Bill Wendling | 45e9343 | 2012-08-08 06:42:30 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1 | ========================================== |
| 2 | The LLVM Target-Independent Code Generator |
| 3 | ========================================== |
| 4 | |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 5 | .. role:: raw-html(raw) |
| 6 | :format: html |
| 7 | |
| 8 | .. raw:: html |
| 9 | |
| 10 | <style> |
| 11 | .unknown { background-color: #C0C0C0; text-align: center; } |
| 12 | .unknown:before { content: "?" } |
| 13 | .no { background-color: #C11B17 } |
| 14 | .no:before { content: "N" } |
| 15 | .partial { background-color: #F88017 } |
| 16 | .yes { background-color: #0F0; } |
| 17 | .yes:before { content: "Y" } |
Justin Holewinski | c059d56 | 2013-01-11 18:37:54 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 18 | .na { background-color: #6666FF; } |
| 19 | .na:before { content: "N/A" } |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 20 | </style> |
| 21 | |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 22 | .. contents:: |
| 23 | :local: |
| 24 | |
| 25 | .. warning:: |
| 26 | This is a work in progress. |
| 27 | |
| 28 | Introduction |
| 29 | ============ |
| 30 | |
| 31 | The LLVM target-independent code generator is a framework that provides a suite |
| 32 | of reusable components for translating the LLVM internal representation to the |
| 33 | machine code for a specified target---either in assembly form (suitable for a |
| 34 | static compiler) or in binary machine code format (usable for a JIT |
| 35 | compiler). The LLVM target-independent code generator consists of six main |
| 36 | components: |
| 37 | |
| 38 | 1. `Abstract target description`_ interfaces which capture important properties |
| 39 | about various aspects of the machine, independently of how they will be used. |
| 40 | These interfaces are defined in ``include/llvm/Target/``. |
| 41 | |
| 42 | 2. Classes used to represent the `code being generated`_ for a target. These |
| 43 | classes are intended to be abstract enough to represent the machine code for |
| 44 | *any* target machine. These classes are defined in |
| 45 | ``include/llvm/CodeGen/``. At this level, concepts like "constant pool |
| 46 | entries" and "jump tables" are explicitly exposed. |
| 47 | |
| 48 | 3. Classes and algorithms used to represent code as the object file level, the |
| 49 | `MC Layer`_. These classes represent assembly level constructs like labels, |
| 50 | sections, and instructions. At this level, concepts like "constant pool |
| 51 | entries" and "jump tables" don't exist. |
| 52 | |
| 53 | 4. `Target-independent algorithms`_ used to implement various phases of native |
| 54 | code generation (register allocation, scheduling, stack frame representation, |
| 55 | etc). This code lives in ``lib/CodeGen/``. |
| 56 | |
| 57 | 5. `Implementations of the abstract target description interfaces`_ for |
| 58 | particular targets. These machine descriptions make use of the components |
| 59 | provided by LLVM, and can optionally provide custom target-specific passes, |
| 60 | to build complete code generators for a specific target. Target descriptions |
| 61 | live in ``lib/Target/``. |
| 62 | |
| 63 | 6. The target-independent JIT components. The LLVM JIT is completely target |
| 64 | independent (it uses the ``TargetJITInfo`` structure to interface for |
| 65 | target-specific issues. The code for the target-independent JIT lives in |
| 66 | ``lib/ExecutionEngine/JIT``. |
| 67 | |
| 68 | Depending on which part of the code generator you are interested in working on, |
| 69 | different pieces of this will be useful to you. In any case, you should be |
| 70 | familiar with the `target description`_ and `machine code representation`_ |
| 71 | classes. If you want to add a backend for a new target, you will need to |
| 72 | `implement the target description`_ classes for your new target and understand |
| 73 | the `LLVM code representation <LangRef.html>`_. If you are interested in |
| 74 | implementing a new `code generation algorithm`_, it should only depend on the |
| 75 | target-description and machine code representation classes, ensuring that it is |
| 76 | portable. |
| 77 | |
| 78 | Required components in the code generator |
| 79 | ----------------------------------------- |
| 80 | |
| 81 | The two pieces of the LLVM code generator are the high-level interface to the |
| 82 | code generator and the set of reusable components that can be used to build |
| 83 | target-specific backends. The two most important interfaces (:raw-html:`<tt>` |
Micah Villmow | 791cfc2 | 2012-10-08 16:39:34 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 84 | `TargetMachine`_ :raw-html:`</tt>` and :raw-html:`<tt>` `DataLayout`_ |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 85 | :raw-html:`</tt>`) are the only ones that are required to be defined for a |
| 86 | backend to fit into the LLVM system, but the others must be defined if the |
| 87 | reusable code generator components are going to be used. |
| 88 | |
| 89 | This design has two important implications. The first is that LLVM can support |
| 90 | completely non-traditional code generation targets. For example, the C backend |
| 91 | does not require register allocation, instruction selection, or any of the other |
| 92 | standard components provided by the system. As such, it only implements these |
| 93 | two interfaces, and does its own thing. Note that C backend was removed from the |
| 94 | trunk since LLVM 3.1 release. Another example of a code generator like this is a |
| 95 | (purely hypothetical) backend that converts LLVM to the GCC RTL form and uses |
| 96 | GCC to emit machine code for a target. |
| 97 | |
| 98 | This design also implies that it is possible to design and implement radically |
| 99 | different code generators in the LLVM system that do not make use of any of the |
| 100 | built-in components. Doing so is not recommended at all, but could be required |
| 101 | for radically different targets that do not fit into the LLVM machine |
| 102 | description model: FPGAs for example. |
| 103 | |
| 104 | .. _high-level design of the code generator: |
| 105 | |
| 106 | The high-level design of the code generator |
| 107 | ------------------------------------------- |
| 108 | |
| 109 | The LLVM target-independent code generator is designed to support efficient and |
| 110 | quality code generation for standard register-based microprocessors. Code |
| 111 | generation in this model is divided into the following stages: |
| 112 | |
| 113 | 1. `Instruction Selection`_ --- This phase determines an efficient way to |
| 114 | express the input LLVM code in the target instruction set. This stage |
| 115 | produces the initial code for the program in the target instruction set, then |
| 116 | makes use of virtual registers in SSA form and physical registers that |
| 117 | represent any required register assignments due to target constraints or |
| 118 | calling conventions. This step turns the LLVM code into a DAG of target |
| 119 | instructions. |
| 120 | |
| 121 | 2. `Scheduling and Formation`_ --- This phase takes the DAG of target |
| 122 | instructions produced by the instruction selection phase, determines an |
| 123 | ordering of the instructions, then emits the instructions as :raw-html:`<tt>` |
| 124 | `MachineInstr`_\s :raw-html:`</tt>` with that ordering. Note that we |
| 125 | describe this in the `instruction selection section`_ because it operates on |
| 126 | a `SelectionDAG`_. |
| 127 | |
| 128 | 3. `SSA-based Machine Code Optimizations`_ --- This optional stage consists of a |
| 129 | series of machine-code optimizations that operate on the SSA-form produced by |
| 130 | the instruction selector. Optimizations like modulo-scheduling or peephole |
| 131 | optimization work here. |
| 132 | |
| 133 | 4. `Register Allocation`_ --- The target code is transformed from an infinite |
| 134 | virtual register file in SSA form to the concrete register file used by the |
| 135 | target. This phase introduces spill code and eliminates all virtual register |
| 136 | references from the program. |
| 137 | |
| 138 | 5. `Prolog/Epilog Code Insertion`_ --- Once the machine code has been generated |
| 139 | for the function and the amount of stack space required is known (used for |
| 140 | LLVM alloca's and spill slots), the prolog and epilog code for the function |
| 141 | can be inserted and "abstract stack location references" can be eliminated. |
| 142 | This stage is responsible for implementing optimizations like frame-pointer |
| 143 | elimination and stack packing. |
| 144 | |
| 145 | 6. `Late Machine Code Optimizations`_ --- Optimizations that operate on "final" |
| 146 | machine code can go here, such as spill code scheduling and peephole |
| 147 | optimizations. |
| 148 | |
| 149 | 7. `Code Emission`_ --- The final stage actually puts out the code for the |
| 150 | current function, either in the target assembler format or in machine |
| 151 | code. |
| 152 | |
| 153 | The code generator is based on the assumption that the instruction selector will |
| 154 | use an optimal pattern matching selector to create high-quality sequences of |
| 155 | native instructions. Alternative code generator designs based on pattern |
| 156 | expansion and aggressive iterative peephole optimization are much slower. This |
| 157 | design permits efficient compilation (important for JIT environments) and |
| 158 | aggressive optimization (used when generating code offline) by allowing |
| 159 | components of varying levels of sophistication to be used for any step of |
| 160 | compilation. |
| 161 | |
| 162 | In addition to these stages, target implementations can insert arbitrary |
| 163 | target-specific passes into the flow. For example, the X86 target uses a |
| 164 | special pass to handle the 80x87 floating point stack architecture. Other |
| 165 | targets with unusual requirements can be supported with custom passes as needed. |
| 166 | |
| 167 | Using TableGen for target description |
| 168 | ------------------------------------- |
| 169 | |
| 170 | The target description classes require a detailed description of the target |
| 171 | architecture. These target descriptions often have a large amount of common |
| 172 | information (e.g., an ``add`` instruction is almost identical to a ``sub`` |
| 173 | instruction). In order to allow the maximum amount of commonality to be |
| 174 | factored out, the LLVM code generator uses the |
Dmitri Gribenko | b129b9b | 2012-11-29 16:12:13 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 175 | :doc:`TableGen <TableGenFundamentals>` tool to describe big chunks of the |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 176 | target machine, which allows the use of domain-specific and target-specific |
| 177 | abstractions to reduce the amount of repetition. |
| 178 | |
| 179 | As LLVM continues to be developed and refined, we plan to move more and more of |
| 180 | the target description to the ``.td`` form. Doing so gives us a number of |
| 181 | advantages. The most important is that it makes it easier to port LLVM because |
| 182 | it reduces the amount of C++ code that has to be written, and the surface area |
| 183 | of the code generator that needs to be understood before someone can get |
| 184 | something working. Second, it makes it easier to change things. In particular, |
| 185 | if tables and other things are all emitted by ``tblgen``, we only need a change |
| 186 | in one place (``tblgen``) to update all of the targets to a new interface. |
| 187 | |
| 188 | .. _Abstract target description: |
| 189 | .. _target description: |
| 190 | |
| 191 | Target description classes |
| 192 | ========================== |
| 193 | |
| 194 | The LLVM target description classes (located in the ``include/llvm/Target`` |
| 195 | directory) provide an abstract description of the target machine independent of |
| 196 | any particular client. These classes are designed to capture the *abstract* |
| 197 | properties of the target (such as the instructions and registers it has), and do |
| 198 | not incorporate any particular pieces of code generation algorithms. |
| 199 | |
Micah Villmow | 791cfc2 | 2012-10-08 16:39:34 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 200 | All of the target description classes (except the :raw-html:`<tt>` `DataLayout`_ |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 201 | :raw-html:`</tt>` class) are designed to be subclassed by the concrete target |
| 202 | implementation, and have virtual methods implemented. To get to these |
| 203 | implementations, the :raw-html:`<tt>` `TargetMachine`_ :raw-html:`</tt>` class |
| 204 | provides accessors that should be implemented by the target. |
| 205 | |
| 206 | .. _TargetMachine: |
| 207 | |
| 208 | The ``TargetMachine`` class |
| 209 | --------------------------- |
| 210 | |
| 211 | The ``TargetMachine`` class provides virtual methods that are used to access the |
| 212 | target-specific implementations of the various target description classes via |
| 213 | the ``get*Info`` methods (``getInstrInfo``, ``getRegisterInfo``, |
