blob: 4faf8bcfd419982b438c73c5758e88e8f6840cce [file] [log] [blame]
Chris Lattner086c0142006-02-03 06:21:43 +00001Target Independent Opportunities:
2
Chris Lattnerf308ea02006-09-28 06:01:17 +00003//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
4
Chris Lattner1d159832009-11-27 17:12:30 +00005Dead argument elimination should be enhanced to handle cases when an argument is
6dead to an externally visible function. Though the argument can't be removed
7from the externally visible function, the caller doesn't need to pass it in.
8For example in this testcase:
9
10 void foo(int X) __attribute__((noinline));
11 void foo(int X) { sideeffect(); }
12 void bar(int A) { foo(A+1); }
13
14We compile bar to:
15
16define void @bar(i32 %A) nounwind ssp {
17 %0 = add nsw i32 %A, 1 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
18 tail call void @foo(i32 %0) nounwind noinline ssp
19 ret void
20}
21
22The add is dead, we could pass in 'i32 undef' instead. This occurs for C++
23templates etc, which usually have linkonce_odr/weak_odr linkage, not internal
24linkage.
25
26//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
27
Chris Lattner9b62b452006-11-14 01:57:53 +000028With the recent changes to make the implicit def/use set explicit in
29machineinstrs, we should change the target descriptions for 'call' instructions
30so that the .td files don't list all the call-clobbered registers as implicit
31defs. Instead, these should be added by the code generator (e.g. on the dag).
32
33This has a number of uses:
34
351. PPC32/64 and X86 32/64 can avoid having multiple copies of call instructions
36 for their different impdef sets.
372. Targets with multiple calling convs (e.g. x86) which have different clobber
38 sets don't need copies of call instructions.
393. 'Interprocedural register allocation' can be done to reduce the clobber sets
40 of calls.
41
42//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
43
Nate Begeman81e80972006-03-17 01:40:33 +000044Make the PPC branch selector target independant
45
46//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner086c0142006-02-03 06:21:43 +000047
48Get 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 +000049precision don't matter (ffastmath). Misc/mandel will like this. :) This isn't
50safe in general, even on darwin. See the libm implementation of hypot for
51examples (which special case when x/y are exactly zero to get signed zeros etc
52right).
Chris Lattner086c0142006-02-03 06:21:43 +000053
Chris Lattner086c0142006-02-03 06:21:43 +000054//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
55
56Solve this DAG isel folding deficiency:
57
58int X, Y;
59
60void fn1(void)
61{
62 X = X | (Y << 3);
63}
64
65compiles to
66
67fn1:
68 movl Y, %eax
69 shll $3, %eax
70 orl X, %eax
71 movl %eax, X
72 ret
73
74The problem is the store's chain operand is not the load X but rather
75a TokenFactor of the load X and load Y, which prevents the folding.
76
77There are two ways to fix this:
78
791. The dag combiner can start using alias analysis to realize that y/x
80 don't alias, making the store to X not dependent on the load from Y.
812. The generated isel could be made smarter in the case it can't
82 disambiguate the pointers.
83
84Number 1 is the preferred solution.
85
Evan Chenge617b082006-03-13 23:19:10 +000086This has been "fixed" by a TableGen hack. But that is a short term workaround
87which will be removed once the proper fix is made.
88
Chris Lattner086c0142006-02-03 06:21:43 +000089//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
90
Chris Lattnerb27b69f2006-03-04 01:19:34 +000091On targets with expensive 64-bit multiply, we could LSR this:
92
93for (i = ...; ++i) {
94 x = 1ULL << i;
95
96into:
97 long long tmp = 1;
98 for (i = ...; ++i, tmp+=tmp)
99 x = tmp;
100
101This would be a win on ppc32, but not x86 or ppc64.
102
Chris Lattnerad019932006-03-04 08:44:51 +0000103//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner5b0fe7d2006-03-05 20:00:08 +0000104
105Shrink: (setlt (loadi32 P), 0) -> (setlt (loadi8 Phi), 0)
106
107//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner549f27d22006-03-07 02:46:26 +0000108
Chris Lattner398ffba2010-01-01 01:29:26 +0000109Reassociate should turn things like:
110
111int factorial(int X) {
112 return X*X*X*X*X*X*X*X;
113}
114
115into llvm.powi calls, allowing the code generator to produce balanced
116multiplication trees.
117
118First, the intrinsic needs to be extended to support integers, and second the
119code generator needs to be enhanced to lower these to multiplication trees.
Chris Lattnerc20995e2006-03-11 20:17:08 +0000120
121//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
122
Chris Lattner74cfb7d2006-03-11 20:20:40 +0000123Interesting? testcase for add/shift/mul reassoc:
124
125int bar(int x, int y) {
126 return x*x*x+y+x*x*x*x*x*y*y*y*y;
127}
128int foo(int z, int n) {
129 return bar(z, n) + bar(2*z, 2*n);
130}
131
Chris Lattner398ffba2010-01-01 01:29:26 +0000132This is blocked on not handling X*X*X -> powi(X, 3) (see note above). The issue
133is that we end up getting t = 2*X s = t*t and don't turn this into 4*X*X,
134which is the same number of multiplies and is canonical, because the 2*X has
135multiple uses. Here's a simple example:
136
137define i32 @test15(i32 %X1) {
138 %B = mul i32 %X1, 47 ; X1*47
139 %C = mul i32 %B, %B
140 ret i32 %C
141}
142
143
144//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
145
146Reassociate should handle the example in GCC PR16157:
147
148extern int a0, a1, a2, a3, a4; extern int b0, b1, b2, b3, b4;
149void f () { /* this can be optimized to four additions... */
150 b4 = a4 + a3 + a2 + a1 + a0;
151 b3 = a3 + a2 + a1 + a0;
152 b2 = a2 + a1 + a0;
153 b1 = a1 + a0;
154}
155
156This requires reassociating to forms of expressions that are already available,
157something that reassoc doesn't think about yet.
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000158
Chris Lattner10c42452010-01-24 20:01:41 +0000159
160//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
161
162This function: (derived from GCC PR19988)
163double foo(double x, double y) {
164 return ((x + 0.1234 * y) * (x + -0.1234 * y));
165}
166
167compiles to:
168_foo:
169 movapd %xmm1, %xmm2
170 mulsd LCPI1_1(%rip), %xmm1
171 mulsd LCPI1_0(%rip), %xmm2
172 addsd %xmm0, %xmm1
173 addsd %xmm0, %xmm2
174 movapd %xmm1, %xmm0
175 mulsd %xmm2, %xmm0
176 ret
177
Chris Lattner43dc2e62010-01-24 20:17:09 +0000178Reassociate should be able to turn it into:
Chris Lattner10c42452010-01-24 20:01:41 +0000179
180double foo(double x, double y) {
181 return ((x + 0.1234 * y) * (x - 0.1234 * y));
182}
183
184Which allows the multiply by constant to be CSE'd, producing:
185
186_foo:
187 mulsd LCPI1_0(%rip), %xmm1
188 movapd %xmm1, %xmm2
189 addsd %xmm0, %xmm2
190 subsd %xmm1, %xmm0
191 mulsd %xmm2, %xmm0
192 ret
193
194This doesn't need -ffast-math support at all. This is particularly bad because
195the llvm-gcc frontend is canonicalizing the later into the former, but clang
196doesn't have this problem.
197
Chris Lattner74cfb7d2006-03-11 20:20:40 +0000198//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
199
Chris Lattner82c78b22006-03-09 20:13:21 +0000200These two functions should generate the same code on big-endian systems:
201
202int g(int *j,int *l) { return memcmp(j,l,4); }
203int h(int *j, int *l) { return *j - *l; }
204
205this could be done in SelectionDAGISel.cpp, along with other special cases,
206for 1,2,4,8 bytes.
207
208//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
209
Chris Lattnerc04b4232006-03-22 07:33:46 +0000210It would be nice to revert this patch:
211http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20060213/031986.html
212
213And teach the dag combiner enough to simplify the code expanded before
214legalize. It seems plausible that this knowledge would let it simplify other
215stuff too.
216
Chris Lattnere6cd96d2006-03-24 19:59:17 +0000217//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
218
Reid Spencerac9dcb92007-02-15 03:39:18 +0000219For vector types, TargetData.cpp::getTypeInfo() returns alignment that is equal
Evan Cheng67d3d4c2006-03-31 22:35:14 +0000220to the type size. It works but can be overly conservative as the alignment of
Reid Spencerac9dcb92007-02-15 03:39:18 +0000221specific vector types are target dependent.
Chris Lattnereaa7c062006-04-01 04:08:29 +0000222
223//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
224
Dan Gohman1f3be1a2009-05-11 18:51:16 +0000225We should produce an unaligned load from code like this:
Chris Lattnereaa7c062006-04-01 04:08:29 +0000226
227v4sf example(float *P) {
228 return (v4sf){P[0], P[1], P[2], P[3] };
229}
230
231//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
232
Chris Lattner16abfdf2006-05-18 18:26:13 +0000233Add support for conditional increments, and other related patterns. Instead
234of:
235
236 movl 136(%esp), %eax
237 cmpl $0, %eax
238 je LBB16_2 #cond_next
239LBB16_1: #cond_true
240 incl _foo
241LBB16_2: #cond_next
242
243emit:
244 movl _foo, %eax
245 cmpl $1, %edi
246 sbbl $-1, %eax
247 movl %eax, _foo
248
249//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner870cf1b2006-05-19 20:45:08 +0000250
251Combine: a = sin(x), b = cos(x) into a,b = sincos(x).
