.memcpy.i32(i8* %endptr,
1348 i8* getelementptr ([5 x i8]* @"\01LC42", i32 0, i32 0), i32 5, i32 1)
1349 %3074 = call i32 @strlen(i8* %endptr) nounwind readonly
1350
1351This is interesting for a couple reasons. First, in this:
1352
1353 %3073 = call i8* @strcpy(i8* %3072, i8* %3071) nounwind
1354 %strlen = call i32 @strlen(i8* %3072)
1355
1356The strlen could be replaced with: %strlen = sub %3072, %3073, because the
1357strcpy call returns a pointer to the end of the string. Based on that, the
1358endptr GEP just becomes equal to 3073, which eliminates a strlen call and GEP.
1359
1360Second, the memcpy+strlen strlen can be replaced with:
1361
1362 %3074 = call i32 @strlen([5 x i8]* @"\01LC42") nounwind readonly
1363
1364Because the destination was just copied into the specified memory buffer. This,
1365in turn, can be constant folded to "4".
1366
1367In other code, it contains:
1368
1369 %endptr6978 = bitcast i8* %endptr69 to i32*
1370 store i32 7107374, i32* %endptr6978, align 1
1371 %3167 = call i32 @strlen(i8* %endptr69) nounwind readonly
1372
1373Which could also be constant folded. Whatever is producing this should probably
1374be fixed to leave this as a memcpy from a string.
1375
1376Further, eon also has an interesting partially redundant strlen call:
1377
1378bb8: ; preds = %_ZN18eonImageCalculatorC1Ev.exit
1379 %682 = getelementptr i8** %argv, i32 6 ; <i8**> [#uses=2]
1380 %683 = load i8** %682, align 4 ; <i8*> [#uses=4]
1381 %684 = load i8* %683, align 1 ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1382 %685 = icmp eq i8 %684, 0 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
1383 br i1 %685, label %bb10, label %bb9
1384
1385bb9: ; preds = %bb8
1386 %686 = call i32 @strlen(i8* %683) nounwind readonly
1387 %687 = icmp ugt i32 %686, 254 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
1388 br i1 %687, label %bb10, label %bb11
1389
1390bb10: ; preds = %bb9, %bb8
1391 %688 = call i32 @strlen(i8* %683) nounwind readonly
1392
1393This could be eliminated by doing the strlen once in bb8, saving code size and
1394improving perf on the bb8->9->10 path.
1395
1396//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner9fee08f2009-01-08 07:34:55 +00001397
1398I see an interesting fully redundant call to strlen left in 186.crafty:InputMove
1399which looks like:
1400 %movetext11 = getelementptr [128 x i8]* %movetext, i32 0, i32 0
1401
1402
1403bb62: ; preds = %bb55, %bb53
1404 %promote.0 = phi i32 [ %169, %bb55 ], [ 0, %bb53 ]
1405 %171 = call i32 @strlen(i8* %movetext11) nounwind readonly align 1
1406 %172 = add i32 %171, -1 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1407 %173 = getelementptr [128 x i8]* %movetext, i32 0, i32 %172
1408
1409... no stores ...
1410 br i1 %or.cond, label %bb65, label %bb72
1411
1412bb65: ; preds = %bb62
1413 store i8 0, i8* %173, align 1
1414 br label %bb72
1415
1416bb72: ; preds = %bb65, %bb62
1417 %trank.1 = phi i32 [ %176, %bb65 ], [ -1, %bb62 ]
1418 %177 = call i32 @strlen(i8* %movetext11) nounwind readonly align 1
1419
1420Note that on the bb62->bb72 path, that the %177 strlen call is partially
1421redundant with the %171 call. At worst, we could shove the %177 strlen call
1422up into the bb65 block moving it out of the bb62->bb72 path. However, note
1423that bb65 stores to the string, zeroing out the last byte. This means that on
1424that path the value of %177 is actually just %171-1. A sub is cheaper than a
1425strlen!
1426
1427This pattern repeats several times, basically doing:
1428
1429 A = strlen(P);
1430 P[A-1] = 0;
1431 B = strlen(P);
1432 where it is "obvious" that B = A-1.
1433
1434//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1435
1436186.crafty contains this interesting pattern:
1437
1438%77 = call i8* @strstr(i8* getelementptr ([6 x i8]* @"\01LC5", i32 0, i32 0),
1439 i8* %30)
1440%phitmp648 = icmp eq i8* %77, getelementptr ([6 x i8]* @"\01LC5", i32 0, i32 0)
1441br i1 %phitmp648, label %bb70, label %bb76
1442
1443bb70: ; preds = %OptionMatch.exit91, %bb69
1444 %78 = call i32 @strlen(i8* %30) nounwind readonly align 1 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1445
1446This is basically:
1447 cststr = "abcdef";
1448 if (strstr(cststr, P) == cststr) {
1449 x = strlen(P);
1450 ...