| 214 | ``getFrameInfo``, etc.). This class is designed to be specialized by a concrete |
| 215 | target implementation (e.g., ``X86TargetMachine``) which implements the various |
| 216 | virtual methods. The only required target description class is the |
Micah Villmow | 791cfc2 | 2012-10-08 16:39:34 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 217 | :raw-html:`<tt>` `DataLayout`_ :raw-html:`</tt>` class, but if the code |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 218 | generator components are to be used, the other interfaces should be implemented |
| 219 | as well. |
| 220 | |
Micah Villmow | 791cfc2 | 2012-10-08 16:39:34 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 221 | .. _DataLayout: |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 222 | |
Micah Villmow | 791cfc2 | 2012-10-08 16:39:34 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 223 | The ``DataLayout`` class |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 224 | ------------------------ |
| 225 | |
Micah Villmow | 791cfc2 | 2012-10-08 16:39:34 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 226 | The ``DataLayout`` class is the only required target description class, and it |
Dmitri Gribenko | bb4c23f | 2012-11-02 18:06:51 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 227 | is the only class that is not extensible (you cannot derive a new class from |
Micah Villmow | 791cfc2 | 2012-10-08 16:39:34 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 228 | it). ``DataLayout`` specifies information about how the target lays out memory |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 229 | for structures, the alignment requirements for various data types, the size of |
| 230 | pointers in the target, and whether the target is little-endian or |
| 231 | big-endian. |
| 232 | |
Dmitri Gribenko | b129b9b | 2012-11-29 16:12:13 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 233 | .. _TargetLowering: |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 234 | |
| 235 | The ``TargetLowering`` class |
| 236 | ---------------------------- |
| 237 | |
| 238 | The ``TargetLowering`` class is used by SelectionDAG based instruction selectors |
| 239 | primarily to describe how LLVM code should be lowered to SelectionDAG |
| 240 | operations. Among other things, this class indicates: |
| 241 | |
| 242 | * an initial register class to use for various ``ValueType``\s, |
| 243 | |
| 244 | * which operations are natively supported by the target machine, |
| 245 | |
| 246 | * the return type of ``setcc`` operations, |
| 247 | |
| 248 | * the type to use for shift amounts, and |
| 249 | |
| 250 | * various high-level characteristics, like whether it is profitable to turn |
Dmitri Gribenko | bb4c23f | 2012-11-02 18:06:51 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 251 | division by a constant into a multiplication sequence. |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 252 | |
Dmitri Gribenko | 91cb694 | 2012-12-01 12:13:48 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 253 | .. _TargetRegisterInfo: |
| 254 | |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 255 | The ``TargetRegisterInfo`` class |
| 256 | -------------------------------- |
| 257 | |
| 258 | The ``TargetRegisterInfo`` class is used to describe the register file of the |
| 259 | target and any interactions between the registers. |
| 260 | |
Eli Bendersky | 97d6abe | 2012-10-31 16:41:07 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 261 | Registers are represented in the code generator by unsigned integers. Physical |
| 262 | registers (those that actually exist in the target description) are unique |
| 263 | small numbers, and virtual registers are generally large. Note that |
| 264 | register ``#0`` is reserved as a flag value. |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 265 | |
| 266 | Each register in the processor description has an associated |
| 267 | ``TargetRegisterDesc`` entry, which provides a textual name for the register |
| 268 | (used for assembly output and debugging dumps) and a set of aliases (used to |
| 269 | indicate whether one register overlaps with another). |
| 270 | |
| 271 | In addition to the per-register description, the ``TargetRegisterInfo`` class |
| 272 | exposes a set of processor specific register classes (instances of the |
| 273 | ``TargetRegisterClass`` class). Each register class contains sets of registers |
| 274 | that have the same properties (for example, they are all 32-bit integer |
| 275 | registers). Each SSA virtual register created by the instruction selector has |
| 276 | an associated register class. When the register allocator runs, it replaces |
| 277 | virtual registers with a physical register in the set. |
| 278 | |
| 279 | The target-specific implementations of these classes is auto-generated from a |
| 280 | `TableGen <TableGenFundamentals.html>`_ description of the register file. |
| 281 | |
| 282 | .. _TargetInstrInfo: |
| 283 | |
| 284 | The ``TargetInstrInfo`` class |
| 285 | ----------------------------- |
| 286 | |
| 287 | The ``TargetInstrInfo`` class is used to describe the machine instructions |
Eli Bendersky | 2f89e81 | 2013-01-30 20:54:21 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 288 | supported by the target. Descriptions define things like the mnemonic for |
| 289 | the opcode, the number of operands, the list of implicit register uses and defs, |
| 290 | whether the instruction has certain target-independent properties (accesses |
| 291 | memory, is commutable, etc), and holds any target-specific flags. |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 292 | |
| 293 | The ``TargetFrameInfo`` class |
| 294 | ----------------------------- |
| 295 | |
| 296 | The ``TargetFrameInfo`` class is used to provide information about the stack |
| 297 | frame layout of the target. It holds the direction of stack growth, the known |
| 298 | stack alignment on entry to each function, and the offset to the local area. |
| 299 | The offset to the local area is the offset from the stack pointer on function |
| 300 | entry to the first location where function data (local variables, spill |
| 301 | locations) can be stored. |
| 302 | |
| 303 | The ``TargetSubtarget`` class |
| 304 | ----------------------------- |
| 305 | |
| 306 | The ``TargetSubtarget`` class is used to provide information about the specific |
| 307 | chip set being targeted. A sub-target informs code generation of which |
| 308 | instructions are supported, instruction latencies and instruction execution |
| 309 | itinerary; i.e., which processing units are used, in what order, and for how |
| 310 | long. |
| 311 | |
| 312 | The ``TargetJITInfo`` class |
| 313 | --------------------------- |
| 314 | |
| 315 | The ``TargetJITInfo`` class exposes an abstract interface used by the |
| 316 | Just-In-Time code generator to perform target-specific activities, such as |
| 317 | emitting stubs. If a ``TargetMachine`` supports JIT code generation, it should |
| 318 | provide one of these objects through the ``getJITInfo`` method. |
| 319 | |
| 320 | .. _code being generated: |
| 321 | .. _machine code representation: |
| 322 | |
| 323 | Machine code description classes |
| 324 | ================================ |
| 325 | |
| 326 | At the high-level, LLVM code is translated to a machine specific representation |
| 327 | formed out of :raw-html:`<tt>` `MachineFunction`_ :raw-html:`</tt>`, |
| 328 | :raw-html:`<tt>` `MachineBasicBlock`_ :raw-html:`</tt>`, and :raw-html:`<tt>` |
| 329 | `MachineInstr`_ :raw-html:`</tt>` instances (defined in |
| 330 | ``include/llvm/CodeGen``). This representation is completely target agnostic, |
| 331 | representing instructions in their most abstract form: an opcode and a series of |
| 332 | operands. This representation is designed to support both an SSA representation |
| 333 | for machine code, as well as a register allocated, non-SSA form. |
| 334 | |
| 335 | .. _MachineInstr: |
| 336 | |
| 337 | The ``MachineInstr`` class |
| 338 | -------------------------- |
| 339 | |
| 340 | Target machine instructions are represented as instances of the ``MachineInstr`` |
| 341 | class. This class is an extremely abstract way of representing machine |
| 342 | instructions. In particular, it only keeps track of an opcode number and a set |
| 343 | of operands. |
| 344 | |
| 345 | The opcode number is a simple unsigned integer that only has meaning to a |
| 346 | specific backend. All of the instructions for a target should be defined in the |
| 347 | ``*InstrInfo.td`` file for the target. The opcode enum values are auto-generated |
| 348 | from this description. The ``MachineInstr`` class does not have any information |
| 349 | about how to interpret the instruction (i.e., what the semantics of the |
| 350 | instruction are); for that you must refer to the :raw-html:`<tt>` |
| 351 | `TargetInstrInfo`_ :raw-html:`</tt>` class. |
| 352 | |
| 353 | The operands of a machine instruction can be of several different types: a |
| 354 | register reference, a constant integer, a basic block reference, etc. In |
| 355 | addition, a machine operand should be marked as a def or a use of the value |
| 356 | (though only registers are allowed to be defs). |
| 357 | |
| 358 | By convention, the LLVM code generator orders instruction operands so that all |
| 359 | register definitions come before the register uses, even on architectures that |
| 360 | are normally printed in other orders. For example, the SPARC add instruction: |
| 361 | "``add %i1, %i2, %i3``" adds the "%i1", and "%i2" registers and stores the |
| 362 | result into the "%i3" register. In the LLVM code generator, the operands should |
| 363 | be stored as "``%i3, %i1, %i2``": with the destination first. |
| 364 | |
| 365 | Keeping destination (definition) operands at the beginning of the operand list |
| 366 | has several advantages. In particular, the debugging printer will print the |
| 367 | instruction like this: |
| 368 | |
| 369 | .. code-block:: llvm |
| 370 | |
| 371 | %r3 = add %i1, %i2 |
| 372 | |
| 373 | Also if the first operand is a def, it is easier to `create instructions`_ whose |
| 374 | only def is the first operand. |
| 375 | |
| 376 | .. _create instructions: |
| 377 | |
| 378 | Using the ``MachineInstrBuilder.h`` functions |
| 379 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 380 | |
| 381 | Machine instructions are created by using the ``BuildMI`` functions, located in |
| 382 | the ``include/llvm/CodeGen/MachineInstrBuilder.h`` file. The ``BuildMI`` |
| 383 | functions make it easy to build arbitrary machine instructions. Usage of the |
| 384 | ``BuildMI`` functions look like this: |
| 385 | |
| 386 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 387 | |
| 388 | // Create a 'DestReg = mov 42' (rendered in X86 assembly as 'mov DestReg, 42') |
| 389 | // instruction. The '1' specifies how many operands will be added. |
| 390 | MachineInstr *MI = BuildMI(X86::MOV32ri, 1, DestReg).addImm(42); |
| 391 | |
| 392 | // Create the same instr, but insert it at the end of a basic block. |
Dmitri Gribenko | 8bd5e35 | 2012-09-30 20:51:02 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 393 | MachineBasicBlock &MBB = ... |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 394 | BuildMI(MBB, X86::MOV32ri, 1, DestReg).addImm(42); |
| 395 | |
| 396 | // Create the same instr, but insert it before a specified iterator point. |
| 397 | MachineBasicBlock::iterator MBBI = ... |
| 398 | BuildMI(MBB, MBBI, X86::MOV32ri, 1, DestReg).addImm(42); |
| 399 | |
| 400 | // Create a 'cmp Reg, 0' instruction, no destination reg. |
| 401 | MI = BuildMI(X86::CMP32ri, 2).addReg(Reg).addImm(0); |
| 402 | |
| 403 | // Create an 'sahf' instruction which takes no operands and stores nothing. |
| 404 | MI = BuildMI(X86::SAHF, 0); |
| 405 | |
| 406 | // Create a self looping branch instruction. |
Dmitri Gribenko | 8bd5e35 | 2012-09-30 20:51:02 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 407 | BuildMI(MBB, X86::JNE, 1).addMBB(&MBB); |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 408 | |
| 409 | The key thing to remember with the ``BuildMI`` functions is that you have to |
| 410 | specify the number of operands that the machine instruction will take. This |
| 411 | allows for efficient memory allocation. You also need to specify if operands |
| 412 | default to be uses of values, not definitions. If you need to add a definition |
| 413 | operand (other than the optional destination register), you must explicitly mark |
| 414 | it as such: |
| 415 | |
| 416 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 417 | |
| 418 | MI.addReg(Reg, RegState::Define); |
| 419 | |
| 420 | Fixed (preassigned) registers |
| 421 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 422 | |
| 423 | One important issue that the code generator needs to be aware of is the presence |
| 424 | of fixed registers. In particular, there are often places in the instruction |
| 425 | stream where the register allocator *must* arrange for a particular value to be |
| 426 | in a particular register. This can occur due to limitations of the instruction |
| 427 | set (e.g., the X86 can only do a 32-bit divide with the ``EAX``/``EDX`` |