252
253Expand these to calls of sin/cos and stores:
254 double sincos(double x, double *sin, double *cos);
255 float sincosf(float x, float *sin, float *cos);
256 long double sincosl(long double x, long double *sin, long double *cos);
257
258Doing so could allow SROA of the destination pointers. See also:
259http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17687
260
Chris Lattner2dae65d2008-12-10 01:30:48 +0000261This is now easily doable with MRVs. We could even make an intrinsic for this
262if anyone cared enough about sincos.
263
Chris Lattner870cf1b2006-05-19 20:45:08 +0000264//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnerf00f68a2006-05-19 21:01:38 +0000265
Chris Lattner7ed96ab2006-09-16 23:57:51 +0000266quantum_sigma_x in 462.libquantum contains the following loop:
267
268 for(i=0; i<reg->size; i++)
269 {
270 /* Flip the target bit of each basis state */
271 reg->node[i].state ^= ((MAX_UNSIGNED) 1 << target);
272 }
273
274Where MAX_UNSIGNED/state is a 64-bit int. On a 32-bit platform it would be just
275so cool to turn it into something like:
276
Chris Lattnerb33a42a2006-09-18 04:54:35 +0000277 long long Res = ((MAX_UNSIGNED) 1 << target);
Chris Lattner7ed96ab2006-09-16 23:57:51 +0000278 if (target < 32) {
279 for(i=0; i<reg->size; i++)
Chris Lattnerb33a42a2006-09-18 04:54:35 +0000280 reg->node[i].state ^= Res & 0xFFFFFFFFULL;
Chris Lattner7ed96ab2006-09-16 23:57:51 +0000281 } else {
282 for(i=0; i<reg->size; i++)
Chris Lattnerb33a42a2006-09-18 04:54:35 +0000283 reg->node[i].state ^= Res & 0xFFFFFFFF00000000ULL
Chris Lattner7ed96ab2006-09-16 23:57:51 +0000284 }
285
286... which would only do one 32-bit XOR per loop iteration instead of two.
287
288It would also be nice to recognize the reg->size doesn't alias reg->node[i], but
Chris Lattner9c6a0dc2009-11-26 01:51:18 +0000289this requires TBAA.
Chris Lattnerfaa6adf2009-09-21 06:04:07 +0000290
291//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
292
Chris Lattnerb1ac7692008-10-05 02:16:12 +0000293This isn't recognized as bswap by instcombine (yes, it really is bswap):
Chris Lattnerf9bae432006-12-08 02:01:32 +0000294
295unsigned long reverse(unsigned v) {
296 unsigned t;
297 t = v ^ ((v << 16) | (v >> 16));
298 t &= ~0xff0000;
299 v = (v << 24) | (v >> 8);
300 return v ^ (t >> 8);
301}
302
Eric Christopher33634d02010-06-29 22:22:22 +0000303Neither is this (very standard idiom):
304
305int f(int n)
306{
307 return (((n) << 24) | (((n) & 0xff00) << 8)
308 | (((n) >> 8) & 0xff00) | ((n) >> 24));
309}
310
Chris Lattnerfb981f32006-09-25 17:12:14 +0000311//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
312
Chris Lattner818ff342010-01-23 18:49:30 +0000313[LOOP RECOGNITION]
314
Chris Lattnerf4fee2a2008-10-15 16:02:15 +0000315These idioms should be recognized as popcount (see PR1488):
316
317unsigned countbits_slow(unsigned v) {
318 unsigned c;
319 for (c = 0; v; v >>= 1)
320 c += v & 1;
321 return c;
322}
323unsigned countbits_fast(unsigned v){
324 unsigned c;
325 for (c = 0; v; c++)
326 v &= v - 1; // clear the least significant bit set
327 return c;
328}
329
330BITBOARD = unsigned long long
331int PopCnt(register BITBOARD a) {
332 register int c=0;
333 while(a) {
334 c++;
335 a &= a - 1;
336 }
337 return c;
338}
339unsigned int popcount(unsigned int input) {
340 unsigned int count = 0;
341 for (unsigned int i = 0; i < 4 * 8; i++)
342 count += (input >> i) & i;
343 return count;
344}
345
Chris Lattner9c6a0dc2009-11-26 01:51:18 +0000346This is a form of idiom recognition for loops, the same thing that could be
347useful for recognizing memset/memcpy.
348
Chris Lattnerf4fee2a2008-10-15 16:02:15 +0000349//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
350
Chris Lattnerfb981f32006-09-25 17:12:14 +0000351These should turn into single 16-bit (unaligned?) loads on little/big endian
352processors.
353
354unsigned short read_16_le(const unsigned char *adr) {
355 return adr[0] | (adr[1] << 8);
356}
357unsigned short read_16_be(const unsigned char *adr) {
358 return (adr[0] << 8) | adr[1];
359}
360
361//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnercf103912006-10-24 16:12:47 +0000362
Reid Spencer1628cec2006-10-26 06:15:43 +0000363-instcombine should handle this transform:
Reid Spencere4d87aa2006-12-23 06:05:41 +0000364 icmp pred (sdiv X / C1 ), C2
Reid Spencer1628cec2006-10-26 06:15:43 +0000365when X, C1, and C2 are unsigned. Similarly for udiv and signed operands.
366
367Currently InstCombine avoids this transform but will do it when the signs of
368the operands and the sign of the divide match. See the FIXME in
369InstructionCombining.cpp in the visitSetCondInst method after the switch case
370for Instruction::UDiv (around line 4447) for more details.
371
372The SingleSource/Benchmarks/Shootout-C++/hash and hash2 tests have examples of
373this construct.
Chris Lattnerd7c628d2006-11-03 22:27:39 +0000374
375//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
376
Chris Lattneraa306c22010-01-23 17:59:23 +0000377[LOOP RECOGNITION]
378
Chris Lattner578d2df2006-11-10 00:23:26 +0000379viterbi speeds up *significantly* if the various "history" related copy loops
380are turned into memcpy calls at the source level. We need a "loops to memcpy"
381pass.
382
383//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Nick Lewyckybf637342006-11-13 00:23:28 +0000384
Chris Lattneraa306c22010-01-23 17:59:23 +0000385[LOOP OPTIMIZATION]
386
387SingleSource/Benchmarks/Misc/dt.c shows several interesting optimization
388opportunities in its double_array_divs_variable function: it needs loop
389interchange, memory promotion (which LICM already does), vectorization and
390variable trip count loop unrolling (since it has a constant trip count). ICC
391apparently produces this very nice code with -ffast-math:
392
393..B1.70: # Preds ..B1.70 ..B1.69
394 mulpd %xmm0, %xmm1 #108.2
395 mulpd %xmm0, %xmm1 #108.2
396 mulpd %xmm0, %xmm1 #108.2
397 mulpd %xmm0, %xmm1 #108.2
398 addl $8, %edx #
399 cmpl $131072, %edx #108.2
400 jb ..B1.70 # Prob 99% #108.2
401
402It would be better to count down to zero, but this is a lot better than what we
403do.
404
405//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
406
Chris Lattner03a6d962007-01-16 06:39:48 +0000407Consider:
408
409typedef unsigned U32;
410typedef unsigned long long U64;
411int test (U32 *inst, U64 *regs) {
412 U64 effective_addr2;
413 U32 temp = *inst;
414 int r1 = (temp >> 20) & 0xf;
415 int b2 = (temp >> 16) & 0xf;
416 effective_addr2 = temp & 0xfff;
417 if (b2) effective_addr2 += regs[b2];
418 b2 = (temp >> 12) & 0xf;
419 if (b2) effective_addr2 += regs[b2];
420 effective_addr2 &= regs[4];
421 if ((effective_addr2 & 3) == 0)
422 return 1;
423 return 0;
424}
425
426Note that only the low 2 bits of effective_addr2 are used. On 32-bit systems,
427we don't eliminate the computation of the top half of effective_addr2 because
428we don't have whole-function selection dags. On x86, this means we use one
429extra register for the function when effective_addr2 is declared as U64 than
430when it is declared U32.
431
Chris Lattner17424982009-11-10 23:47:45 +0000432PHI Slicing could be extended to do this.
433
Chris Lattner03a6d962007-01-16 06:39:48 +0000434//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
435
Chris Lattner9c6a0dc2009-11-26 01:51:18 +0000436LSR should know what GPR types a target has from TargetData. This code:
Chris Lattner1a77a552007-03-24 06:01:32 +0000437
438volatile short X, Y; // globals
439
440void foo(int N) {
441 int i;
442 for (i = 0; i < N; i++) { X = i; Y = i*4; }
443}
444
Chris Lattnerc1491f32009-09-20 17:37:38 +0000445produces two near identical IV's (after promotion) on PPC/ARM:
Chris Lattner1a77a552007-03-24 06:01:32 +0000446
Chris Lattnerc1491f32009-09-20 17:37:38 +0000447LBB1_2:
448 ldr r3, LCPI1_0
449 ldr r3, [r3]
450 strh r2, [r3]
451 ldr r3, LCPI1_1
452 ldr r3, [r3]
453 strh r1, [r3]
454 add r1, r1, #4
455 add r2, r2, #1 <- [0,+,1]
456 sub r0, r0, #1 <- [0,-,1]
457 cmp r0, #0
458 bne LBB1_2
459
460LSR should reuse the "+" IV for the exit test.
Chris Lattner1a77a552007-03-24 06:01:32 +0000461
Chris Lattner1a77a552007-03-24 06:01:32 +0000462//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
463
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000464Tail call elim should be more aggressive, checking to see if the call is
465followed by an uncond branch to an exit block.