1451
1452The strstr call would be significantly cheaper written as:
1453
1454cststr = "abcdef";
1455if (memcmp(P, str, strlen(P)))
1456 x = strlen(P);
1457
1458This is memcmp+strlen instead of strstr. This also makes the strlen fully
1459redundant.
1460
1461//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1462
1463186.crafty also contains this code:
1464
1465%1906 = call i32 @strlen(i8* getelementptr ([32 x i8]* @pgn_event, i32 0,i32 0))
1466%1907 = getelementptr [32 x i8]* @pgn_event, i32 0, i32 %1906
1467%1908 = call i8* @strcpy(i8* %1907, i8* %1905) nounwind align 1
1468%1909 = call i32 @strlen(i8* getelementptr ([32 x i8]* @pgn_event, i32 0,i32 0))
1469%1910 = getelementptr [32 x i8]* @pgn_event, i32 0, i32 %1909
1470
1471The last strlen is computable as 1908-@pgn_event, which means 1910=1908.
1472
1473//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1474
1475186.crafty has this interesting pattern with the "out.4543" variable:
1476
1477call void @llvm.memcpy.i32(
1478 i8* getelementptr ([10 x i8]* @out.4543, i32 0, i32 0),
1479 i8* getelementptr ([7 x i8]* @"\01LC28700", i32 0, i32 0), i32 7, i32 1)
1480%101 = call@printf(i8* ... @out.4543, i32 0, i32 0)) nounwind
1481
1482It is basically doing:
1483
1484 memcpy(globalarray, "string");
1485 printf(..., globalarray);
1486
1487Anyway, by knowing that printf just reads the memory and forward substituting
1488the string directly into the printf, this eliminates reads from globalarray.
1489Since this pattern occurs frequently in crafty (due to the "DisplayTime" and
1490other similar functions) there are many stores to "out". Once all the printfs
1491stop using "out", all that is left is the memcpy's into it. This should allow
1492globalopt to remove the "stored only" global.
1493
1494//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1495
Dan Gohman8289b052009-01-20 01:07:33 +00001496This code:
1497
1498define inreg i32 @foo(i8* inreg %p) nounwind {
1499 %tmp0 = load i8* %p
1500 %tmp1 = ashr i8 %tmp0, 5
1501 %tmp2 = sext i8 %tmp1 to i32
1502 ret i32 %tmp2
1503}
1504
1505could be dagcombine'd to a sign-extending load with a shift.
1506For example, on x86 this currently gets this:
1507
1508 movb (%eax), %al
1509 sarb $5, %al
1510 movsbl %al, %eax
1511
1512while it could get this:
1513
1514 movsbl (%eax), %eax
1515 sarl $5, %eax
1516
1517//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner256baa42009-01-22 07:16:03 +00001518
1519GCC PR31029:
1520
1521int test(int x) { return 1-x == x; } // --> return false
1522int test2(int x) { return 2-x == x; } // --> return x == 1 ?
1523
1524Always foldable for odd constants, what is the rule for even?
1525
1526//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1527
Torok Edwine46a6862009-01-24 19:30:25 +00001528PR 3381: GEP to field of size 0 inside a struct could be turned into GEP
1529for next field in struct (which is at same address).
1530
1531For example: store of float into { {{}}, float } could be turned into a store to
1532the float directly.
1533
Torok Edwin474479f2009-02-20 18:42:06 +00001534//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Nick Lewycky20babb12009-02-25 06:52:48 +00001535
Torok Edwin474479f2009-02-20 18:42:06 +00001536#include <math.h>
1537double foo(double a) { return sin(a); }
1538
1539This compiles into this on x86-64 Linux:
1540foo:
1541 subq $8, %rsp
1542 call sin
1543 addq $8, %rsp
1544 ret
1545vs:
1546
1547foo:
1548 jmp sin
1549
Nick Lewycky20babb12009-02-25 06:52:48 +00001550//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1551
Chris Lattner32c5f172009-05-11 17:41:40 +00001552The arg promotion pass should make use of nocapture to make its alias analysis
1553stuff much more precise.