| 428 | registers), or external factors like calling conventions. In any case, the |
| 429 | instruction selector should emit code that copies a virtual register into or out |
| 430 | of a physical register when needed. |
| 431 | |
| 432 | For example, consider this simple LLVM example: |
| 433 | |
| 434 | .. code-block:: llvm |
| 435 | |
| 436 | define i32 @test(i32 %X, i32 %Y) { |
| 437 | %Z = udiv i32 %X, %Y |
| 438 | ret i32 %Z |
| 439 | } |
| 440 | |
| 441 | The X86 instruction selector produces this machine code for the ``div`` and |
| 442 | ``ret`` (use "``llc X.bc -march=x86 -print-machineinstrs``" to get this): |
| 443 | |
| 444 | .. code-block:: llvm |
| 445 | |
| 446 | ;; Start of div |
| 447 | %EAX = mov %reg1024 ;; Copy X (in reg1024) into EAX |
| 448 | %reg1027 = sar %reg1024, 31 |
| 449 | %EDX = mov %reg1027 ;; Sign extend X into EDX |
| 450 | idiv %reg1025 ;; Divide by Y (in reg1025) |
| 451 | %reg1026 = mov %EAX ;; Read the result (Z) out of EAX |
| 452 | |
| 453 | ;; Start of ret |
| 454 | %EAX = mov %reg1026 ;; 32-bit return value goes in EAX |
| 455 | ret |
| 456 | |
| 457 | By the end of code generation, the register allocator has coalesced the |
| 458 | registers and deleted the resultant identity moves producing the following |
| 459 | code: |
| 460 | |
| 461 | .. code-block:: llvm |
| 462 | |
| 463 | ;; X is in EAX, Y is in ECX |
| 464 | mov %EAX, %EDX |
| 465 | sar %EDX, 31 |
| 466 | idiv %ECX |
| 467 | ret |
| 468 | |
| 469 | This approach is extremely general (if it can handle the X86 architecture, it |
| 470 | can handle anything!) and allows all of the target specific knowledge about the |
| 471 | instruction stream to be isolated in the instruction selector. Note that |
| 472 | physical registers should have a short lifetime for good code generation, and |
| 473 | all physical registers are assumed dead on entry to and exit from basic blocks |
| 474 | (before register allocation). Thus, if you need a value to be live across basic |
| 475 | block boundaries, it *must* live in a virtual register. |
| 476 | |
| 477 | Call-clobbered registers |
| 478 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 479 | |
| 480 | Some machine instructions, like calls, clobber a large number of physical |
| 481 | registers. Rather than adding ``<def,dead>`` operands for all of them, it is |
| 482 | possible to use an ``MO_RegisterMask`` operand instead. The register mask |
| 483 | operand holds a bit mask of preserved registers, and everything else is |
| 484 | considered to be clobbered by the instruction. |
| 485 | |
| 486 | Machine code in SSA form |
| 487 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 488 | |
| 489 | ``MachineInstr``'s are initially selected in SSA-form, and are maintained in |
| 490 | SSA-form until register allocation happens. For the most part, this is |
| 491 | trivially simple since LLVM is already in SSA form; LLVM PHI nodes become |
| 492 | machine code PHI nodes, and virtual registers are only allowed to have a single |
| 493 | definition. |
| 494 | |
| 495 | After register allocation, machine code is no longer in SSA-form because there |
| 496 | are no virtual registers left in the code. |
| 497 | |
| 498 | .. _MachineBasicBlock: |
| 499 | |
| 500 | The ``MachineBasicBlock`` class |
| 501 | ------------------------------- |
| 502 | |
| 503 | The ``MachineBasicBlock`` class contains a list of machine instructions |
| 504 | (:raw-html:`<tt>` `MachineInstr`_ :raw-html:`</tt>` instances). It roughly |
| 505 | corresponds to the LLVM code input to the instruction selector, but there can be |
| 506 | a one-to-many mapping (i.e. one LLVM basic block can map to multiple machine |
| 507 | basic blocks). The ``MachineBasicBlock`` class has a "``getBasicBlock``" method, |
| 508 | which returns the LLVM basic block that it comes from. |
| 509 | |
| 510 | .. _MachineFunction: |
| 511 | |
| 512 | The ``MachineFunction`` class |
| 513 | ----------------------------- |
| 514 | |
| 515 | The ``MachineFunction`` class contains a list of machine basic blocks |
| 516 | (:raw-html:`<tt>` `MachineBasicBlock`_ :raw-html:`</tt>` instances). It |
| 517 | corresponds one-to-one with the LLVM function input to the instruction selector. |
| 518 | In addition to a list of basic blocks, the ``MachineFunction`` contains a a |
| 519 | ``MachineConstantPool``, a ``MachineFrameInfo``, a ``MachineFunctionInfo``, and |
| 520 | a ``MachineRegisterInfo``. See ``include/llvm/CodeGen/MachineFunction.h`` for |
| 521 | more information. |
| 522 | |
| 523 | ``MachineInstr Bundles`` |
| 524 | ------------------------ |
| 525 | |
| 526 | LLVM code generator can model sequences of instructions as MachineInstr |
| 527 | bundles. A MI bundle can model a VLIW group / pack which contains an arbitrary |
| 528 | number of parallel instructions. It can also be used to model a sequential list |
| 529 | of instructions (potentially with data dependencies) that cannot be legally |
| 530 | separated (e.g. ARM Thumb2 IT blocks). |
| 531 | |
| 532 | Conceptually a MI bundle is a MI with a number of other MIs nested within: |
| 533 | |
| 534 | :: |
| 535 | |
| 536 | -------------- |
| 537 | | Bundle | --------- |
| 538 | -------------- \ |
| 539 | | ---------------- |
| 540 | | | MI | |
| 541 | | ---------------- |
| 542 | | | |
| 543 | | ---------------- |
| 544 | | | MI | |
| 545 | | ---------------- |
| 546 | | | |
| 547 | | ---------------- |
| 548 | | | MI | |
| 549 | | ---------------- |
| 550 | | |
| 551 | -------------- |
| 552 | | Bundle | -------- |
| 553 | -------------- \ |
| 554 | | ---------------- |
| 555 | | | MI | |
| 556 | | ---------------- |
| 557 | | | |
| 558 | | ---------------- |
| 559 | | | MI | |
| 560 | | ---------------- |
| 561 | | | |
| 562 | | ... |
| 563 | | |
| 564 | -------------- |
| 565 | | Bundle | -------- |
| 566 | -------------- \ |
| 567 | | |
| 568 | ... |
| 569 | |
| 570 | MI bundle support does not change the physical representations of |
| 571 | MachineBasicBlock and MachineInstr. All the MIs (including top level and nested |
| 572 | ones) are stored as sequential list of MIs. The "bundled" MIs are marked with |
| 573 | the 'InsideBundle' flag. A top level MI with the special BUNDLE opcode is used |
| 574 | to represent the start of a bundle. It's legal to mix BUNDLE MIs with indiviual |
| 575 | MIs that are not inside bundles nor represent bundles. |
| 576 | |
| 577 | MachineInstr passes should operate on a MI bundle as a single unit. Member |
| 578 | methods have been taught to correctly handle bundles and MIs inside bundles. |
| 579 | The MachineBasicBlock iterator has been modified to skip over bundled MIs to |
| 580 | enforce the bundle-as-a-single-unit concept. An alternative iterator |
| 581 | instr_iterator has been added to MachineBasicBlock to allow passes to iterate |
| 582 | over all of the MIs in a MachineBasicBlock, including those which are nested |
| 583 | inside bundles. The top level BUNDLE instruction must have the correct set of |
| 584 | register MachineOperand's that represent the cumulative inputs and outputs of |
| 585 | the bundled MIs. |
| 586 | |
| 587 | Packing / bundling of MachineInstr's should be done as part of the register |
| 588 | allocation super-pass. More specifically, the pass which determines what MIs |
| 589 | should be bundled together must be done after code generator exits SSA form |
| 590 | (i.e. after two-address pass, PHI elimination, and copy coalescing). Bundles |
| 591 | should only be finalized (i.e. adding BUNDLE MIs and input and output register |
| 592 | MachineOperands) after virtual registers have been rewritten into physical |
| 593 | registers. This requirement eliminates the need to add virtual register operands |
| 594 | to BUNDLE instructions which would effectively double the virtual register def |
| 595 | and use lists. |
| 596 | |
| 597 | .. _MC Layer: |
| 598 | |
| 599 | The "MC" Layer |
| 600 | ============== |
| 601 | |
| 602 | The MC Layer is used to represent and process code at the raw machine code |
| 603 | level, devoid of "high level" information like "constant pools", "jump tables", |
| 604 | "global variables" or anything like that. At this level, LLVM handles things |
| 605 | like label names, machine instructions, and sections in the object file. The |
| 606 | code in this layer is used for a number of important purposes: the tail end of |
| 607 | the code generator uses it to write a .s or .o file, and it is also used by the |
| 608 | llvm-mc tool to implement standalone machine code assemblers and disassemblers. |
| 609 | |
| 610 | This section describes some of the important classes. There are also a number |
| 611 | of important subsystems that interact at this layer, they are described later in |
| 612 | this manual. |
| 613 | |
| 614 | .. _MCStreamer: |
| 615 | |
| 616 | The ``MCStreamer`` API |
| 617 | ---------------------- |
| 618 | |
| 619 | MCStreamer is best thought of as an assembler API. It is an abstract API which |
| 620 | is *implemented* in different ways (e.g. to output a .s file, output an ELF .o |
| 621 | file, etc) but whose API correspond directly to what you see in a .s file. |
| 622 | MCStreamer has one method per directive, such as EmitLabel, EmitSymbolAttribute, |
| 623 | SwitchSection, EmitValue (for .byte, .word), etc, which directly correspond to |
| 624 | assembly level directives. It also has an EmitInstruction method, which is used |
| 625 | to output an MCInst to the streamer. |
| 626 | |
| 627 | This API is most important for two clients: the llvm-mc stand-alone assembler is |
| 628 | effectively a parser that parses a line, then invokes a method on MCStreamer. In |
| 629 | the code generator, the `Code Emission`_ phase of the code generator lowers |
| 630 | higher level LLVM IR and Machine* constructs down to the MC layer, emitting |
| 631 | directives through MCStreamer. |
| 632 | |
| 633 | On the implementation side of MCStreamer, there are two major implementations: |
| 634 | one for writing out a .s file (MCAsmStreamer), and one for writing out a .o |
| 635 | file (MCObjectStreamer). MCAsmStreamer is a straight-forward implementation |
| 636 | that prints out a directive for each method (e.g. ``EmitValue -> .byte``), but |
| 637 | MCObjectStreamer implements a full assembler. |
| 638 | |
Rafael Espindola | c52566d | 2013-10-09 02:05:08 +0000 | [diff] [blame^] | 639 | For target specific directives, the MCStreamer has a MCTargetStreamer instance. |
| 640 | Each target that needs it defines a class that inherits from it and is a lot |
| 641 | like MCStreamer itself: It has one method per directive and two classes that |
| 642 | inherit from it, a target object streamer and a target asm streamer. The target |
| 643 | asm streamer just prints it (``emitFnStart -> .fnstrart``), and the object |
| 644 | streamer implement the assembler logic for it. |
| 645 | |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 646 | The ``MCContext`` class |
| 647 | ----------------------- |
| 648 | |
| 649 | The MCContext class is the owner of a variety of uniqued data structures at the |
| 650 | MC layer, including symbols, sections, etc. As such, this is the class that you |
| 651 | interact with to create symbols and sections. This class can not be subclassed. |
| 652 | |
| 653 | The ``MCSymbol`` class |
| 654 | ---------------------- |
| 655 | |
| 656 | The MCSymbol class represents a symbol (aka label) in the assembly file. There |
| 657 | are two interesting kinds of symbols: assembler temporary symbols, and normal |
| 658 | symbols. Assembler temporary symbols are used and processed by the assembler |
| 659 | but are discarded when the object file is produced. The distinction is usually |
| 660 | represented by adding a prefix to the label, for example "L" labels are |
| 661 | assembler temporary labels in MachO. |
| 662 | |
| 663 | MCSymbols are created by MCContext and uniqued there. This means that MCSymbols |
| 664 | can be compared for pointer equivalence to find out if they are the same symbol. |
| 665 | Note that pointer inequality does not guarantee the labels will end up at |
| 666 | different addresses though. It's perfectly legal to output something like this |
| 667 | to the .s file: |
| 668 | |
| 669 | :: |
| 670 | |
| 671 | foo: |
| 672 | bar: |
| 673 | .byte 4 |
| 674 | |
| 675 | In this case, both the foo and bar symbols will have the same address. |
| 676 | |
| 677 | The ``MCSection`` class |
| 678 | ----------------------- |
| 679 | |
| 680 | The ``MCSection`` class represents an object-file specific section. It is |
| 681 | subclassed by object file specific implementations (e.g. ``MCSectionMachO``, |
| 682 | ``MCSectionCOFF``, ``MCSectionELF``) and these are created and uniqued by |
| 683 | MCContext. The MCStreamer has a notion of the current section, which can be |
| 684 | changed with the SwitchToSection method (which corresponds to a ".section" |
| 685 | directive in a .s file). |
| 686 | |
| 687 | .. _MCInst: |
| 688 | |
| 689 | The ``MCInst`` class |
| 690 | -------------------- |
| 691 | |
| 692 | The ``MCInst`` class is a target-independent representation of an instruction. |
| 693 | It is a simple class (much more so than `MachineInstr`_) that holds a |