466
467; This testcase is due to tail-duplication not wanting to copy the return
468; instruction into the terminating blocks because there was other code
469; optimized out of the function after the taildup happened.
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000470; RUN: llvm-as < %s | opt -tailcallelim | llvm-dis | not grep call
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000471
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000472define i32 @t4(i32 %a) {
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000473entry:
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000474 %tmp.1 = and i32 %a, 1 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
475 %tmp.2 = icmp ne i32 %tmp.1, 0 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
476 br i1 %tmp.2, label %then.0, label %else.0
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000477
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000478then.0: ; preds = %entry
479 %tmp.5 = add i32 %a, -1 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
480 %tmp.3 = call i32 @t4( i32 %tmp.5 ) ; <i32> [#uses=1]
481 br label %return
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000482
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000483else.0: ; preds = %entry
484 %tmp.7 = icmp ne i32 %a, 0 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
485 br i1 %tmp.7, label %then.1, label %return
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000486
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000487then.1: ; preds = %else.0
488 %tmp.11 = add i32 %a, -2 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
489 %tmp.9 = call i32 @t4( i32 %tmp.11 ) ; <i32> [#uses=1]
490 br label %return
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000491
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000492return: ; preds = %then.1, %else.0, %then.0
493 %result.0 = phi i32 [ 0, %else.0 ], [ %tmp.3, %then.0 ],
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000494 [ %tmp.9, %then.1 ]
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000495 ret i32 %result.0
Chris Lattner5e14b0d2007-05-05 22:29:06 +0000496}
Chris Lattnerf110a2b2007-05-05 22:44:08 +0000497
498//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
499
Chris Lattnerc90b8662008-08-10 00:47:21 +0000500Tail recursion elimination should handle:
501
502int pow2m1(int n) {
503 if (n == 0)
504 return 0;
505 return 2 * pow2m1 (n - 1) + 1;
506}
507
508Also, multiplies can be turned into SHL's, so they should be handled as if
509they were associative. "return foo() << 1" can be tail recursion eliminated.
510
511//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
512
Chris Lattnerf110a2b2007-05-05 22:44:08 +0000513Argument promotion should promote arguments for recursive functions, like
514this:
515
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000516; RUN: llvm-as < %s | opt -argpromotion | llvm-dis | grep x.val
Chris Lattnerf110a2b2007-05-05 22:44:08 +0000517
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000518define internal i32 @foo(i32* %x) {
Chris Lattnerf110a2b2007-05-05 22:44:08 +0000519entry:
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000520 %tmp = load i32* %x ; <i32> [#uses=0]
521 %tmp.foo = call i32 @foo( i32* %x ) ; <i32> [#uses=1]
522 ret i32 %tmp.foo
Chris Lattnerf110a2b2007-05-05 22:44:08 +0000523}
524
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000525define i32 @bar(i32* %x) {
Chris Lattnerf110a2b2007-05-05 22:44:08 +0000526entry:
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000527 %tmp3 = call i32 @foo( i32* %x ) ; <i32> [#uses=1]
528 ret i32 %tmp3
Chris Lattnerf110a2b2007-05-05 22:44:08 +0000529}
530
Chris Lattner81f2d712007-12-05 23:05:06 +0000531//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner166a2682007-12-28 04:42:05 +0000532
Chris Lattnera1643ba2007-12-28 22:30:05 +0000533We should investigate an instruction sinking pass. Consider this silly
534example in pic mode:
535
536#include <assert.h>
537void foo(int x) {
538 assert(x);
539 //...
540}
541
542we compile this to:
543_foo:
544 subl $28, %esp
545 call "L1$pb"
546"L1$pb":
547 popl %eax
548 cmpl $0, 32(%esp)
549 je LBB1_2 # cond_true
550LBB1_1: # return
551 # ...
552 addl $28, %esp
553 ret
554LBB1_2: # cond_true
555...
556
557The PIC base computation (call+popl) is only used on one path through the
558code, but is currently always computed in the entry block. It would be
559better to sink the picbase computation down into the block for the
560assertion, as it is the only one that uses it. This happens for a lot of
561code with early outs.
562
Chris Lattner92c06a02007-12-29 01:05:01 +0000563Another example is loads of arguments, which are usually emitted into the
564entry block on targets like x86. If not used in all paths through a
565function, they should be sunk into the ones that do.
566
Chris Lattnera1643ba2007-12-28 22:30:05 +0000567In this case, whole-function-isel would also handle this.
Chris Lattner166a2682007-12-28 04:42:05 +0000568
569//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnerb3041942008-01-07 21:38:14 +0000570
571Investigate lowering of sparse switch statements into perfect hash tables:
572http://burtleburtle.net/bob/hash/perfect.html
573
574//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnerf61b63e2008-01-09 00:17:57 +0000575
576We should turn things like "load+fabs+store" and "load+fneg+store" into the
577corresponding integer operations. On a yonah, this loop:
578
579double a[256];
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000580void foo() {
581 int i, b;
582 for (b = 0; b < 10000000; b++)
583 for (i = 0; i < 256; i++)
584 a[i] = -a[i];
585}
Chris Lattnerf61b63e2008-01-09 00:17:57 +0000586
587is twice as slow as this loop:
588
589long long a[256];
Chris Lattner7c4e9a42008-02-18 18:46:39 +0000590void foo() {
591 int i, b;
592 for (b = 0; b < 10000000; b++)
593 for (i = 0; i < 256; i++)
594 a[i] ^= (1ULL << 63);
595}
Chris Lattnerf61b63e2008-01-09 00:17:57 +0000596
597and I suspect other processors are similar. On X86 in particular this is a
598big win because doing this with integers allows the use of read/modify/write
599instructions.
600
601//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner83726012008-01-10 18:25:41 +0000602
603DAG Combiner should try to combine small loads into larger loads when
604profitable. For example, we compile this C++ example:
605
606struct THotKey { short Key; bool Control; bool Shift; bool Alt; };
607extern THotKey m_HotKey;
608THotKey GetHotKey () { return m_HotKey; }
609
610into (-O3 -fno-exceptions -static -fomit-frame-pointer):
611
612__Z9GetHotKeyv:
613 pushl %esi
614 movl 8(%esp), %eax
615 movb _m_HotKey+3, %cl
616 movb _m_HotKey+4, %dl
617 movb _m_HotKey+2, %ch
618 movw _m_HotKey, %si
619 movw %si, (%eax)
620 movb %ch, 2(%eax)
621 movb %cl, 3(%eax)
622 movb %dl, 4(%eax)
623 popl %esi
624 ret $4
625
626GCC produces:
627
628__Z9GetHotKeyv:
629 movl _m_HotKey, %edx
630 movl 4(%esp), %eax
631 movl %edx, (%eax)
632 movzwl _m_HotKey+4, %edx
633 movw %dx, 4(%eax)
634 ret $4
635
636The LLVM IR contains the needed alignment info, so we should be able to
637merge the loads and stores into 4-byte loads:
638
639 %struct.THotKey = type { i16, i8, i8, i8 }
640define void @_Z9GetHotKeyv(%struct.THotKey* sret %agg.result) nounwind {
641...
642 %tmp2 = load i16* getelementptr (@m_HotKey, i32 0, i32 0), align 8
643 %tmp5 = load i8* getelementptr (@m_HotKey, i32 0, i32 1), align 2
644 %tmp8 = load i8* getelementptr (@m_HotKey, i32 0, i32 2), align 1
645 %tmp11 = load i8* getelementptr (@m_HotKey, i32 0, i32 3), align 2
646
647Alternatively, we should use a small amount of base-offset alias analysis
648to make it so the scheduler doesn't need to hold all the loads in regs at
649once.
650
651//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner497b7e92008-01-11 06:17:47 +0000652
Nate Begemane9fe65c2008-02-18 18:39:23 +0000653We should add an FRINT node to the DAG to model targets that have legal
654implementations of ceil/floor/rint.
Chris Lattner48840f82008-02-28 05:34:27 +0000655
656//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
657
658Consider:
659
660int test() {
661 long long input[8] = {1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1};
662 foo(input);
663}
664
665We currently compile this into a memcpy from a global array since the
666initializer is fairly large and not memset'able. This is good, but the memcpy
667gets lowered to load/stores in the code generator. This is also ok, except
668that the codegen lowering for memcpy doesn't handle the case when the source
669is a constant global. This gives us atrocious code like this:
670
671 call "L1$pb"
672"L1$pb":
673 popl %eax
674 movl _C.0.1444-"L1$pb"+32(%eax), %ecx
675 movl %ecx, 40(%esp)
676 movl _C.0.1444-"L1$pb"+20(%eax), %ecx
677 movl %ecx, 28(%esp)
678 movl _C.0.1444-"L1$pb"+36(%eax), %ecx
679 movl %ecx, 44(%esp)
680 movl _C.0.1444-"L1$pb"+44(%eax), %ecx
681 movl %ecx, 52(%esp)
682 movl _C.0.1444-"L1$pb"+40(%eax), %ecx
683 movl %ecx, 48(%esp)
684 movl _C.0.1444-"L1$pb"+12(%eax), %ecx
685 movl %ecx, 20(%esp)
686 movl _C.0.1444-"L1$pb"+4(%eax), %ecx
687...
688
689instead of:
690 movl $1, 16(%esp)
691 movl $0, 20(%esp)
692 movl $1, 24(%esp)
693 movl $0, 28(%esp)
694 movl $1, 32(%esp)
695 movl $0, 36(%esp)
696 ...