1554
1555//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1556
1557The following functions should be optimized to use a select instead of a
1558branch (from gcc PR40072):
1559
1560char char_int(int m) {if(m>7) return 0; return m;}
1561int int_char(char m) {if(m>7) return 0; return m;}
1562
1563//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1564
Bill Wendling5a569272009-10-27 22:48:31 +00001565int func(int a, int b) { if (a & 0x80) b |= 0x80; else b &= ~0x80; return b; }
1566
1567Generates this:
1568
1569define i32 @func(i32 %a, i32 %b) nounwind readnone ssp {
1570entry:
1571 %0 = and i32 %a, 128 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1572 %1 = icmp eq i32 %0, 0 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
1573 %2 = or i32 %b, 128 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1574 %3 = and i32 %b, -129 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1575 %b_addr.0 = select i1 %1, i32 %3, i32 %2 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1576 ret i32 %b_addr.0
1577}
1578
1579However, it's functionally equivalent to:
1580
1581 b = (b & ~0x80) | (a & 0x80);
1582
1583Which generates this:
1584
1585define i32 @func(i32 %a, i32 %b) nounwind readnone ssp {
1586entry:
1587 %0 = and i32 %b, -129 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1588 %1 = and i32 %a, 128 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1589 %2 = or i32 %0, %1 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1590 ret i32 %2
1591}
1592
1593This can be generalized for other forms:
1594
1595 b = (b & ~0x80) | (a & 0x40) << 1;
1596
1597//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Bill Wendlingc872e9c2009-10-27 23:30:07 +00001598
1599These two functions produce different code. They shouldn't:
1600
1601#include <stdint.h>
1602
1603uint8_t p1(uint8_t b, uint8_t a) {
1604 b = (b & ~0xc0) | (a & 0xc0);
1605 return (b);
1606}
1607
1608uint8_t p2(uint8_t b, uint8_t a) {
1609 b = (b & ~0x40) | (a & 0x40);
1610 b = (b & ~0x80) | (a & 0x80);
1611 return (b);
1612}
1613
1614define zeroext i8 @p1(i8 zeroext %b, i8 zeroext %a) nounwind readnone ssp {
1615entry:
1616 %0 = and i8 %b, 63 ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1617 %1 = and i8 %a, -64 ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1618 %2 = or i8 %1, %0 ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1619 ret i8 %2
1620}
1621
1622define zeroext i8 @p2(i8 zeroext %b, i8 zeroext %a) nounwind readnone ssp {
1623entry:
1624 %0 = and i8 %b, 63 ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1625 %.masked = and i8 %a, 64 ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1626 %1 = and i8 %a, -128 ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1627 %2 = or i8 %1, %0 ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1628 %3 = or i8 %2, %.masked ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1629 ret i8 %3
1630}
1631
1632//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner6fdfc9c2009-11-11 17:51:27 +00001633
1634IPSCCP does not currently propagate argument dependent constants through
1635functions where it does not not all of the callers. This includes functions
1636with normal external linkage as well as templates, C99 inline functions etc.
1637Specifically, it does nothing to:
1638
1639define i32 @test(i32 %x, i32 %y, i32 %z) nounwind {
1640entry:
1641 %0 = add nsw i32 %y, %z
1642 %1 = mul i32 %0, %x
1643 %2 = mul i32 %y, %z
1644 %3 = add nsw i32 %1, %2
1645 ret i32 %3
1646}
1647
1648define i32 @test2() nounwind {
1649entry:
1650 %0 = call i32 @test(i32 1, i32 2, i32 4) nounwind
1651 ret i32 %0
1652}
1653
1654It would be interesting extend IPSCCP to be able to handle simple cases like
1655this, where all of the arguments to a call are constant. Because IPSCCP runs
1656before inlining, trivial templates and inline functions are not yet inlined.
1657The results for a function + set of constant arguments should be memoized in a
1658map.
1659
1660//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnerfc926c22009-11-11 17:54:02 +00001661
1662The libcall constant folding stuff should be moved out of SimplifyLibcalls into
1663libanalysis' constantfolding logic. This would allow IPSCCP to be able to
1664handle simple things like this:
1665
1666static int foo(const char *X) { return strlen(X); }
1667int bar() { return foo("abcd"); }
1668
1669//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Nick Lewycky93f9f7a2009-11-15 17:51:23 +00001670
1671InstCombine should use SimplifyDemandedBits to remove the or instruction:
1672
1673define i1 @test(i8 %x, i8 %y) {
1674 %A = or i8 %x, 1
1675 %B = icmp ugt i8 %A, 3
1676 ret i1 %B
1677}
1678
1679Currently instcombine calls SimplifyDemandedBits with either all bits or just
1680the sign bit, if the comparison is obviously a sign test. In this case, we only
1681need all but the bottom two bits from %A, and if we gave that mask to SDB it
1682would delete the or instruction for us.
1683
1684//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//