| 694 | target-specific opcode and a vector of MCOperands. MCOperand, in turn, is a |
| 695 | simple discriminated union of three cases: 1) a simple immediate, 2) a target |
| 696 | register ID, 3) a symbolic expression (e.g. "``Lfoo-Lbar+42``") as an MCExpr. |
| 697 | |
| 698 | MCInst is the common currency used to represent machine instructions at the MC |
| 699 | layer. It is the type used by the instruction encoder, the instruction printer, |
| 700 | and the type generated by the assembly parser and disassembler. |
| 701 | |
| 702 | .. _Target-independent algorithms: |
| 703 | .. _code generation algorithm: |
| 704 | |
| 705 | Target-independent code generation algorithms |
| 706 | ============================================= |
| 707 | |
| 708 | This section documents the phases described in the `high-level design of the |
| 709 | code generator`_. It explains how they work and some of the rationale behind |
| 710 | their design. |
| 711 | |
| 712 | .. _Instruction Selection: |
| 713 | .. _instruction selection section: |
| 714 | |
| 715 | Instruction Selection |
| 716 | --------------------- |
| 717 | |
| 718 | Instruction Selection is the process of translating LLVM code presented to the |
| 719 | code generator into target-specific machine instructions. There are several |
| 720 | well-known ways to do this in the literature. LLVM uses a SelectionDAG based |
| 721 | instruction selector. |
| 722 | |
| 723 | Portions of the DAG instruction selector are generated from the target |
| 724 | description (``*.td``) files. Our goal is for the entire instruction selector |
| 725 | to be generated from these ``.td`` files, though currently there are still |
| 726 | things that require custom C++ code. |
| 727 | |
| 728 | .. _SelectionDAG: |
| 729 | |
| 730 | Introduction to SelectionDAGs |
| 731 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 732 | |
| 733 | The SelectionDAG provides an abstraction for code representation in a way that |
| 734 | is amenable to instruction selection using automatic techniques |
| 735 | (e.g. dynamic-programming based optimal pattern matching selectors). It is also |
| 736 | well-suited to other phases of code generation; in particular, instruction |
| 737 | scheduling (SelectionDAG's are very close to scheduling DAGs post-selection). |
| 738 | Additionally, the SelectionDAG provides a host representation where a large |
| 739 | variety of very-low-level (but target-independent) `optimizations`_ may be |
| 740 | performed; ones which require extensive information about the instructions |
| 741 | efficiently supported by the target. |
| 742 | |
| 743 | The SelectionDAG is a Directed-Acyclic-Graph whose nodes are instances of the |
| 744 | ``SDNode`` class. The primary payload of the ``SDNode`` is its operation code |
| 745 | (Opcode) that indicates what operation the node performs and the operands to the |
| 746 | operation. The various operation node types are described at the top of the |
| 747 | ``include/llvm/CodeGen/SelectionDAGNodes.h`` file. |
| 748 | |
| 749 | Although most operations define a single value, each node in the graph may |
| 750 | define multiple values. For example, a combined div/rem operation will define |
| 751 | both the dividend and the remainder. Many other situations require multiple |
| 752 | values as well. Each node also has some number of operands, which are edges to |
| 753 | the node defining the used value. Because nodes may define multiple values, |
| 754 | edges are represented by instances of the ``SDValue`` class, which is a |
| 755 | ``<SDNode, unsigned>`` pair, indicating the node and result value being used, |
| 756 | respectively. Each value produced by an ``SDNode`` has an associated ``MVT`` |
| 757 | (Machine Value Type) indicating what the type of the value is. |
| 758 | |
| 759 | SelectionDAGs contain two different kinds of values: those that represent data |
| 760 | flow and those that represent control flow dependencies. Data values are simple |
| 761 | edges with an integer or floating point value type. Control edges are |
| 762 | represented as "chain" edges which are of type ``MVT::Other``. These edges |
| 763 | provide an ordering between nodes that have side effects (such as loads, stores, |
| 764 | calls, returns, etc). All nodes that have side effects should take a token |
| 765 | chain as input and produce a new one as output. By convention, token chain |
| 766 | inputs are always operand #0, and chain results are always the last value |
| 767 | produced by an operation. |
| 768 | |
| 769 | A SelectionDAG has designated "Entry" and "Root" nodes. The Entry node is |
| 770 | always a marker node with an Opcode of ``ISD::EntryToken``. The Root node is |
| 771 | the final side-effecting node in the token chain. For example, in a single basic |
| 772 | block function it would be the return node. |
| 773 | |
| 774 | One important concept for SelectionDAGs is the notion of a "legal" vs. |
| 775 | "illegal" DAG. A legal DAG for a target is one that only uses supported |
| 776 | operations and supported types. On a 32-bit PowerPC, for example, a DAG with a |
| 777 | value of type i1, i8, i16, or i64 would be illegal, as would a DAG that uses a |
| 778 | SREM or UREM operation. The `legalize types`_ and `legalize operations`_ phases |
| 779 | are responsible for turning an illegal DAG into a legal DAG. |
| 780 | |
Dmitri Gribenko | 91cb694 | 2012-12-01 12:13:48 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 781 | .. _SelectionDAG-Process: |
| 782 | |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 783 | SelectionDAG Instruction Selection Process |
| 784 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 785 | |
| 786 | SelectionDAG-based instruction selection consists of the following steps: |
| 787 | |
| 788 | #. `Build initial DAG`_ --- This stage performs a simple translation from the |
| 789 | input LLVM code to an illegal SelectionDAG. |
| 790 | |
| 791 | #. `Optimize SelectionDAG`_ --- This stage performs simple optimizations on the |
| 792 | SelectionDAG to simplify it, and recognize meta instructions (like rotates |
| 793 | and ``div``/``rem`` pairs) for targets that support these meta operations. |
| 794 | This makes the resultant code more efficient and the `select instructions |
| 795 | from DAG`_ phase (below) simpler. |
| 796 | |
| 797 | #. `Legalize SelectionDAG Types`_ --- This stage transforms SelectionDAG nodes |
| 798 | to eliminate any types that are unsupported on the target. |
| 799 | |
| 800 | #. `Optimize SelectionDAG`_ --- The SelectionDAG optimizer is run to clean up |
| 801 | redundancies exposed by type legalization. |
| 802 | |
| 803 | #. `Legalize SelectionDAG Ops`_ --- This stage transforms SelectionDAG nodes to |
| 804 | eliminate any operations that are unsupported on the target. |
| 805 | |
| 806 | #. `Optimize SelectionDAG`_ --- The SelectionDAG optimizer is run to eliminate |
| 807 | inefficiencies introduced by operation legalization. |
| 808 | |
| 809 | #. `Select instructions from DAG`_ --- Finally, the target instruction selector |
| 810 | matches the DAG operations to target instructions. This process translates |
| 811 | the target-independent input DAG into another DAG of target instructions. |
| 812 | |
| 813 | #. `SelectionDAG Scheduling and Formation`_ --- The last phase assigns a linear |
| 814 | order to the instructions in the target-instruction DAG and emits them into |
| 815 | the MachineFunction being compiled. This step uses traditional prepass |
| 816 | scheduling techniques. |
| 817 | |
| 818 | After all of these steps are complete, the SelectionDAG is destroyed and the |
| 819 | rest of the code generation passes are run. |
| 820 | |
| 821 | One great way to visualize what is going on here is to take advantage of a few |
| 822 | LLC command line options. The following options pop up a window displaying the |
| 823 | SelectionDAG at specific times (if you only get errors printed to the console |
| 824 | while using this, you probably `need to configure your |
| 825 | system <ProgrammersManual.html#ViewGraph>`_ to add support for it). |
| 826 | |
| 827 | * ``-view-dag-combine1-dags`` displays the DAG after being built, before the |
| 828 | first optimization pass. |
| 829 | |
| 830 | * ``-view-legalize-dags`` displays the DAG before Legalization. |
| 831 | |
| 832 | * ``-view-dag-combine2-dags`` displays the DAG before the second optimization |
| 833 | pass. |
| 834 | |
| 835 | * ``-view-isel-dags`` displays the DAG before the Select phase. |
| 836 | |
| 837 | * ``-view-sched-dags`` displays the DAG before Scheduling. |
| 838 | |
| 839 | The ``-view-sunit-dags`` displays the Scheduler's dependency graph. This graph |
| 840 | is based on the final SelectionDAG, with nodes that must be scheduled together |
| 841 | bundled into a single scheduling-unit node, and with immediate operands and |
| 842 | other nodes that aren't relevant for scheduling omitted. |
| 843 | |
| 844 | .. _Build initial DAG: |
| 845 | |
| 846 | Initial SelectionDAG Construction |
| 847 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 848 | |
| 849 | The initial SelectionDAG is na\ :raw-html:`ï`\ vely peephole expanded from |
Eli Bendersky | 87a1af4 | 2012-11-05 02:59:23 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 850 | the LLVM input by the ``SelectionDAGBuilder`` class. The intent of this pass |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 851 | is to expose as much low-level, target-specific details to the SelectionDAG as |
| 852 | possible. This pass is mostly hard-coded (e.g. an LLVM ``add`` turns into an |
| 853 | ``SDNode add`` while a ``getelementptr`` is expanded into the obvious |
| 854 | arithmetic). This pass requires target-specific hooks to lower calls, returns, |
| 855 | varargs, etc. For these features, the :raw-html:`<tt>` `TargetLowering`_ |
| 856 | :raw-html:`</tt>` interface is used. |
| 857 | |
| 858 | .. _legalize types: |
| 859 | .. _Legalize SelectionDAG Types: |
| 860 | .. _Legalize SelectionDAG Ops: |
| 861 | |
| 862 | SelectionDAG LegalizeTypes Phase |
| 863 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 864 | |
| 865 | The Legalize phase is in charge of converting a DAG to only use the types that |
| 866 | are natively supported by the target. |
| 867 | |
| 868 | There are two main ways of converting values of unsupported scalar types to |
| 869 | values of supported types: converting small types to larger types ("promoting"), |
| 870 | and breaking up large integer types into smaller ones ("expanding"). For |
| 871 | example, a target might require that all f32 values are promoted to f64 and that |
| 872 | all i1/i8/i16 values are promoted to i32. The same target might require that |
| 873 | all i64 values be expanded into pairs of i32 values. These changes can insert |
| 874 | sign and zero extensions as needed to make sure that the final code has the same |
| 875 | behavior as the input. |
| 876 | |
| 877 | There are two main ways of converting values of unsupported vector types to |
| 878 | value of supported types: splitting vector types, multiple times if necessary, |
| 879 | until a legal type is found, and extending vector types by adding elements to |
| 880 | the end to round them out to legal types ("widening"). If a vector gets split |
| 881 | all the way down to single-element parts with no supported vector type being |
| 882 | found, the elements are converted to scalars ("scalarizing"). |
| 883 | |
| 884 | A target implementation tells the legalizer which types are supported (and which |
| 885 | register class to use for them) by calling the ``addRegisterClass`` method in |
Dmitri Gribenko | b129b9b | 2012-11-29 16:12:13 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 886 | its ``TargetLowering`` constructor. |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 887 | |
| 888 | .. _legalize operations: |
| 889 | .. _Legalizer: |
| 890 | |
| 891 | SelectionDAG Legalize Phase |
| 892 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 893 | |
| 894 | The Legalize phase is in charge of converting a DAG to only use the operations |
| 895 | that are natively supported by the target. |
| 896 | |
| 897 | Targets often have weird constraints, such as not supporting every operation on |
| 898 | every supported datatype (e.g. X86 does not support byte conditional moves and |
| 899 | PowerPC does not support sign-extending loads from a 16-bit memory location). |
| 900 | Legalize takes care of this by open-coding another sequence of operations to |
| 901 | emulate the operation ("expansion"), by promoting one type to a larger type that |
| 902 | supports the operation ("promotion"), or by using a target-specific hook to |
| 903 | implement the legalization ("custom"). |
| 904 | |
| 905 | A target implementation tells the legalizer which operations are not supported |
| 906 | (and which of the above three actions to take) by calling the |
| 907 | ``setOperationAction`` method in its ``TargetLowering`` constructor. |
| 908 | |
| 909 | Prior to the existence of the Legalize passes, we required that every target |
| 910 | `selector`_ supported and handled every operator and type even if they are not |