697
698//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnera11deb02008-03-02 02:51:40 +0000699
700http://llvm.org/PR717:
701
702The following code should compile into "ret int undef". Instead, LLVM
703produces "ret int 0":
704
705int f() {
706 int x = 4;
707 int y;
708 if (x == 3) y = 0;
709 return y;
710}
711
712//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner53b72772008-03-02 19:29:42 +0000713
714The loop unroller should partially unroll loops (instead of peeling them)
715when code growth isn't too bad and when an unroll count allows simplification
716of some code within the loop. One trivial example is:
717
718#include <stdio.h>
719int main() {
720 int nRet = 17;
721 int nLoop;
722 for ( nLoop = 0; nLoop < 1000; nLoop++ ) {
723 if ( nLoop & 1 )
724 nRet += 2;
725 else
726 nRet -= 1;
727 }
728 return nRet;
729}
730
731Unrolling by 2 would eliminate the '&1' in both copies, leading to a net
732reduction in code size. The resultant code would then also be suitable for
733exit value computation.
734
735//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner349155b2008-03-17 01:47:51 +0000736
737We miss a bunch of rotate opportunities on various targets, including ppc, x86,
738etc. On X86, we miss a bunch of 'rotate by variable' cases because the rotate
739matching code in dag combine doesn't look through truncates aggressively
740enough. Here are some testcases reduces from GCC PR17886:
741
742unsigned long long f(unsigned long long x, int y) {
743 return (x << y) | (x >> 64-y);
744}
745unsigned f2(unsigned x, int y){
746 return (x << y) | (x >> 32-y);
747}
748unsigned long long f3(unsigned long long x){
749 int y = 9;
750 return (x << y) | (x >> 64-y);
751}
752unsigned f4(unsigned x){
753 int y = 10;
754 return (x << y) | (x >> 32-y);
755}
756unsigned long long f5(unsigned long long x, unsigned long long y) {
757 return (x << 8) | ((y >> 48) & 0xffull);
758}
759unsigned long long f6(unsigned long long x, unsigned long long y, int z) {
760 switch(z) {
761 case 1:
762 return (x << 8) | ((y >> 48) & 0xffull);
763 case 2:
764 return (x << 16) | ((y >> 40) & 0xffffull);
765 case 3:
766 return (x << 24) | ((y >> 32) & 0xffffffull);
767 case 4:
768 return (x << 32) | ((y >> 24) & 0xffffffffull);
769 default:
770 return (x << 40) | ((y >> 16) & 0xffffffffffull);
771 }
772}
773
Dan Gohmancb747c52008-10-17 21:39:27 +0000774On X86-64, we only handle f2/f3/f4 right. On x86-32, a few of these
Chris Lattner349155b2008-03-17 01:47:51 +0000775generate truly horrible code, instead of using shld and friends. On
776ARM, we end up with calls to L___lshrdi3/L___ashldi3 in f, which is
777badness. PPC64 misses f, f5 and f6. CellSPU aborts in isel.
778
779//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnerf70107f2008-03-20 04:46:13 +0000780
781We do a number of simplifications in simplify libcalls to strength reduce
782standard library functions, but we don't currently merge them together. For
783example, it is useful to merge memcpy(a,b,strlen(b)) -> strcpy. This can only
784be done safely if "b" isn't modified between the strlen and memcpy of course.
785
786//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
787
Chris Lattner26e150f2008-08-10 01:14:08 +0000788We compile this program: (from GCC PR11680)
789http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=4487
790
791Into code that runs the same speed in fast/slow modes, but both modes run 2x
792slower than when compile with GCC (either 4.0 or 4.2):
793
794$ llvm-g++ perf.cpp -O3 -fno-exceptions
795$ time ./a.out fast
7961.821u 0.003s 0:01.82 100.0% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
797
798$ g++ perf.cpp -O3 -fno-exceptions
799$ time ./a.out fast
8000.821u 0.001s 0:00.82 100.0% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
801
802It looks like we are making the same inlining decisions, so this may be raw
803codegen badness or something else (haven't investigated).
804
805//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
806
807We miss some instcombines for stuff like this:
808void bar (void);
809void foo (unsigned int a) {
810 /* This one is equivalent to a >= (3 << 2). */
811 if ((a >> 2) >= 3)
812 bar ();
813}
814
815A few other related ones are in GCC PR14753.
816
817//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
818
819Divisibility by constant can be simplified (according to GCC PR12849) from
820being a mulhi to being a mul lo (cheaper). Testcase:
821
822void bar(unsigned n) {
823 if (n % 3 == 0)
824 true();
825}
826
Eli Friedmanbcae2052009-12-12 23:23:43 +0000827This is equivalent to the following, where 2863311531 is the multiplicative
828inverse of 3, and 1431655766 is ((2^32)-1)/3+1:
829void bar(unsigned n) {
830 if (n * 2863311531U < 1431655766U)
831 true();
832}
833
834The same transformation can work with an even modulo with the addition of a
835rotate: rotate the result of the multiply to the right by the number of bits
836which need to be zero for the condition to be true, and shrink the compare RHS
837by the same amount. Unless the target supports rotates, though, that
838transformation probably isn't worthwhile.
839
840The transformation can also easily be made to work with non-zero equality
841comparisons: just transform, for example, "n % 3 == 1" to "(n-1) % 3 == 0".
Chris Lattner26e150f2008-08-10 01:14:08 +0000842
843//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner23f35bc2008-08-19 06:22:16 +0000844
Chris Lattnerdb039832008-10-15 16:06:03 +0000845Better mod/ref analysis for scanf would allow us to eliminate the vtable and a
846bunch of other stuff from this example (see PR1604):
847
848#include <cstdio>
849struct test {
850 int val;
851 virtual ~test() {}
852};
853
854int main() {
855 test t;
856 std::scanf("%d", &t.val);
857 std::printf("%d\n", t.val);
858}
859
860//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
861
Nick Lewyckyd2f0db12008-11-27 22:41:45 +0000862These functions perform the same computation, but produce different assembly.
Nick Lewyckydf563ca2008-11-27 22:12:22 +0000863
864define i8 @select(i8 %x) readnone nounwind {
865 %A = icmp ult i8 %x, 250
866 %B = select i1 %A, i8 0, i8 1
867 ret i8 %B
868}
869
870define i8 @addshr(i8 %x) readnone nounwind {
871 %A = zext i8 %x to i9
872 %B = add i9 %A, 6 ;; 256 - 250 == 6
873 %C = lshr i9 %B, 8
874 %D = trunc i9 %C to i8
875 ret i8 %D
876}
877
878//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Eli Friedman4e16b292008-11-30 07:36:04 +0000879
880From gcc bug 24696:
881int
882f (unsigned long a, unsigned long b, unsigned long c)
883{
884 return ((a & (c - 1)) != 0) || ((b & (c - 1)) != 0);
885}
886int
887f (unsigned long a, unsigned long b, unsigned long c)
888{
889 return ((a & (c - 1)) != 0) | ((b & (c - 1)) != 0);
890}
891Both should combine to ((a|b) & (c-1)) != 0. Currently not optimized with
892"clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
893
894//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
895
896From GCC Bug 20192:
897#define PMD_MASK (~((1UL << 23) - 1))
898void clear_pmd_range(unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
899{
900 if (!(start & ~PMD_MASK) && !(end & ~PMD_MASK))
901 f();
902}
903The expression should optimize to something like
904"!((start|end)&~PMD_MASK). Currently not optimized with "clang
905-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
906
907//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
908
Eli Friedman4e16b292008-11-30 07:36:04 +0000909void a(int variable)
910{
911 if (variable == 4 || variable == 6)
912 bar();
913}
914This should optimize to "if ((variable | 2) == 6)". Currently not
915optimized with "clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts | llc".
916
917//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
918
919unsigned int f(unsigned int i, unsigned int n) {++i; if (i == n) ++i; return
920i;}
921unsigned int f2(unsigned int i, unsigned int n) {++i; i += i == n; return i;}
922These should combine to the same thing. Currently, the first function
923produces better code on X86.
924
925//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
926
Eli Friedman4e16b292008-11-30 07:36:04 +0000927From GCC Bug 15784:
928#define abs(x) x>0?x:-x
929int f(int x, int y)
930{
931 return (abs(x)) >= 0;
932}
933This should optimize to x == INT_MIN. (With -fwrapv.) Currently not
934optimized with "clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
935
936//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
937
938From GCC Bug 14753:
939void
940rotate_cst (unsigned int a)
941{
942 a = (a << 10) | (a >> 22);
943 if (a == 123)
944 bar ();
945}
946void
947minus_cst (unsigned int a)
948{
949 unsigned int tem;
950
951 tem = 20 - a;
952 if (tem == 5)
953 bar ();
954}
955void
956mask_gt (unsigned int a)
957{
958 /* This is equivalent to a > 15. */
959 if ((a & ~7) > 8)
960 bar ();
961}
962void
963rshift_gt (unsigned int a)
964{
965 /* This is equivalent to a > 23. */
966 if ((a >> 2) > 5)
967 bar ();
968}
969All should simplify to a single comparison. All of these are
970currently not optimized with "clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt
971-std-compile-opts".
972
973//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
974
975From GCC Bug 32605:
976int c(int* x) {return (char*)x+2 == (char*)x;}
977Should combine to 0. Currently not optimized with "clang
978-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts" (although llc can optimize it).
979
980//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
981
Eli Friedman4e16b292008-11-30 07:36:04 +0000982int a(unsigned b) {return ((b << 31) | (b << 30)) >> 31;}
983Should be combined to "((b >> 1) | b) & 1". Currently not optimized
984with "clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
985
986//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
987
988unsigned a(unsigned x, unsigned y) { return x | (y & 1) | (y & 2);}
989Should combine to "x | (y & 3)". Currently not optimized with "clang
990-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
991
992//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
993
Eli Friedman4e16b292008-11-30 07:36:04 +0000994int a(int a, int b, int c) {return (~a & c) | ((c|a) & b);}
995Should fold to "(~a & c) | (a & b)". Currently not optimized with
996"clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
997
998//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
999
1000int a(int a,int b) {return (~(a|b))|a;}
1001Should fold to "a|~b". Currently not optimized with "clang
1002-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1003
1004//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1005
1006int a(int a, int b) {return (a&&b) || (a&&!b);}
1007Should fold to "a". Currently not optimized with "clang -emit-llvm-bc
1008| opt -std-compile-opts".
1009
1010//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1011
1012int a(int a, int b, int c) {return (a&&b) || (!a&&c);}
1013Should fold to "a ? b : c", or at least something sane. Currently not
1014optimized with "clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1015
1016//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1017
1018int a(int a, int b, int c) {return (a&&b) || (a&&c) || (a&&b&&c);}
1019Should fold to a && (b || c). Currently not optimized with "clang
1020-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1021
1022//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1023
1024int a(int x) {return x | ((x & 8) ^ 8);}
1025Should combine to x | 8. Currently not optimized with "clang
1026-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1027
1028//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1029
1030int a(int x) {return x ^ ((x & 8) ^ 8);}
1031Should also combine to x | 8. Currently not optimized with "clang
1032-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1033
1034//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1035
1036int a(int x) {return (x & 8) == 0 ? -1 : -9;}
1037Should combine to (x | -9) ^ 8. Currently not optimized with "clang
1038-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1039
1040//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1041
1042int a(int x) {return (x & 8) == 0 ? -9 : -1;}
1043Should combine to x | -9. Currently not optimized with "clang
1044-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1045
1046//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1047
1048int a(int x) {return ((x | -9) ^ 8) & x;}
1049Should combine to x & -9. Currently not optimized with "clang
1050-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1051
1052//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1053
1054unsigned a(unsigned a) {return a * 0x11111111 >> 28 & 1;}
1055Should combine to "a * 0x88888888 >> 31". Currently not optimized
1056with "clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1057
1058//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1059
1060unsigned a(char* x) {if ((*x & 32) == 0) return b();}
1061There's an unnecessary zext in the generated code with "clang
1062-emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1063
1064//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1065
1066unsigned a(unsigned long long x) {return 40 * (x >> 1);}
1067Should combine to "20 * (((unsigned)x) & -2)". Currently not
1068optimized with "clang -emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts".
1069
1070//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Bill Wendling3bdcda82008-12-02 05:12:47 +00001071
Chris Lattner88d84b22008-12-02 06:32:34 +00001072This was noticed in the entryblock for grokdeclarator in 403.gcc:
1073
1074 %tmp = icmp eq i32 %decl_context, 4
1075 %decl_context_addr.0 = select i1 %tmp, i32 3, i32 %decl_context
1076 %tmp1 = icmp eq i32 %decl_context_addr.0, 1
1077 %decl_context_addr.1 = select i1 %tmp1, i32 0, i32 %decl_context_addr.0
1078
1079tmp1 should be simplified to something like:
1080 (!tmp || decl_context == 1)
1081
1082This allows recursive simplifications, tmp1 is used all over the place in
1083the function, e.g. by:
1084
1085 %tmp23 = icmp eq i32 %decl_context_addr.1, 0 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
1086 %tmp24 = xor i1 %tmp1, true ; <i1> [#uses=1]
1087 %or.cond8 = and i1 %tmp23, %tmp24 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
1088
1089later.
1090
Chris Lattner78a7e7c2008-12-06 19:28:22 +00001091//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1092
Chris Lattnerd4137f42009-11-29 02:19:52 +00001093[STORE SINKING]
1094
Chris Lattner78a7e7c2008-12-06 19:28:22 +00001095Store sinking: This code:
1096
1097void f (int n, int *cond, int *res) {
1098 int i;
1099 *res = 0;
1100 for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
1101 if (*cond)
1102 *res ^= 234; /* (*) */
1103}
1104
1105On this function GVN hoists the fully redundant value of *res, but nothing
1106moves the store out. This gives us this code:
1107
1108bb: ; preds = %bb2, %entry
1109 %.rle = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %.rle6, %bb2 ]
1110 %i.05 = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %indvar.next, %bb2 ]
1111 %1 = load i32* %cond, align 4
1112 %2 = icmp eq i32 %1, 0
1113 br i1 %2, label %bb2, label %bb1
1114
1115bb1: ; preds = %bb
1116 %3 = xor i32 %.rle, 234
1117 store i32 %3, i32* %res, align 4
1118 br label %bb2
1119
1120bb2: ; preds = %bb, %bb1
1121 %.rle6 = phi i32 [ %3, %bb1 ], [ %.rle, %bb ]
1122 %indvar.next = add i32 %i.05, 1
1123 %exitcond = icmp eq i32 %indvar.next, %n
1124 br i1 %exitcond, label %return, label %bb
1125
1126DSE should sink partially dead stores to get the store out of the loop.
1127
Chris Lattner6a09a742008-12-06 22:52:12 +00001128Here's another partial dead case:
1129http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12395
1130
Chris Lattner78a7e7c2008-12-06 19:28:22 +00001131//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1132
1133Scalar PRE hoists the mul in the common block up to the else:
1134
1135int test (int a, int b, int c, int g) {
1136 int d, e;
1137 if (a)
1138 d = b * c;
1139 else
1140 d = b - c;
1141 e = b * c + g;
1142 return d + e;
1143}
1144
1145It would be better to do the mul once to reduce codesize above the if.
1146This is GCC PR38204.
1147
1148//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1149
Chris Lattnerd4137f42009-11-29 02:19:52 +00001150[STORE SINKING]
1151
Chris Lattner78a7e7c2008-12-06 19:28:22 +00001152GCC PR37810 is an interesting case where we should sink load/store reload
1153into the if block and outside the loop, so we don't reload/store it on the
1154non-call path.
1155
1156for () {
1157 *P += 1;
1158 if ()
1159 call();
1160 else
1161 ...
1162->
1163tmp = *P
1164for () {
1165 tmp += 1;
1166 if () {
1167 *P = tmp;
1168 call();
1169 tmp = *P;
1170 } else ...
1171}
1172*P = tmp;
1173
Chris Lattner8f416f32008-12-15 07:49:24 +00001174We now hoist the reload after the call (Transforms/GVN/lpre-call-wrap.ll), but
1175we don't sink the store. We need partially dead store sinking.
1176
Chris Lattner78a7e7c2008-12-06 19:28:22 +00001177//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1178
Chris Lattnerd4137f42009-11-29 02:19:52 +00001179[LOAD PRE CRIT EDGE SPLITTING]
Chris Lattner8f416f32008-12-15 07:49:24 +00001180
Chris Lattner78a7e7c2008-12-06 19:28:22 +00001181GCC PR37166: Sinking of loads prevents SROA'ing the "g" struct on the stack
1182leading to excess stack traffic. This could be handled by GVN with some crazy
1183symbolic phi translation. The code we get looks like (g is on the stack):
1184
1185bb2: ; preds = %bb1
1186..
1187 %9 = getelementptr %struct.f* %g, i32 0, i32 0
1188 store i32 %8, i32* %9, align bel %bb3
1189
1190bb3: ; preds = %bb1, %bb2, %bb
1191 %c_addr.0 = phi %struct.f* [ %g, %bb2 ], [ %c, %bb ], [ %c, %bb1 ]
1192 %b_addr.0 = phi %struct.f* [ %b, %bb2 ], [ %g, %bb ], [ %b, %bb1 ]
1193 %10 = getelementptr %struct.f* %c_addr.0, i32 0, i32 0
1194 %11 = load i32* %10, align 4
1195
Chris Lattner6d949262009-11-27 16:53:57 +00001196%11 is partially redundant, an in BB2 it should have the value %8.
Chris Lattner78a7e7c2008-12-06 19:28:22 +00001197
Chris Lattnerd4137f42009-11-29 02:19:52 +00001198GCC PR33344 and PR35287 are similar cases.
Chris Lattner6a09a742008-12-06 22:52:12 +00001199
Chris Lattner6c9fab72009-11-05 18:19:19 +00001200
1201//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1202
Chris Lattnerd4137f42009-11-29 02:19:52 +00001203[LOAD PRE]
1204
Chris Lattner6a09a742008-12-06 22:52:12 +00001205There are many load PRE testcases in testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/loadpre* in the
Chris Lattnerd4137f42009-11-29 02:19:52 +00001206GCC testsuite, ones we don't get yet are (checked through loadpre25):
1207
1208[CRIT EDGE BREAKING]
1209loadpre3.c predcom-4.c
1210
1211[PRE OF READONLY CALL]
1212loadpre5.c
1213
1214[TURN SELECT INTO BRANCH]
1215loadpre14.c loadpre15.c
1216
1217actually a conditional increment: loadpre18.c loadpre19.c
1218
1219
1220//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1221
1222[SCALAR PRE]
1223There are many PRE testcases in testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-pre-*.c in the
1224GCC testsuite.