| 911 | natively supported. The introduction of the Legalize phases allows all of the |
| 912 | canonicalization patterns to be shared across targets, and makes it very easy to |
| 913 | optimize the canonicalized code because it is still in the form of a DAG. |
| 914 | |
| 915 | .. _optimizations: |
| 916 | .. _Optimize SelectionDAG: |
| 917 | .. _selector: |
| 918 | |
| 919 | SelectionDAG Optimization Phase: the DAG Combiner |
| 920 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 921 | |
| 922 | The SelectionDAG optimization phase is run multiple times for code generation, |
| 923 | immediately after the DAG is built and once after each legalization. The first |
| 924 | run of the pass allows the initial code to be cleaned up (e.g. performing |
| 925 | optimizations that depend on knowing that the operators have restricted type |
| 926 | inputs). Subsequent runs of the pass clean up the messy code generated by the |
| 927 | Legalize passes, which allows Legalize to be very simple (it can focus on making |
| 928 | code legal instead of focusing on generating *good* and legal code). |
| 929 | |
| 930 | One important class of optimizations performed is optimizing inserted sign and |
| 931 | zero extension instructions. We currently use ad-hoc techniques, but could move |
| 932 | to more rigorous techniques in the future. Here are some good papers on the |
| 933 | subject: |
| 934 | |
| 935 | "`Widening integer arithmetic <http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~nr/pubs/widen-abstract.html>`_" :raw-html:`<br>` |
| 936 | Kevin Redwine and Norman Ramsey :raw-html:`<br>` |
| 937 | International Conference on Compiler Construction (CC) 2004 |
| 938 | |
| 939 | "`Effective sign extension elimination <http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=512529.512552>`_" :raw-html:`<br>` |
| 940 | Motohiro Kawahito, Hideaki Komatsu, and Toshio Nakatani :raw-html:`<br>` |
| 941 | Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2002 Conference on Programming Language Design |
| 942 | and Implementation. |
| 943 | |
| 944 | .. _Select instructions from DAG: |
| 945 | |
| 946 | SelectionDAG Select Phase |
| 947 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 948 | |
| 949 | The Select phase is the bulk of the target-specific code for instruction |
| 950 | selection. This phase takes a legal SelectionDAG as input, pattern matches the |
| 951 | instructions supported by the target to this DAG, and produces a new DAG of |
| 952 | target code. For example, consider the following LLVM fragment: |
| 953 | |
| 954 | .. code-block:: llvm |
| 955 | |
| 956 | %t1 = fadd float %W, %X |
| 957 | %t2 = fmul float %t1, %Y |
| 958 | %t3 = fadd float %t2, %Z |
| 959 | |
| 960 | This LLVM code corresponds to a SelectionDAG that looks basically like this: |
| 961 | |
| 962 | .. code-block:: llvm |
| 963 | |
| 964 | (fadd:f32 (fmul:f32 (fadd:f32 W, X), Y), Z) |
| 965 | |
| 966 | If a target supports floating point multiply-and-add (FMA) operations, one of |
| 967 | the adds can be merged with the multiply. On the PowerPC, for example, the |
| 968 | output of the instruction selector might look like this DAG: |
| 969 | |
| 970 | :: |
| 971 | |
| 972 | (FMADDS (FADDS W, X), Y, Z) |
| 973 | |
| 974 | The ``FMADDS`` instruction is a ternary instruction that multiplies its first |
| 975 | two operands and adds the third (as single-precision floating-point numbers). |
| 976 | The ``FADDS`` instruction is a simple binary single-precision add instruction. |
| 977 | To perform this pattern match, the PowerPC backend includes the following |
| 978 | instruction definitions: |
| 979 | |
Sean Silva | 2d4a477 | 2012-11-19 21:18:50 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 980 | .. code-block:: text |
| 981 | :emphasize-lines: 4-5,9 |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 982 | |
| 983 | def FMADDS : AForm_1<59, 29, |
| 984 | (ops F4RC:$FRT, F4RC:$FRA, F4RC:$FRC, F4RC:$FRB), |
| 985 | "fmadds $FRT, $FRA, $FRC, $FRB", |
| 986 | [(set F4RC:$FRT, (fadd (fmul F4RC:$FRA, F4RC:$FRC), |
| 987 | F4RC:$FRB))]>; |
| 988 | def FADDS : AForm_2<59, 21, |
| 989 | (ops F4RC:$FRT, F4RC:$FRA, F4RC:$FRB), |
| 990 | "fadds $FRT, $FRA, $FRB", |
| 991 | [(set F4RC:$FRT, (fadd F4RC:$FRA, F4RC:$FRB))]>; |
| 992 | |
Sean Silva | 2d4a477 | 2012-11-19 21:18:50 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 993 | The highlighted portion of the instruction definitions indicates the pattern |
| 994 | used to match the instructions. The DAG operators (like ``fmul``/``fadd``) |
| 995 | are defined in the ``include/llvm/Target/TargetSelectionDAG.td`` file. |
| 996 | "``F4RC``" is the register class of the input and result values. |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 997 | |
| 998 | The TableGen DAG instruction selector generator reads the instruction patterns |
| 999 | in the ``.td`` file and automatically builds parts of the pattern matching code |
| 1000 | for your target. It has the following strengths: |
| 1001 | |
| 1002 | * At compiler-compiler time, it analyzes your instruction patterns and tells you |
| 1003 | if your patterns make sense or not. |
| 1004 | |
| 1005 | * It can handle arbitrary constraints on operands for the pattern match. In |
| 1006 | particular, it is straight-forward to say things like "match any immediate |
| 1007 | that is a 13-bit sign-extended value". For examples, see the ``immSExt16`` |
| 1008 | and related ``tblgen`` classes in the PowerPC backend. |
| 1009 | |
| 1010 | * It knows several important identities for the patterns defined. For example, |
| 1011 | it knows that addition is commutative, so it allows the ``FMADDS`` pattern |
| 1012 | above to match "``(fadd X, (fmul Y, Z))``" as well as "``(fadd (fmul X, Y), |
| 1013 | Z)``", without the target author having to specially handle this case. |
| 1014 | |
| 1015 | * It has a full-featured type-inferencing system. In particular, you should |
| 1016 | rarely have to explicitly tell the system what type parts of your patterns |
| 1017 | are. In the ``FMADDS`` case above, we didn't have to tell ``tblgen`` that all |
| 1018 | of the nodes in the pattern are of type 'f32'. It was able to infer and |
| 1019 | propagate this knowledge from the fact that ``F4RC`` has type 'f32'. |
| 1020 | |
| 1021 | * Targets can define their own (and rely on built-in) "pattern fragments". |
| 1022 | Pattern fragments are chunks of reusable patterns that get inlined into your |
| 1023 | patterns during compiler-compiler time. For example, the integer "``(not |
| 1024 | x)``" operation is actually defined as a pattern fragment that expands as |
| 1025 | "``(xor x, -1)``", since the SelectionDAG does not have a native '``not``' |
| 1026 | operation. Targets can define their own short-hand fragments as they see fit. |
| 1027 | See the definition of '``not``' and '``ineg``' for examples. |
| 1028 | |
| 1029 | * In addition to instructions, targets can specify arbitrary patterns that map |
| 1030 | to one or more instructions using the 'Pat' class. For example, the PowerPC |
| 1031 | has no way to load an arbitrary integer immediate into a register in one |
| 1032 | instruction. To tell tblgen how to do this, it defines: |
| 1033 | |
| 1034 | :: |
| 1035 | |
| 1036 | // Arbitrary immediate support. Implement in terms of LIS/ORI. |
| 1037 | def : Pat<(i32 imm:$imm), |
| 1038 | (ORI (LIS (HI16 imm:$imm)), (LO16 imm:$imm))>; |
| 1039 | |
| 1040 | If none of the single-instruction patterns for loading an immediate into a |
| 1041 | register match, this will be used. This rule says "match an arbitrary i32 |
| 1042 | immediate, turning it into an ``ORI`` ('or a 16-bit immediate') and an ``LIS`` |
| 1043 | ('load 16-bit immediate, where the immediate is shifted to the left 16 bits') |
| 1044 | instruction". To make this work, the ``LO16``/``HI16`` node transformations |
| 1045 | are used to manipulate the input immediate (in this case, take the high or low |
| 1046 | 16-bits of the immediate). |
| 1047 | |
Ulrich Weigand | ec8d1a5 | 2013-03-19 19:51:09 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1048 | * When using the 'Pat' class to map a pattern to an instruction that has one |
| 1049 | or more complex operands (like e.g. `X86 addressing mode`_), the pattern may |
| 1050 | either specify the operand as a whole using a ``ComplexPattern``, or else it |
| 1051 | may specify the components of the complex operand separately. The latter is |
| 1052 | done e.g. for pre-increment instructions by the PowerPC back end: |
| 1053 | |
| 1054 | :: |
| 1055 | |
| 1056 | def STWU : DForm_1<37, (outs ptr_rc:$ea_res), (ins GPRC:$rS, memri:$dst), |
| 1057 | "stwu $rS, $dst", LdStStoreUpd, []>, |
| 1058 | RegConstraint<"$dst.reg = $ea_res">, NoEncode<"$ea_res">; |
| 1059 | |
| 1060 | def : Pat<(pre_store GPRC:$rS, ptr_rc:$ptrreg, iaddroff:$ptroff), |
| 1061 | (STWU GPRC:$rS, iaddroff:$ptroff, ptr_rc:$ptrreg)>; |
| 1062 | |
| 1063 | Here, the pair of ``ptroff`` and ``ptrreg`` operands is matched onto the |
| 1064 | complex operand ``dst`` of class ``memri`` in the ``STWU`` instruction. |
| 1065 | |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1066 | * While the system does automate a lot, it still allows you to write custom C++ |
| 1067 | code to match special cases if there is something that is hard to |
| 1068 | express. |
| 1069 | |
| 1070 | While it has many strengths, the system currently has some limitations, |
| 1071 | primarily because it is a work in progress and is not yet finished: |
| 1072 | |
| 1073 | * Overall, there is no way to define or match SelectionDAG nodes that define |
| 1074 | multiple values (e.g. ``SMUL_LOHI``, ``LOAD``, ``CALL``, etc). This is the |
| 1075 | biggest reason that you currently still *have to* write custom C++ code |
| 1076 | for your instruction selector. |
| 1077 | |
| 1078 | * There is no great way to support matching complex addressing modes yet. In |
| 1079 | the future, we will extend pattern fragments to allow them to define multiple |
| 1080 | values (e.g. the four operands of the `X86 addressing mode`_, which are |
| 1081 | currently matched with custom C++ code). In addition, we'll extend fragments |
| 1082 | so that a fragment can match multiple different patterns. |
| 1083 | |
| 1084 | * We don't automatically infer flags like ``isStore``/``isLoad`` yet. |
| 1085 | |
| 1086 | * We don't automatically generate the set of supported registers and operations |
| 1087 | for the `Legalizer`_ yet. |
| 1088 | |
| 1089 | * We don't have a way of tying in custom legalized nodes yet. |
| 1090 | |
| 1091 | Despite these limitations, the instruction selector generator is still quite |
| 1092 | useful for most of the binary and logical operations in typical instruction |
| 1093 | sets. If you run into any problems or can't figure out how to do something, |
| 1094 | please let Chris know! |
| 1095 | |
| 1096 | .. _Scheduling and Formation: |
| 1097 | .. _SelectionDAG Scheduling and Formation: |
| 1098 | |
| 1099 | SelectionDAG Scheduling and Formation Phase |
| 1100 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1101 | |
| 1102 | The scheduling phase takes the DAG of target instructions from the selection |
| 1103 | phase and assigns an order. The scheduler can pick an order depending on |
| 1104 | various constraints of the machines (i.e. order for minimal register pressure or |
| 1105 | try to cover instruction latencies). Once an order is established, the DAG is |
| 1106 | converted to a list of :raw-html:`<tt>` `MachineInstr`_\s :raw-html:`</tt>` and |
| 1107 | the SelectionDAG is destroyed. |
| 1108 | |
| 1109 | Note that this phase is logically separate from the instruction selection phase, |
| 1110 | but is tied to it closely in the code because it operates on SelectionDAGs. |
| 1111 | |
| 1112 | Future directions for the SelectionDAG |
| 1113 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1114 | |
| 1115 | #. Optional function-at-a-time selection. |
| 1116 | |
| 1117 | #. Auto-generate entire selector from ``.td`` file. |
| 1118 | |
| 1119 | .. _SSA-based Machine Code Optimizations: |
| 1120 | |
| 1121 | SSA-based Machine Code Optimizations |
| 1122 | ------------------------------------ |
| 1123 | |
| 1124 | To Be Written |
| 1125 | |
| 1126 | Live Intervals |
| 1127 | -------------- |
| 1128 | |
| 1129 | Live Intervals are the ranges (intervals) where a variable is *live*. They are |
| 1130 | used by some `register allocator`_ passes to determine if two or more virtual |
| 1131 | registers which require the same physical register are live at the same point in |
| 1132 | the program (i.e., they conflict). When this situation occurs, one virtual |
| 1133 | register must be *spilled*. |
| 1134 | |
| 1135 | Live Variable Analysis |
| 1136 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1137 | |
| 1138 | The first step in determining the live intervals of variables is to calculate |
| 1139 | the set of registers that are immediately dead after the instruction (i.e., the |
| 1140 | instruction calculates the value, but it is never used) and the set of registers |
| 1141 | that are used by the instruction, but are never used after the instruction |