Chris Lattner6a09a742008-12-06 22:52:12 +00001225
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001226//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1227
1228There are some interesting cases in testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pred-comm* in the
Chris Lattnerd4137f42009-11-29 02:19:52 +00001229GCC testsuite. For example, we get the first example in predcom-1.c, but
1230miss the second one:
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001231
Chris Lattnerd4137f42009-11-29 02:19:52 +00001232unsigned fib[1000];
1233unsigned avg[1000];
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001234
Chris Lattnerd4137f42009-11-29 02:19:52 +00001235__attribute__ ((noinline))
1236void count_averages(int n) {
1237 int i;
1238 for (i = 1; i < n; i++)
1239 avg[i] = (((unsigned long) fib[i - 1] + fib[i] + fib[i + 1]) / 3) & 0xffff;
1240}
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001241
Chris Lattnerd4137f42009-11-29 02:19:52 +00001242which compiles into two loads instead of one in the loop.
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001243
Chris Lattnerd4137f42009-11-29 02:19:52 +00001244predcom-2.c is the same as predcom-1.c
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001245
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001246predcom-3.c is very similar but needs loads feeding each other instead of
1247store->load.
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001248
1249
1250//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1251
Chris Lattneraa306c22010-01-23 17:59:23 +00001252[ALIAS ANALYSIS]
1253
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001254Type based alias analysis:
Chris Lattner6a09a742008-12-06 22:52:12 +00001255http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14705
1256
Chris Lattneraa306c22010-01-23 17:59:23 +00001257We should do better analysis of posix_memalign. At the least it should
1258no-capture its pointer argument, at best, we should know that the out-value
1259result doesn't point to anything (like malloc). One example of this is in
1260SingleSource/Benchmarks/Misc/dt.c
1261
Chris Lattner6a09a742008-12-06 22:52:12 +00001262//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1263
Chris Lattner6a09a742008-12-06 22:52:12 +00001264A/B get pinned to the stack because we turn an if/then into a select instead
1265of PRE'ing the load/store. This may be fixable in instcombine:
1266http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37892
1267
Chris Lattner93c6c772009-09-21 02:53:57 +00001268struct X { int i; };
1269int foo (int x) {
1270 struct X a;
1271 struct X b;
1272 struct X *p;
1273 a.i = 1;
1274 b.i = 2;
1275 if (x)
1276 p = &a;
1277 else
1278 p = &b;
1279 return p->i;
1280}
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001281
Chris Lattner93c6c772009-09-21 02:53:57 +00001282//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001283
Chris Lattner6a09a742008-12-06 22:52:12 +00001284Interesting missed case because of control flow flattening (should be 2 loads):
1285http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26629
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001286With: llvm-gcc t2.c -S -o - -O0 -emit-llvm | llvm-as |
1287 opt -mem2reg -gvn -instcombine | llvm-dis
Chris Lattnerd4137f42009-11-29 02:19:52 +00001288we miss it because we need 1) CRIT EDGE 2) MULTIPLE DIFFERENT
Chris Lattner582048d2008-12-15 08:32:28 +00001289VALS PRODUCED BY ONE BLOCK OVER DIFFERENT PATHS
Chris Lattner6a09a742008-12-06 22:52:12 +00001290
1291//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1292
1293http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19633
1294We could eliminate the branch condition here, loading from null is undefined:
1295
1296struct S { int w, x, y, z; };
1297struct T { int r; struct S s; };
1298void bar (struct S, int);
1299void foo (int a, struct T b)
1300{
1301 struct S *c = 0;
1302 if (a)
1303 c = &b.s;
1304 bar (*c, a);
1305}
1306
1307//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner88d84b22008-12-02 06:32:34 +00001308
Chris Lattner9cf8ef62008-12-23 20:52:52 +00001309simplifylibcalls should do several optimizations for strspn/strcspn:
1310
1311strcspn(x, "") -> strlen(x)
1312strcspn("", x) -> 0
1313strspn("", x) -> 0
1314strspn(x, "") -> strlen(x)
1315strspn(x, "a") -> strchr(x, 'a')-x
1316
1317strcspn(x, "a") -> inlined loop for up to 3 letters (similarly for strspn):
1318
1319size_t __strcspn_c3 (__const char *__s, int __reject1, int __reject2,
1320 int __reject3) {
1321 register size_t __result = 0;
1322 while (__s[__result] != '\0' && __s[__result] != __reject1 &&
1323 __s[__result] != __reject2 && __s[__result] != __reject3)
1324 ++__result;
1325 return __result;
1326}
1327
1328This should turn into a switch on the character. See PR3253 for some notes on
1329codegen.
1330
1331456.hmmer apparently uses strcspn and strspn a lot. 471.omnetpp uses strspn.
1332
1333//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnerd23b7992008-12-31 00:54:13 +00001334
1335"gas" uses this idiom:
1336 else if (strchr ("+-/*%|&^:[]()~", *intel_parser.op_string))
1337..
1338 else if (strchr ("<>", *intel_parser.op_string)
1339
1340Those should be turned into a switch.
1341
1342//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnerffb08f52009-01-08 06:52:57 +00001343
1344252.eon contains this interesting code:
1345
1346 %3072 = getelementptr [100 x i8]* %tempString, i32 0, i32 0
1347 %3073 = call i8* @strcpy(i8* %3072, i8* %3071) nounwind
1348 %strlen = call i32 @strlen(i8* %3072) ; uses = 1
1349 %endptr = getelementptr [100 x i8]* %tempString, i32 0, i32 %strlen
1350 call void @llvm.memcpy.i32(i8* %endptr,
1351 i8* getelementptr ([5 x i8]* @"\01LC42", i32 0, i32 0), i32 5, i32 1)
1352 %3074 = call i32 @strlen(i8* %endptr) nounwind readonly
1353
1354This is interesting for a couple reasons. First, in this:
1355
1356 %3073 = call i8* @strcpy(i8* %3072, i8* %3071) nounwind
1357 %strlen = call i32 @strlen(i8* %3072)
1358
1359The strlen could be replaced with: %strlen = sub %3072, %3073, because the
1360strcpy call returns a pointer to the end of the string. Based on that, the
1361endptr GEP just becomes equal to 3073, which eliminates a strlen call and GEP.
1362
1363Second, the memcpy+strlen strlen can be replaced with:
1364
1365 %3074 = call i32 @strlen([5 x i8]* @"\01LC42") nounwind readonly
1366
1367Because the destination was just copied into the specified memory buffer. This,
1368in turn, can be constant folded to "4".
1369
1370In other code, it contains:
1371
1372 %endptr6978 = bitcast i8* %endptr69 to i32*
1373 store i32 7107374, i32* %endptr6978, align 1
1374 %3167 = call i32 @strlen(i8* %endptr69) nounwind readonly
1375
1376Which could also be constant folded. Whatever is producing this should probably
1377be fixed to leave this as a memcpy from a string.
1378
1379Further, eon also has an interesting partially redundant strlen call:
1380
1381bb8: ; preds = %_ZN18eonImageCalculatorC1Ev.exit
1382 %682 = getelementptr i8** %argv, i32 6 ; <i8**> [#uses=2]
1383 %683 = load i8** %682, align 4 ; <i8*> [#uses=4]
1384 %684 = load i8* %683, align 1 ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1385 %685 = icmp eq i8 %684, 0 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
1386 br i1 %685, label %bb10, label %bb9
1387
1388bb9: ; preds = %bb8
1389 %686 = call i32 @strlen(i8* %683) nounwind readonly
1390 %687 = icmp ugt i32 %686, 254 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
1391 br i1 %687, label %bb10, label %bb11
1392
1393bb10: ; preds = %bb9, %bb8
1394 %688 = call i32 @strlen(i8* %683) nounwind readonly
1395
1396This could be eliminated by doing the strlen once in bb8, saving code size and
1397improving perf on the bb8->9->10 path.
1398
1399//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner9fee08f2009-01-08 07:34:55 +00001400
1401I see an interesting fully redundant call to strlen left in 186.crafty:InputMove
1402which looks like:
1403 %movetext11 = getelementptr [128 x i8]* %movetext, i32 0, i32 0
1404
1405
1406bb62: ; preds = %bb55, %bb53
1407 %promote.0 = phi i32 [ %169, %bb55 ], [ 0, %bb53 ]
1408 %171 = call i32 @strlen(i8* %movetext11) nounwind readonly align 1
1409 %172 = add i32 %171, -1 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1410 %173 = getelementptr [128 x i8]* %movetext, i32 0, i32 %172
1411
1412... no stores ...
1413 br i1 %or.cond, label %bb65, label %bb72
1414
1415bb65: ; preds = %bb62
1416 store i8 0, i8* %173, align 1
1417 br label %bb72
1418
1419bb72: ; preds = %bb65, %bb62
1420 %trank.1 = phi i32 [ %176, %bb65 ], [ -1, %bb62 ]
1421 %177 = call i32 @strlen(i8* %movetext11) nounwind readonly align 1
1422
1423Note that on the bb62->bb72 path, that the %177 strlen call is partially
1424redundant with the %171 call. At worst, we could shove the %177 strlen call
1425up into the bb65 block moving it out of the bb62->bb72 path. However, note
1426that bb65 stores to the string, zeroing out the last byte. This means that on
1427that path the value of %177 is actually just %171-1. A sub is cheaper than a
1428strlen!
1429
1430This pattern repeats several times, basically doing:
1431
1432 A = strlen(P);
1433 P[A-1] = 0;
1434 B = strlen(P);
1435 where it is "obvious" that B = A-1.
1436
1437//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1438
Chris Lattner9fee08f2009-01-08 07:34:55 +00001439186.crafty also contains this code:
1440
1441%1906 = call i32 @strlen(i8* getelementptr ([32 x i8]* @pgn_event, i32 0,i32 0))
1442%1907 = getelementptr [32 x i8]* @pgn_event, i32 0, i32 %1906
1443%1908 = call i8* @strcpy(i8* %1907, i8* %1905) nounwind align 1
1444%1909 = call i32 @strlen(i8* getelementptr ([32 x i8]* @pgn_event, i32 0,i32 0))
1445%1910 = getelementptr [32 x i8]* @pgn_event, i32 0, i32 %1909
1446
1447The last strlen is computable as 1908-@pgn_event, which means 1910=1908.
1448
1449//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1450
1451186.crafty has this interesting pattern with the "out.4543" variable:
1452
1453call void @llvm.memcpy.i32(
1454 i8* getelementptr ([10 x i8]* @out.4543, i32 0, i32 0),
1455 i8* getelementptr ([7 x i8]* @"\01LC28700", i32 0, i32 0), i32 7, i32 1)
1456%101 = call@printf(i8* ... @out.4543, i32 0, i32 0)) nounwind
1457
1458It is basically doing:
1459
1460 memcpy(globalarray, "string");
1461 printf(..., globalarray);
1462
1463Anyway, by knowing that printf just reads the memory and forward substituting
1464the string directly into the printf, this eliminates reads from globalarray.
1465Since this pattern occurs frequently in crafty (due to the "DisplayTime" and
1466other similar functions) there are many stores to "out". Once all the printfs
1467stop using "out", all that is left is the memcpy's into it. This should allow
1468globalopt to remove the "stored only" global.
1469
1470//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1471
Dan Gohman8289b052009-01-20 01:07:33 +00001472This code:
1473
1474define inreg i32 @foo(i8* inreg %p) nounwind {
1475 %tmp0 = load i8* %p
1476 %tmp1 = ashr i8 %tmp0, 5
1477 %tmp2 = sext i8 %tmp1 to i32
1478 ret i32 %tmp2
1479}
1480
1481could be dagcombine'd to a sign-extending load with a shift.
1482For example, on x86 this currently gets this:
1483
1484 movb (%eax), %al
1485 sarb $5, %al
1486 movsbl %al, %eax
1487
1488while it could get this:
1489
1490 movsbl (%eax), %eax
1491 sarl $5, %eax
1492
1493//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner256baa42009-01-22 07:16:03 +00001494
1495GCC PR31029:
1496
1497int test(int x) { return 1-x == x; } // --> return false
1498int test2(int x) { return 2-x == x; } // --> return x == 1 ?
1499
1500Always foldable for odd constants, what is the rule for even?
1501
1502//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1503
Torok Edwine46a6862009-01-24 19:30:25 +00001504PR 3381: GEP to field of size 0 inside a struct could be turned into GEP
1505for next field in struct (which is at same address).
1506
1507For example: store of float into { {{}}, float } could be turned into a store to
1508the float directly.
1509
Torok Edwin474479f2009-02-20 18:42:06 +00001510//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Nick Lewycky20babb12009-02-25 06:52:48 +00001511
Torok Edwin474479f2009-02-20 18:42:06 +00001512#include <math.h>
1513double foo(double a) { return sin(a); }
1514
1515This compiles into this on x86-64 Linux:
1516foo:
1517 subq $8, %rsp
1518 call sin
1519 addq $8, %rsp
1520 ret
1521vs:
1522
1523foo:
1524 jmp sin
1525
Nick Lewycky20babb12009-02-25 06:52:48 +00001526//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1527
Chris Lattner32c5f172009-05-11 17:41:40 +00001528The arg promotion pass should make use of nocapture to make its alias analysis
1529stuff much more precise.
1530
1531//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1532
1533The following functions should be optimized to use a select instead of a
1534branch (from gcc PR40072):
1535
1536char char_int(int m) {if(m>7) return 0; return m;}
1537int int_char(char m) {if(m>7) return 0; return m;}
1538
1539//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1540
Bill Wendling5a569272009-10-27 22:48:31 +00001541int func(int a, int b) { if (a & 0x80) b |= 0x80; else b &= ~0x80; return b; }
1542
1543Generates this:
1544
1545define i32 @func(i32 %a, i32 %b) nounwind readnone ssp {
1546entry:
1547 %0 = and i32 %a, 128 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1548 %1 = icmp eq i32 %0, 0 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
1549 %2 = or i32 %b, 128 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1550 %3 = and i32 %b, -129 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1551 %b_addr.0 = select i1 %1, i32 %3, i32 %2 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1552 ret i32 %b_addr.0
1553}
1554
1555However, it's functionally equivalent to:
1556
1557 b = (b & ~0x80) | (a & 0x80);
1558
1559Which generates this:
1560
1561define i32 @func(i32 %a, i32 %b) nounwind readnone ssp {
1562entry:
1563 %0 = and i32 %b, -129 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1564 %1 = and i32 %a, 128 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1565 %2 = or i32 %0, %1 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1566 ret i32 %2
1567}
1568
1569This can be generalized for other forms:
1570
1571 b = (b & ~0x80) | (a & 0x40) << 1;
1572
1573//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Bill Wendlingc872e9c2009-10-27 23:30:07 +00001574
1575These two functions produce different code. They shouldn't:
1576
1577#include <stdint.h>
1578
1579uint8_t p1(uint8_t b, uint8_t a) {
1580 b = (b & ~0xc0) | (a & 0xc0);
1581 return (b);
1582}
1583
1584uint8_t p2(uint8_t b, uint8_t a) {
1585 b = (b & ~0x40) | (a & 0x40);
1586 b = (b & ~0x80) | (a & 0x80);
1587 return (b);
1588}
1589
1590define zeroext i8 @p1(i8 zeroext %b, i8 zeroext %a) nounwind readnone ssp {
1591entry:
1592 %0 = and i8 %b, 63 ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1593 %1 = and i8 %a, -64 ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1594 %2 = or i8 %1, %0 ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1595 ret i8 %2
1596}
1597
1598define zeroext i8 @p2(i8 zeroext %b, i8 zeroext %a) nounwind readnone ssp {
1599entry:
1600 %0 = and i8 %b, 63 ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1601 %.masked = and i8 %a, 64 ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1602 %1 = and i8 %a, -128 ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1603 %2 = or i8 %1, %0 ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1604 %3 = or i8 %2, %.masked ; <i8> [#uses=1]
1605 ret i8 %3
1606}
1607
1608//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner6fdfc9c2009-11-11 17:51:27 +00001609
1610IPSCCP does not currently propagate argument dependent constants through
1611functions where it does not not all of the callers. This includes functions
1612with normal external linkage as well as templates, C99 inline functions etc.
1613Specifically, it does nothing to:
1614
1615define i32 @test(i32 %x, i32 %y, i32 %z) nounwind {
1616entry:
1617 %0 = add nsw i32 %y, %z
1618 %1 = mul i32 %0, %x
1619 %2 = mul i32 %y, %z
1620 %3 = add nsw i32 %1, %2
1621 ret i32 %3
1622}
1623
1624define i32 @test2() nounwind {
1625entry:
1626 %0 = call i32 @test(i32 1, i32 2, i32 4) nounwind
1627 ret i32 %0
1628}
1629
1630It would be interesting extend IPSCCP to be able to handle simple cases like
1631this, where all of the arguments to a call are constant. Because IPSCCP runs
1632before inlining, trivial templates and inline functions are not yet inlined.
1633The results for a function + set of constant arguments should be memoized in a
1634map.
1635
1636//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnerfc926c22009-11-11 17:54:02 +00001637
1638The libcall constant folding stuff should be moved out of SimplifyLibcalls into
1639libanalysis' constantfolding logic. This would allow IPSCCP to be able to
1640handle simple things like this:
1641
1642static int foo(const char *X) { return strlen(X); }
1643int bar() { return foo("abcd"); }
1644
1645//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Nick Lewycky93f9f7a2009-11-15 17:51:23 +00001646
1647InstCombine should use SimplifyDemandedBits to remove the or instruction:
1648
1649define i1 @test(i8 %x, i8 %y) {
1650 %A = or i8 %x, 1
1651 %B = icmp ugt i8 %A, 3
1652 ret i1 %B
1653}
1654
1655Currently instcombine calls SimplifyDemandedBits with either all bits or just
1656the sign bit, if the comparison is obviously a sign test. In this case, we only
1657need all but the bottom two bits from %A, and if we gave that mask to SDB it
1658would delete the or instruction for us.
1659
1660//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner05332172009-12-03 07:41:54 +00001661
Duncan Sandse10920d2010-01-06 15:37:47 +00001662functionattrs doesn't know much about memcpy/memset. This function should be
Duncan Sands7c422ac2010-01-06 08:45:52 +00001663marked readnone rather than readonly, since it only twiddles local memory, but
1664functionattrs doesn't handle memset/memcpy/memmove aggressively:
Chris Lattner89742c22009-12-03 07:43:46 +00001665
1666struct X { int *p; int *q; };
1667int foo() {
1668 int i = 0, j = 1;
1669 struct X x, y;
1670 int **p;
1671 y.p = &i;
1672 x.q = &j;
1673 p = __builtin_memcpy (&x, &y, sizeof (int *));
1674 return **p;
1675}
1676
Chris Lattner05332172009-12-03 07:41:54 +00001677//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1678
Eli Friedman9cfb3ad2010-01-18 22:36:59 +00001679Missed instcombine transformation:
1680define i1 @a(i32 %x) nounwind readnone {
1681entry:
1682 %cmp = icmp eq i32 %x, 30
1683 %sub = add i32 %x, -30
1684 %cmp2 = icmp ugt i32 %sub, 9
1685 %or = or i1 %cmp, %cmp2
1686 ret i1 %or
1687}
1688This should be optimized to a single compare. Testcase derived from gcc.