| 1142 | (i.e., they are killed). Live variable information is computed for |
| 1143 | each *virtual* register and *register allocatable* physical register |
| 1144 | in the function. This is done in a very efficient manner because it uses SSA to |
| 1145 | sparsely compute lifetime information for virtual registers (which are in SSA |
| 1146 | form) and only has to track physical registers within a block. Before register |
| 1147 | allocation, LLVM can assume that physical registers are only live within a |
| 1148 | single basic block. This allows it to do a single, local analysis to resolve |
| 1149 | physical register lifetimes within each basic block. If a physical register is |
| 1150 | not register allocatable (e.g., a stack pointer or condition codes), it is not |
| 1151 | tracked. |
| 1152 | |
| 1153 | Physical registers may be live in to or out of a function. Live in values are |
| 1154 | typically arguments in registers. Live out values are typically return values in |
| 1155 | registers. Live in values are marked as such, and are given a dummy "defining" |
| 1156 | instruction during live intervals analysis. If the last basic block of a |
| 1157 | function is a ``return``, then it's marked as using all live out values in the |
| 1158 | function. |
| 1159 | |
| 1160 | ``PHI`` nodes need to be handled specially, because the calculation of the live |
| 1161 | variable information from a depth first traversal of the CFG of the function |
| 1162 | won't guarantee that a virtual register used by the ``PHI`` node is defined |
| 1163 | before it's used. When a ``PHI`` node is encountered, only the definition is |
| 1164 | handled, because the uses will be handled in other basic blocks. |
| 1165 | |
| 1166 | For each ``PHI`` node of the current basic block, we simulate an assignment at |
| 1167 | the end of the current basic block and traverse the successor basic blocks. If a |
| 1168 | successor basic block has a ``PHI`` node and one of the ``PHI`` node's operands |
| 1169 | is coming from the current basic block, then the variable is marked as *alive* |
| 1170 | within the current basic block and all of its predecessor basic blocks, until |
| 1171 | the basic block with the defining instruction is encountered. |
| 1172 | |
| 1173 | Live Intervals Analysis |
| 1174 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1175 | |
| 1176 | We now have the information available to perform the live intervals analysis and |
| 1177 | build the live intervals themselves. We start off by numbering the basic blocks |
| 1178 | and machine instructions. We then handle the "live-in" values. These are in |
| 1179 | physical registers, so the physical register is assumed to be killed by the end |
| 1180 | of the basic block. Live intervals for virtual registers are computed for some |
| 1181 | ordering of the machine instructions ``[1, N]``. A live interval is an interval |
| 1182 | ``[i, j)``, where ``1 >= i >= j > N``, for which a variable is live. |
| 1183 | |
| 1184 | .. note:: |
| 1185 | More to come... |
| 1186 | |
| 1187 | .. _Register Allocation: |
| 1188 | .. _register allocator: |
| 1189 | |
| 1190 | Register Allocation |
| 1191 | ------------------- |
| 1192 | |
| 1193 | The *Register Allocation problem* consists in mapping a program |
| 1194 | :raw-html:`<b><tt>` P\ :sub:`v`\ :raw-html:`</tt></b>`, that can use an unbounded |
| 1195 | number of virtual registers, to a program :raw-html:`<b><tt>` P\ :sub:`p`\ |
| 1196 | :raw-html:`</tt></b>` that contains a finite (possibly small) number of physical |
| 1197 | registers. Each target architecture has a different number of physical |
| 1198 | registers. If the number of physical registers is not enough to accommodate all |
| 1199 | the virtual registers, some of them will have to be mapped into memory. These |
| 1200 | virtuals are called *spilled virtuals*. |
| 1201 | |
| 1202 | How registers are represented in LLVM |
| 1203 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1204 | |
| 1205 | In LLVM, physical registers are denoted by integer numbers that normally range |
| 1206 | from 1 to 1023. To see how this numbering is defined for a particular |
| 1207 | architecture, you can read the ``GenRegisterNames.inc`` file for that |
| 1208 | architecture. For instance, by inspecting |
| 1209 | ``lib/Target/X86/X86GenRegisterInfo.inc`` we see that the 32-bit register |
| 1210 | ``EAX`` is denoted by 43, and the MMX register ``MM0`` is mapped to 65. |
| 1211 | |
| 1212 | Some architectures contain registers that share the same physical location. A |
| 1213 | notable example is the X86 platform. For instance, in the X86 architecture, the |
| 1214 | registers ``EAX``, ``AX`` and ``AL`` share the first eight bits. These physical |
| 1215 | registers are marked as *aliased* in LLVM. Given a particular architecture, you |
| 1216 | can check which registers are aliased by inspecting its ``RegisterInfo.td`` |
| 1217 | file. Moreover, the class ``MCRegAliasIterator`` enumerates all the physical |
| 1218 | registers aliased to a register. |
| 1219 | |
| 1220 | Physical registers, in LLVM, are grouped in *Register Classes*. Elements in the |
| 1221 | same register class are functionally equivalent, and can be interchangeably |
| 1222 | used. Each virtual register can only be mapped to physical registers of a |
| 1223 | particular class. For instance, in the X86 architecture, some virtuals can only |
| 1224 | be allocated to 8 bit registers. A register class is described by |
| 1225 | ``TargetRegisterClass`` objects. To discover if a virtual register is |
| 1226 | compatible with a given physical, this code can be used:</p> |
| 1227 | |
| 1228 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 1229 | |
| 1230 | bool RegMapping_Fer::compatible_class(MachineFunction &mf, |
| 1231 | unsigned v_reg, |
| 1232 | unsigned p_reg) { |
| 1233 | assert(TargetRegisterInfo::isPhysicalRegister(p_reg) && |
| 1234 | "Target register must be physical"); |
| 1235 | const TargetRegisterClass *trc = mf.getRegInfo().getRegClass(v_reg); |
| 1236 | return trc->contains(p_reg); |
| 1237 | } |
| 1238 | |
| 1239 | Sometimes, mostly for debugging purposes, it is useful to change the number of |
| 1240 | physical registers available in the target architecture. This must be done |
| 1241 | statically, inside the ``TargetRegsterInfo.td`` file. Just ``grep`` for |
| 1242 | ``RegisterClass``, the last parameter of which is a list of registers. Just |
| 1243 | commenting some out is one simple way to avoid them being used. A more polite |
| 1244 | way is to explicitly exclude some registers from the *allocation order*. See the |
| 1245 | definition of the ``GR8`` register class in |
| 1246 | ``lib/Target/X86/X86RegisterInfo.td`` for an example of this. |
| 1247 | |
| 1248 | Virtual registers are also denoted by integer numbers. Contrary to physical |
| 1249 | registers, different virtual registers never share the same number. Whereas |
| 1250 | physical registers are statically defined in a ``TargetRegisterInfo.td`` file |
| 1251 | and cannot be created by the application developer, that is not the case with |
| 1252 | virtual registers. In order to create new virtual registers, use the method |
| 1253 | ``MachineRegisterInfo::createVirtualRegister()``. This method will return a new |
| 1254 | virtual register. Use an ``IndexedMap<Foo, VirtReg2IndexFunctor>`` to hold |
| 1255 | information per virtual register. If you need to enumerate all virtual |
| 1256 | registers, use the function ``TargetRegisterInfo::index2VirtReg()`` to find the |
| 1257 | virtual register numbers: |
| 1258 | |
| 1259 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 1260 | |
| 1261 | for (unsigned i = 0, e = MRI->getNumVirtRegs(); i != e; ++i) { |
| 1262 | unsigned VirtReg = TargetRegisterInfo::index2VirtReg(i); |
| 1263 | stuff(VirtReg); |
| 1264 | } |
| 1265 | |
| 1266 | Before register allocation, the operands of an instruction are mostly virtual |
| 1267 | registers, although physical registers may also be used. In order to check if a |
| 1268 | given machine operand is a register, use the boolean function |
| 1269 | ``MachineOperand::isRegister()``. To obtain the integer code of a register, use |
| 1270 | ``MachineOperand::getReg()``. An instruction may define or use a register. For |
| 1271 | instance, ``ADD reg:1026 := reg:1025 reg:1024`` defines the registers 1024, and |
| 1272 | uses registers 1025 and 1026. Given a register operand, the method |
| 1273 | ``MachineOperand::isUse()`` informs if that register is being used by the |
| 1274 | instruction. The method ``MachineOperand::isDef()`` informs if that registers is |
| 1275 | being defined. |
| 1276 | |
| 1277 | We will call physical registers present in the LLVM bitcode before register |
| 1278 | allocation *pre-colored registers*. Pre-colored registers are used in many |
| 1279 | different situations, for instance, to pass parameters of functions calls, and |
| 1280 | to store results of particular instructions. There are two types of pre-colored |
| 1281 | registers: the ones *implicitly* defined, and those *explicitly* |
| 1282 | defined. Explicitly defined registers are normal operands, and can be accessed |
| 1283 | with ``MachineInstr::getOperand(int)::getReg()``. In order to check which |
| 1284 | registers are implicitly defined by an instruction, use the |
| 1285 | ``TargetInstrInfo::get(opcode)::ImplicitDefs``, where ``opcode`` is the opcode |
| 1286 | of the target instruction. One important difference between explicit and |
| 1287 | implicit physical registers is that the latter are defined statically for each |
| 1288 | instruction, whereas the former may vary depending on the program being |
| 1289 | compiled. For example, an instruction that represents a function call will |
| 1290 | always implicitly define or use the same set of physical registers. To read the |
| 1291 | registers implicitly used by an instruction, use |
| 1292 | ``TargetInstrInfo::get(opcode)::ImplicitUses``. Pre-colored registers impose |
| 1293 | constraints on any register allocation algorithm. The register allocator must |
| 1294 | make sure that none of them are overwritten by the values of virtual registers |
| 1295 | while still alive. |
| 1296 | |
| 1297 | Mapping virtual registers to physical registers |
| 1298 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1299 | |
| 1300 | There are two ways to map virtual registers to physical registers (or to memory |
| 1301 | slots). The first way, that we will call *direct mapping*, is based on the use |
| 1302 | of methods of the classes ``TargetRegisterInfo``, and ``MachineOperand``. The |
| 1303 | second way, that we will call *indirect mapping*, relies on the ``VirtRegMap`` |
| 1304 | class in order to insert loads and stores sending and getting values to and from |
| 1305 | memory. |
| 1306 | |
| 1307 | The direct mapping provides more flexibility to the developer of the register |
| 1308 | allocator; however, it is more error prone, and demands more implementation |
| 1309 | work. Basically, the programmer will have to specify where load and store |
| 1310 | instructions should be inserted in the target function being compiled in order |
| 1311 | to get and store values in memory. To assign a physical register to a virtual |
| 1312 | register present in a given operand, use ``MachineOperand::setReg(p_reg)``. To |
| 1313 | insert a store instruction, use ``TargetInstrInfo::storeRegToStackSlot(...)``, |
| 1314 | and to insert a load instruction, use ``TargetInstrInfo::loadRegFromStackSlot``. |
| 1315 | |
| 1316 | The indirect mapping shields the application developer from the complexities of |
| 1317 | inserting load and store instructions. In order to map a virtual register to a |
| 1318 | physical one, use ``VirtRegMap::assignVirt2Phys(vreg, preg)``. In order to map |
| 1319 | a certain virtual register to memory, use |
| 1320 | ``VirtRegMap::assignVirt2StackSlot(vreg)``. This method will return the stack |
| 1321 | slot where ``vreg``'s value will be located. If it is necessary to map another |
| 1322 | virtual register to the same stack slot, use |
| 1323 | ``VirtRegMap::assignVirt2StackSlot(vreg, stack_location)``. One important point |
| 1324 | to consider when using the indirect mapping, is that even if a virtual register |
| 1325 | is mapped to memory, it still needs to be mapped to a physical register. This |
| 1326 | physical register is the location where the virtual register is supposed to be |
| 1327 | found before being stored or after being reloaded. |
| 1328 | |
| 1329 | If the indirect strategy is used, after all the virtual registers have been |
| 1330 | mapped to physical registers or stack slots, it is necessary to use a spiller |
| 1331 | object to place load and store instructions in the code. Every virtual that has |
| 1332 | been mapped to a stack slot will be stored to memory after been defined and will |
| 1333 | be loaded before being used. The implementation of the spiller tries to recycle |
| 1334 | load/store instructions, avoiding unnecessary instructions. For an example of |
| 1335 | how to invoke the spiller, see ``RegAllocLinearScan::runOnMachineFunction`` in |
| 1336 | ``lib/CodeGen/RegAllocLinearScan.cpp``. |
| 1337 | |
| 1338 | Handling two address instructions |
| 1339 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1340 | |
| 1341 | With very rare exceptions (e.g., function calls), the LLVM machine code |
| 1342 | instructions are three address instructions. That is, each instruction is |
| 1343 | expected to define at most one register, and to use at most two registers. |
| 1344 | However, some architectures use two address instructions. In this case, the |
| 1345 | defined register is also one of the used register. For instance, an instruction |
| 1346 | such as ``ADD %EAX, %EBX``, in X86 is actually equivalent to ``%EAX = %EAX + |
| 1347 | %EBX``. |
| 1348 | |
| 1349 | In order to produce correct code, LLVM must convert three address instructions |
| 1350 | that represent two address instructions into true two address instructions. LLVM |
| 1351 | provides the pass ``TwoAddressInstructionPass`` for this specific purpose. It |
| 1352 | must be run before register allocation takes place. After its execution, the |
| 1353 | resulting code may no longer be in SSA form. This happens, for instance, in |
| 1354 | situations where an instruction such as ``%a = ADD %b %c`` is converted to two |
| 1355 | instructions such as: |
| 1356 | |
| 1357 | :: |
| 1358 | |
| 1359 | %a = MOVE %b |
| 1360 | %a = ADD %a %c |
| 1361 | |
| 1362 | Notice that, internally, the second instruction is represented as ``ADD |
| 1363 | %a[def/use] %c``. I.e., the register operand ``%a`` is both used and defined by |
| 1364 | the instruction. |
| 1365 | |
| 1366 | The SSA deconstruction phase |
| 1367 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1368 | |
| 1369 | An important transformation that happens during register allocation is called |
| 1370 | the *SSA Deconstruction Phase*. The SSA form simplifies many analyses that are |
| 1371 | performed on the control flow graph of programs. However, traditional |
| 1372 | instruction sets do not implement PHI instructions. Thus, in order to generate |
| 1373 | executable code, compilers must replace PHI instructions with other instructions |
| 1374 | that preserve their semantics. |
| 1375 | |
| 1376 | There are many ways in which PHI instructions can safely be removed from the |
| 1377 | target code. The most traditional PHI deconstruction algorithm replaces PHI |
| 1378 | instructions with copy instructions. That is the strategy adopted by LLVM. The |
| 1379 | SSA deconstruction algorithm is implemented in |
| 1380 | ``lib/CodeGen/PHIElimination.cpp``. In order to invoke this pass, the identifier |
| 1381 | ``PHIEliminationID`` must be marked as required in the code of the register |
| 1382 | allocator. |
| 1383 | |
| 1384 | Instruction folding |
| 1385 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1386 | |
| 1387 | *Instruction folding* is an optimization performed during register allocation |
| 1388 | that removes unnecessary copy instructions. For instance, a sequence of |
| 1389 | instructions such as: |
| 1390 | |
| 1391 | :: |
| 1392 | |
| 1393 | %EBX = LOAD %mem_address |
| 1394 | %EAX = COPY %EBX |
| 1395 | |
| 1396 | can be safely substituted by the single instruction: |
| 1397 | |
| 1398 | :: |
| 1399 | |
| 1400 | %EAX = LOAD %mem_address |
| 1401 | |
| 1402 | Instructions can be folded with the |
| 1403 | ``TargetRegisterInfo::foldMemoryOperand(...)`` method. Care must be taken when |
| 1404 | folding instructions; a folded instruction can be quite different from the |
| 1405 | original instruction. See ``LiveIntervals::addIntervalsForSpills`` in |
| 1406 | ``lib/CodeGen/LiveIntervalAnalysis.cpp`` for an example of its use. |
| 1407 | |
| 1408 | Built in register allocators |
| 1409 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1410 | |
| 1411 | The LLVM infrastructure provides the application developer with three different |
| 1412 | register allocators: |
| 1413 | |
| 1414 | * *Fast* --- This register allocator is the default for debug builds. It |
| 1415 | allocates registers on a basic block level, attempting to keep values in |
| 1416 | registers and reusing registers as appropriate. |
| 1417 | |
| 1418 | * *Basic* --- This is an incremental approach to register allocation. Live |
| 1419 | ranges are assigned to registers one at a time in an order that is driven by |
| 1420 | heuristics. Since code can be rewritten on-the-fly during allocation, this |
| 1421 | framework allows interesting allocators to be developed as extensions. It is |
| 1422 | not itself a production register allocator but is a potentially useful |
| 1423 | stand-alone mode for triaging bugs and as a performance baseline. |
| 1424 | |
| 1425 | * *Greedy* --- *The default allocator*. This is a highly tuned implementation of |
| 1426 | the *Basic* allocator that incorporates global live range splitting. This |
| 1427 | allocator works hard to minimize the cost of spill code. |
| 1428 | |
| 1429 | * *PBQP* --- A Partitioned Boolean Quadratic Programming (PBQP) based register |
| 1430 | allocator. This allocator works by constructing a PBQP problem representing |
| 1431 | the register allocation problem under consideration, solving this using a PBQP |
| 1432 | solver, and mapping the solution back to a register assignment. |
| 1433 | |
| 1434 | The type of register allocator used in ``llc`` can be chosen with the command |
| 1435 | line option ``-regalloc=...``: |
| 1436 | |
| 1437 | .. code-block:: bash |
| 1438 | |
| 1439 | $ llc -regalloc=linearscan file.bc -o ln.s |
| 1440 | $ llc -regalloc=fast file.bc -o fa.s |
| 1441 | $ llc -regalloc=pbqp file.bc -o pbqp.s |
| 1442 | |
| 1443 | .. _Prolog/Epilog Code Insertion: |
| 1444 | |
| 1445 | Prolog/Epilog Code Insertion |
| 1446 | ---------------------------- |
| 1447 | |
| 1448 | Compact Unwind |
| 1449 | |
| 1450 | Throwing an exception requires *unwinding* out of a function. The information on |
| 1451 | how to unwind a given function is traditionally expressed in DWARF unwind |
| 1452 | (a.k.a. frame) info. But that format was originally developed for debuggers to |
| 1453 | backtrace, and each Frame Description Entry (FDE) requires ~20-30 bytes per |
| 1454 | function. There is also the cost of mapping from an address in a function to the |
| 1455 | corresponding FDE at runtime. An alternative unwind encoding is called *compact |
| 1456 | unwind* and requires just 4-bytes per function. |
| 1457 | |
| 1458 | The compact unwind encoding is a 32-bit value, which is encoded in an |
| 1459 | architecture-specific way. It specifies which registers to restore and from |
| 1460 | where, and how to unwind out of the function. When the linker creates a final |
| 1461 | linked image, it will create a ``__TEXT,__unwind_info`` section. This section is |
| 1462 | a small and fast way for the runtime to access unwind info for any given |
| 1463 | function. If we emit compact unwind info for the function, that compact unwind |
| 1464 | info will be encoded in the ``__TEXT,__unwind_info`` section. If we emit DWARF |
| 1465 | unwind info, the ``__TEXT,__unwind_info`` section will contain the offset of the |
| 1466 | FDE in the ``__TEXT,__eh_frame`` section in the final linked image. |
| 1467 | |
| 1468 | For X86, there are three modes for the compact unwind encoding: |
| 1469 | |
| 1470 | *Function with a Frame Pointer (``EBP`` or ``RBP``)* |
| 1471 | ``EBP/RBP``-based frame, where ``EBP/RBP`` is pushed onto the stack |
| 1472 | immediately after the return address, then ``ESP/RSP`` is moved to |
| 1473 | ``EBP/RBP``. Thus to unwind, ``ESP/RSP`` is restored with the current |
| 1474 | ``EBP/RBP`` value, then ``EBP/RBP`` is restored by popping the stack, and the |
| 1475 | return is done by popping the stack once more into the PC. All non-volatile |
| 1476 | registers that need to be restored must have been saved in a small range on |
| 1477 | the stack that starts ``EBP-4`` to ``EBP-1020`` (``RBP-8`` to |
| 1478 | ``RBP-1020``). The offset (divided by 4 in 32-bit mode and 8 in 64-bit mode) |
| 1479 | is encoded in bits 16-23 (mask: ``0x00FF0000``). The registers saved are |
| 1480 | encoded in bits 0-14 (mask: ``0x00007FFF``) as five 3-bit entries from the |
| 1481 | following table: |
| 1482 | |
| 1483 | ============== ============= =============== |
| 1484 | Compact Number i386 Register x86-64 Register |
| 1485 | ============== ============= =============== |
| 1486 | 1 ``EBX`` ``RBX`` |
| 1487 | 2 ``ECX`` ``R12`` |
| 1488 | 3 ``EDX`` ``R13`` |
| 1489 | 4 ``EDI`` ``R14`` |
| 1490 | 5 ``ESI`` ``R15`` |
| 1491 | 6 ``EBP`` ``RBP`` |
| 1492 | ============== ============= =============== |
| 1493 | |
| 1494 | *Frameless with a Small Constant Stack Size (``EBP`` or ``RBP`` is not used as a frame pointer)* |
| 1495 | To return, a constant (encoded in the compact unwind encoding) is added to the |
| 1496 | ``ESP/RSP``. Then the return is done by popping the stack into the PC. All |
| 1497 | non-volatile registers that need to be restored must have been saved on the |
| 1498 | stack immediately after the return address. The stack size (divided by 4 in |
| 1499 | 32-bit mode and 8 in 64-bit mode) is encoded in bits 16-23 (mask: |
| 1500 | ``0x00FF0000``). There is a maximum stack size of 1024 bytes in 32-bit mode |
| 1501 | and 2048 in 64-bit mode. The number of registers saved is encoded in bits 9-12 |
| 1502 | (mask: ``0x00001C00``). Bits 0-9 (mask: ``0x000003FF``) contain which |
| 1503 | registers were saved and their order. (See the |
| 1504 | ``encodeCompactUnwindRegistersWithoutFrame()`` function in |
| 1505 | ``lib/Target/X86FrameLowering.cpp`` for the encoding algorithm.) |
| 1506 | |
| 1507 | *Frameless with a Large Constant Stack Size (``EBP`` or ``RBP`` is not used as a frame pointer)* |
| 1508 | This case is like the "Frameless with a Small Constant Stack Size" case, but |
| 1509 | the stack size is too large to encode in the compact unwind encoding. Instead |
| 1510 | it requires that the function contains "``subl $nnnnnn, %esp``" in its |
| 1511 | prolog. The compact encoding contains the offset to the ``$nnnnnn`` value in |
| 1512 | the function in bits 9-12 (mask: ``0x00001C00``). |
| 1513 | |
| 1514 | .. _Late Machine Code Optimizations: |
| 1515 | |
| 1516 | Late Machine Code Optimizations |
| 1517 | ------------------------------- |
| 1518 | |
| 1519 | .. note:: |
| 1520 | |
| 1521 | To Be Written |
| 1522 | |
| 1523 | .. _Code Emission: |
| 1524 | |
| 1525 | Code Emission |
| 1526 | ------------- |
| 1527 | |
| 1528 | The code emission step of code generation is responsible for lowering from the |
| 1529 | code generator abstractions (like `MachineFunction`_, `MachineInstr`_, etc) down |
| 1530 | to the abstractions used by the MC layer (`MCInst`_, `MCStreamer`_, etc). This |
| 1531 | is done with a combination of several different classes: the (misnamed) |
| 1532 | target-independent AsmPrinter class, target-specific subclasses of AsmPrinter |
| 1533 | (such as SparcAsmPrinter), and the TargetLoweringObjectFile class. |
| 1534 | |
| 1535 | Since the MC layer works at the level of abstraction of object files, it doesn't |
| 1536 | have a notion of functions, global variables etc. Instead, it thinks about |
| 1537 | labels, directives, and instructions. A key class used at this time is the |
| 1538 | MCStreamer class. This is an abstract API that is implemented in different ways |
| 1539 | (e.g. to output a .s file, output an ELF .o file, etc) that is effectively an |
| 1540 | "assembler API". MCStreamer has one method per directive, such as EmitLabel, |
| 1541 | EmitSymbolAttribute, SwitchSection, etc, which directly correspond to assembly |
| 1542 | level directives. |
| 1543 | |
| 1544 | If you are interested in implementing a code generator for a target, there are |
| 1545 | three important things that you have to implement for your target: |
| 1546 | |
| 1547 | #. First, you need a subclass of AsmPrinter for your target. This class |
| 1548 | implements the general lowering process converting MachineFunction's into MC |
| 1549 | label constructs. The AsmPrinter base class provides a number of useful |
| 1550 | methods and routines, and also allows you to override the lowering process in |
| 1551 | some important ways. You should get much of the lowering for free if you are |
| 1552 | implementing an ELF, COFF, or MachO target, because the |
| 1553 | TargetLoweringObjectFile class implements much of the common logic. |
| 1554 | |
| 1555 | #. Second, you need to implement an instruction printer for your target. The |
| 1556 | instruction printer takes an `MCInst`_ and renders it to a raw_ostream as |
| 1557 | text. Most of this is automatically generated from the .td file (when you |
| 1558 | specify something like "``add $dst, $src1, $src2``" in the instructions), but |
| 1559 | you need to implement routines to print operands. |
| 1560 | |
| 1561 | #. Third, you need to implement code that lowers a `MachineInstr`_ to an MCInst, |
| 1562 | usually implemented in "<target>MCInstLower.cpp". This lowering process is |
| 1563 | often target specific, and is responsible for turning jump table entries, |
| 1564 | constant pool indices, global variable addresses, etc into MCLabels as |
| 1565 | appropriate. This translation layer is also responsible for expanding pseudo |