1689
1690//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1691
1692Missed instcombine transformation:
1693void b();
1694void a(int x) { if (((1<<x)&8)==0) b(); }
1695
1696The shift should be optimized out. Testcase derived from gcc.
1697
1698//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1699
1700Missed instcombine or reassociate transformation:
1701int a(int a, int b) { return (a==12)&(b>47)&(b<58); }
1702
1703The sgt and slt should be combined into a single comparison. Testcase derived
1704from gcc.
1705
1706//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1707
1708Missed instcombine transformation:
1709define i32 @a(i32 %x) nounwind readnone {
1710entry:
Eli Friedman1144d7e2010-01-31 04:55:32 +00001711 %rem = srem i32 %x, 32
1712 %shl = shl i32 1, %rem
1713 ret i32 %shl
1714}
1715
1716The srem can be transformed to an and because if x is negative, the shift is
1717undefined. Testcase derived from gcc.
1718
1719//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1720
1721Missed instcombine/dagcombine transformation:
1722define i32 @a(i32 %x, i32 %y) nounwind readnone {
1723entry:
1724 %mul = mul i32 %y, -8
1725 %sub = sub i32 %x, %mul
Eli Friedman9cfb3ad2010-01-18 22:36:59 +00001726 ret i32 %sub
1727}
1728
Eli Friedman1144d7e2010-01-31 04:55:32 +00001729Should compile to something like x+y*8, but currently compiles to an
1730inefficient result. Testcase derived from gcc.
1731
1732//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1733
1734Missed instcombine/dagcombine transformation:
1735define void @lshift_lt(i8 zeroext %a) nounwind {
1736entry:
1737 %conv = zext i8 %a to i32
1738 %shl = shl i32 %conv, 3
1739 %cmp = icmp ult i32 %shl, 33
1740 br i1 %cmp, label %if.then, label %if.end
1741
1742if.then:
1743 tail call void @bar() nounwind
1744 ret void
1745
1746if.end:
1747 ret void
1748}
1749declare void @bar() nounwind
1750
1751The shift should be eliminated. Testcase derived from gcc.
Eli Friedman9cfb3ad2010-01-18 22:36:59 +00001752
1753//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattnercf031f62010-02-09 00:11:10 +00001754
1755These compile into different code, one gets recognized as a switch and the
1756other doesn't due to phase ordering issues (PR6212):
1757
1758int test1(int mainType, int subType) {
1759 if (mainType == 7)
1760 subType = 4;
1761 else if (mainType == 9)
1762 subType = 6;
1763 else if (mainType == 11)
1764 subType = 9;
1765 return subType;
1766}
1767
1768int test2(int mainType, int subType) {
1769 if (mainType == 7)
1770 subType = 4;
1771 if (mainType == 9)
1772 subType = 6;
1773 if (mainType == 11)
1774 subType = 9;
1775 return subType;
1776}
1777
1778//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Chris Lattner66636702010-03-10 21:42:42 +00001779
1780The following test case (from PR6576):
1781
1782define i32 @mul(i32 %a, i32 %b) nounwind readnone {
1783entry:
1784 %cond1 = icmp eq i32 %b, 0 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
1785 br i1 %cond1, label %exit, label %bb.nph
1786bb.nph: ; preds = %entry
1787 %tmp = mul i32 %b, %a ; <i32> [#uses=1]
1788 ret i32 %tmp
1789exit: ; preds = %entry
1790 ret i32 0
1791}
1792
1793could be reduced to:
1794
1795define i32 @mul(i32 %a, i32 %b) nounwind readnone {
1796entry:
1797 %tmp = mul i32 %b, %a
1798 ret i32 %tmp
1799}
1800
1801//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1802
Chris Lattner94846892010-04-16 23:52:30 +00001803We should use DSE + llvm.lifetime.end to delete dead vtable pointer updates.
1804See GCC PR34949
1805
Chris Lattnerc2685a92010-05-21 23:16:21 +00001806Another interesting case is that something related could be used for variables
1807that go const after their ctor has finished. In these cases, globalopt (which
1808can statically run the constructor) could mark the global const (so it gets put
1809in the readonly section). A testcase would be:
1810
1811#include <complex>
1812using namespace std;
1813const complex<char> should_be_in_rodata (42,-42);
1814complex<char> should_be_in_data (42,-42);
1815complex<char> should_be_in_bss;
1816
1817Where we currently evaluate the ctors but the globals don't become const because
1818the optimizer doesn't know they "become const" after the ctor is done. See
1819GCC PR4131 for more examples.
1820
Chris Lattner94846892010-04-16 23:52:30 +00001821//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1822
Dan Gohman3a2a4842010-05-03 14:31:00 +00001823In this code:
1824
1825long foo(long x) {
1826 return x > 1 ? x : 1;
1827}
1828
1829LLVM emits a comparison with 1 instead of 0. 0 would be equivalent
1830and cheaper on most targets.
1831
1832LLVM prefers comparisons with zero over non-zero in general, but in this
1833case it choses instead to keep the max operation obvious.
1834
1835//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Eli Friedman8c47d3b2010-06-12 05:54:27 +00001836
1837Take the following testcase on x86-64 (similar testcases exist for all targets
1838with addc/adde):
1839
1840define void @a(i64* nocapture %s, i64* nocapture %t, i64 %a, i64 %b,
1841i64 %c) nounwind {
1842entry:
1843 %0 = zext i64 %a to i128 ; <i128> [#uses=1]
1844 %1 = zext i64 %b to i128 ; <i128> [#uses=1]
1845 %2 = add i128 %1, %0 ; <i128> [#uses=2]
1846 %3 = zext i64 %c to i128 ; <i128> [#uses=1]
1847 %4 = shl i128 %3, 64 ; <i128> [#uses=1]
1848 %5 = add i128 %4, %2 ; <i128> [#uses=1]
1849 %6 = lshr i128 %5, 64 ; <i128> [#uses=1]
1850 %7 = trunc i128 %6 to i64 ; <i64> [#uses=1]
1851 store i64 %7, i64* %s, align 8
1852 %8 = trunc i128 %2 to i64 ; <i64> [#uses=1]
1853 store i64 %8, i64* %t, align 8
1854 ret void
1855}
1856
1857Generated code:
1858 addq %rcx, %rdx
1859 movl $0, %eax
1860 adcq $0, %rax
1861 addq %r8, %rax
1862 movq %rax, (%rdi)
1863 movq %rdx, (%rsi)
1864 ret
1865
1866Expected code:
1867 addq %rcx, %rdx
1868 adcq $0, %r8
1869 movq %r8, (%rdi)
1870 movq %rdx, (%rsi)
1871 ret
1872
1873The generated SelectionDAG has an ADD of an ADDE, where both operands of the
1874ADDE are zero. Replacing one of the operands of the ADDE with the other operand
1875of the ADD, and replacing the ADD with the ADDE, should give the desired result.
1876
1877(That said, we are doing a lot better than gcc on this testcase. :) )
1878
1879//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Eli Friedmanb4a74c12010-07-03 07:38:12 +00001880
1881Switch lowering generates less than ideal code for the following switch:
1882define void @a(i32 %x) nounwind {
1883entry:
1884 switch i32 %x, label %if.end [
1885 i32 0, label %if.then
1886 i32 1, label %if.then
1887 i32 2, label %if.then
1888 i32 3, label %if.then
1889 i32 5, label %if.then
1890 ]
1891if.then:
1892 tail call void @foo() nounwind
1893 ret void
1894if.end:
1895 ret void
1896}
1897declare void @foo()
1898
1899Generated code on x86-64 (other platforms give similar results):
1900a:
1901 cmpl $5, %edi
1902 ja .LBB0_2
1903 movl %edi, %eax
1904 movl $47, %ecx
1905 btq %rax, %rcx
1906 jb .LBB0_3
1907.LBB0_2:
1908 ret
1909.LBB0_3:
Eli Friedmanb4828292010-07-03 08:43:32 +00001910 jmp foo # TAILCALL
Eli Friedmanb4a74c12010-07-03 07:38:12 +00001911
1912The movl+movl+btq+jb could be simplified to a cmpl+jne.
1913
Eli Friedmanb4828292010-07-03 08:43:32 +00001914Or, if we wanted to be really clever, we could simplify the whole thing to
1915something like the following, which eliminates a branch:
1916 xorl $1, %edi
1917 cmpl $4, %edi
1918 ja .LBB0_2
1919 ret
1920.LBB0_2:
1921 jmp foo # TAILCALL
Nick Lewyckyb1e4eeb2010-08-08 07:04:25 +00001922//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
1923Given a branch where the two target blocks are identical ("ret i32 %b" in
1924both), simplifycfg will simplify them away. But not so for a switch statement:
Eli Friedmanb4828292010-07-03 08:43:32 +00001925
Nick Lewyckyb1e4eeb2010-08-08 07:04:25 +00001926define i32 @f(i32 %a, i32 %b) nounwind readnone {
1927entry:
1928 switch i32 %a, label %bb3 [
1929 i32 4, label %bb
1930 i32 6, label %bb
1931 ]
1932
1933bb: ; preds = %entry, %entry
1934 ret i32 %b
1935
1936bb3: ; preds = %entry
1937 ret i32 %b
1938}
Eli Friedmanb4a74c12010-07-03 07:38:12 +00001939//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//