| 1566 | ops used by the code generator into the actual machine instructions they |
| 1567 | correspond to. The MCInsts that are generated by this are fed into the |
| 1568 | instruction printer or the encoder. |
| 1569 | |
| 1570 | Finally, at your choosing, you can also implement an subclass of MCCodeEmitter |
| 1571 | which lowers MCInst's into machine code bytes and relocations. This is |
| 1572 | important if you want to support direct .o file emission, or would like to |
| 1573 | implement an assembler for your target. |
| 1574 | |
| 1575 | VLIW Packetizer |
| 1576 | --------------- |
| 1577 | |
| 1578 | In a Very Long Instruction Word (VLIW) architecture, the compiler is responsible |
| 1579 | for mapping instructions to functional-units available on the architecture. To |
| 1580 | that end, the compiler creates groups of instructions called *packets* or |
| 1581 | *bundles*. The VLIW packetizer in LLVM is a target-independent mechanism to |
| 1582 | enable the packetization of machine instructions. |
| 1583 | |
| 1584 | Mapping from instructions to functional units |
| 1585 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1586 | |
| 1587 | Instructions in a VLIW target can typically be mapped to multiple functional |
| 1588 | units. During the process of packetizing, the compiler must be able to reason |
| 1589 | about whether an instruction can be added to a packet. This decision can be |
| 1590 | complex since the compiler has to examine all possible mappings of instructions |
| 1591 | to functional units. Therefore to alleviate compilation-time complexity, the |
| 1592 | VLIW packetizer parses the instruction classes of a target and generates tables |
| 1593 | at compiler build time. These tables can then be queried by the provided |
| 1594 | machine-independent API to determine if an instruction can be accommodated in a |
| 1595 | packet. |
| 1596 | |
| 1597 | How the packetization tables are generated and used |
| 1598 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1599 | |
| 1600 | The packetizer reads instruction classes from a target's itineraries and creates |
| 1601 | a deterministic finite automaton (DFA) to represent the state of a packet. A DFA |
| 1602 | consists of three major elements: inputs, states, and transitions. The set of |
| 1603 | inputs for the generated DFA represents the instruction being added to a |
| 1604 | packet. The states represent the possible consumption of functional units by |
| 1605 | instructions in a packet. In the DFA, transitions from one state to another |
| 1606 | occur on the addition of an instruction to an existing packet. If there is a |
| 1607 | legal mapping of functional units to instructions, then the DFA contains a |
| 1608 | corresponding transition. The absence of a transition indicates that a legal |
| 1609 | mapping does not exist and that the instruction cannot be added to the packet. |
| 1610 | |
| 1611 | To generate tables for a VLIW target, add *Target*\ GenDFAPacketizer.inc as a |
| 1612 | target to the Makefile in the target directory. The exported API provides three |
| 1613 | functions: ``DFAPacketizer::clearResources()``, |
| 1614 | ``DFAPacketizer::reserveResources(MachineInstr *MI)``, and |
| 1615 | ``DFAPacketizer::canReserveResources(MachineInstr *MI)``. These functions allow |
| 1616 | a target packetizer to add an instruction to an existing packet and to check |
| 1617 | whether an instruction can be added to a packet. See |
| 1618 | ``llvm/CodeGen/DFAPacketizer.h`` for more information. |
| 1619 | |
| 1620 | Implementing a Native Assembler |
| 1621 | =============================== |
| 1622 | |
| 1623 | Though you're probably reading this because you want to write or maintain a |
Sylvestre Ledru | 2e16254 | 2013-10-01 13:17:09 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1624 | compiler backend, LLVM also fully supports building a native assembler. |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1625 | We've tried hard to automate the generation of the assembler from the .td files |
| 1626 | (in particular the instruction syntax and encodings), which means that a large |
| 1627 | part of the manual and repetitive data entry can be factored and shared with the |
| 1628 | compiler. |
| 1629 | |
| 1630 | Instruction Parsing |
| 1631 | ------------------- |
| 1632 | |
| 1633 | .. note:: |
| 1634 | |
| 1635 | To Be Written |
| 1636 | |
| 1637 | |
| 1638 | Instruction Alias Processing |
| 1639 | ---------------------------- |
| 1640 | |
| 1641 | Once the instruction is parsed, it enters the MatchInstructionImpl function. |
| 1642 | The MatchInstructionImpl function performs alias processing and then does actual |
| 1643 | matching. |
| 1644 | |
| 1645 | Alias processing is the phase that canonicalizes different lexical forms of the |
| 1646 | same instructions down to one representation. There are several different kinds |
| 1647 | of alias that are possible to implement and they are listed below in the order |
| 1648 | that they are processed (which is in order from simplest/weakest to most |
| 1649 | complex/powerful). Generally you want to use the first alias mechanism that |
| 1650 | meets the needs of your instruction, because it will allow a more concise |
| 1651 | description. |
| 1652 | |
| 1653 | Mnemonic Aliases |
| 1654 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1655 | |
| 1656 | The first phase of alias processing is simple instruction mnemonic remapping for |
| 1657 | classes of instructions which are allowed with two different mnemonics. This |
| 1658 | phase is a simple and unconditionally remapping from one input mnemonic to one |
| 1659 | output mnemonic. It isn't possible for this form of alias to look at the |
| 1660 | operands at all, so the remapping must apply for all forms of a given mnemonic. |
| 1661 | Mnemonic aliases are defined simply, for example X86 has: |
| 1662 | |
| 1663 | :: |
| 1664 | |
| 1665 | def : MnemonicAlias<"cbw", "cbtw">; |
| 1666 | def : MnemonicAlias<"smovq", "movsq">; |
| 1667 | def : MnemonicAlias<"fldcww", "fldcw">; |
| 1668 | def : MnemonicAlias<"fucompi", "fucomip">; |
| 1669 | def : MnemonicAlias<"ud2a", "ud2">; |
| 1670 | |
| 1671 | ... and many others. With a MnemonicAlias definition, the mnemonic is remapped |
| 1672 | simply and directly. Though MnemonicAlias's can't look at any aspect of the |
| 1673 | instruction (such as the operands) they can depend on global modes (the same |
| 1674 | ones supported by the matcher), through a Requires clause: |
| 1675 | |
| 1676 | :: |
| 1677 | |
| 1678 | def : MnemonicAlias<"pushf", "pushfq">, Requires<[In64BitMode]>; |
| 1679 | def : MnemonicAlias<"pushf", "pushfl">, Requires<[In32BitMode]>; |
| 1680 | |
| 1681 | In this example, the mnemonic gets mapped into different a new one depending on |
| 1682 | the current instruction set. |
| 1683 | |
| 1684 | Instruction Aliases |
| 1685 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1686 | |
| 1687 | The most general phase of alias processing occurs while matching is happening: |
| 1688 | it provides new forms for the matcher to match along with a specific instruction |
| 1689 | to generate. An instruction alias has two parts: the string to match and the |
| 1690 | instruction to generate. For example: |
| 1691 | |
| 1692 | :: |
| 1693 | |
| 1694 | def : InstAlias<"movsx $src, $dst", (MOVSX16rr8W GR16:$dst, GR8 :$src)>; |
| 1695 | def : InstAlias<"movsx $src, $dst", (MOVSX16rm8W GR16:$dst, i8mem:$src)>; |
| 1696 | def : InstAlias<"movsx $src, $dst", (MOVSX32rr8 GR32:$dst, GR8 :$src)>; |
| 1697 | def : InstAlias<"movsx $src, $dst", (MOVSX32rr16 GR32:$dst, GR16 :$src)>; |
| 1698 | def : InstAlias<"movsx $src, $dst", (MOVSX64rr8 GR64:$dst, GR8 :$src)>; |
| 1699 | def : InstAlias<"movsx $src, $dst", (MOVSX64rr16 GR64:$dst, GR16 :$src)>; |
| 1700 | def : InstAlias<"movsx $src, $dst", (MOVSX64rr32 GR64:$dst, GR32 :$src)>; |
| 1701 | |
| 1702 | This shows a powerful example of the instruction aliases, matching the same |
| 1703 | mnemonic in multiple different ways depending on what operands are present in |
| 1704 | the assembly. The result of instruction aliases can include operands in a |
| 1705 | different order than the destination instruction, and can use an input multiple |
| 1706 | times, for example: |
| 1707 | |
| 1708 | :: |
| 1709 | |
| 1710 | def : InstAlias<"clrb $reg", (XOR8rr GR8 :$reg, GR8 :$reg)>; |
| 1711 | def : InstAlias<"clrw $reg", (XOR16rr GR16:$reg, GR16:$reg)>; |
| 1712 | def : InstAlias<"clrl $reg", (XOR32rr GR32:$reg, GR32:$reg)>; |
| 1713 | def : InstAlias<"clrq $reg", (XOR64rr GR64:$reg, GR64:$reg)>; |
| 1714 | |
| 1715 | This example also shows that tied operands are only listed once. In the X86 |
| 1716 | backend, XOR8rr has two input GR8's and one output GR8 (where an input is tied |
| 1717 | to the output). InstAliases take a flattened operand list without duplicates |
| 1718 | for tied operands. The result of an instruction alias can also use immediates |
| 1719 | and fixed physical registers which are added as simple immediate operands in the |
| 1720 | result, for example: |
| 1721 | |
| 1722 | :: |
| 1723 | |
| 1724 | // Fixed Immediate operand. |
| 1725 | def : InstAlias<"aad", (AAD8i8 10)>; |
| 1726 | |
| 1727 | // Fixed register operand. |
| 1728 | def : InstAlias<"fcomi", (COM_FIr ST1)>; |
| 1729 | |
| 1730 | // Simple alias. |
| 1731 | def : InstAlias<"fcomi $reg", (COM_FIr RST:$reg)>; |
| 1732 | |
| 1733 | Instruction aliases can also have a Requires clause to make them subtarget |
| 1734 | specific. |
| 1735 | |
| 1736 | If the back-end supports it, the instruction printer can automatically emit the |
| 1737 | alias rather than what's being aliased. It typically leads to better, more |
| 1738 | readable code. If it's better to print out what's being aliased, then pass a '0' |
| 1739 | as the third parameter to the InstAlias definition. |
| 1740 | |
| 1741 | Instruction Matching |
| 1742 | -------------------- |
| 1743 | |
| 1744 | .. note:: |
| 1745 | |
| 1746 | To Be Written |
| 1747 | |
| 1748 | .. _Implementations of the abstract target description interfaces: |
| 1749 | .. _implement the target description: |
| 1750 | |
| 1751 | Target-specific Implementation Notes |
| 1752 | ==================================== |
| 1753 | |
| 1754 | This section of the document explains features or design decisions that are |
| 1755 | specific to the code generator for a particular target. First we start with a |
| 1756 | table that summarizes what features are supported by each target. |
| 1757 | |
Dmitri Gribenko | e17d858 | 2012-12-09 23:14:26 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1758 | .. _target-feature-matrix: |
| 1759 | |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1760 | Target Feature Matrix |
| 1761 | --------------------- |
| 1762 | |
| 1763 | Note that this table does not include the C backend or Cpp backends, since they |
| 1764 | do not use the target independent code generator infrastructure. It also |
| 1765 | doesn't list features that are not supported fully by any target yet. It |
| 1766 | considers a feature to be supported if at least one subtarget supports it. A |
| 1767 | feature being supported means that it is useful and works for most cases, it |
| 1768 | does not indicate that there are zero known bugs in the implementation. Here is |
| 1769 | the key: |
| 1770 | |
| 1771 | :raw-html:`<table border="1" cellspacing="0">` |
| 1772 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 1773 | :raw-html:`<th>Unknown</th>` |
Justin Holewinski | c059d56 | 2013-01-11 18:37:54 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1774 | :raw-html:`<th>Not Applicable</th>` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1775 | :raw-html:`<th>No support</th>` |
| 1776 | :raw-html:`<th>Partial Support</th>` |
| 1777 | :raw-html:`<th>Complete Support</th>` |
| 1778 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 1779 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 1780 | :raw-html:`<td class="unknown"></td>` |
Justin Holewinski | c059d56 | 2013-01-11 18:37:54 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1781 | :raw-html:`<td class="na"></td>` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1782 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td>` |
| 1783 | :raw-html:`<td class="partial"></td>` |
| 1784 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td>` |
| 1785 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 1786 | :raw-html:`</table>` |
| 1787 | |
| 1788 | Here is the table: |
| 1789 | |
| 1790 | :raw-html:`<table width="689" border="1" cellspacing="0">` |
| 1791 | :raw-html:`<tr><td></td>` |
| 1792 | :raw-html:`<td colspan="13" align="center" style="background-color:#ffc">Target</td>` |
| 1793 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 1794 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 1795 | :raw-html:`<th>Feature</th>` |
| 1796 | :raw-html:`<th>ARM</th>` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1797 | :raw-html:`<th>Hexagon</th>` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1798 | :raw-html:`<th>MSP430</th>` |
| 1799 | :raw-html:`<th>Mips</th>` |
Justin Holewinski | 9c0d0f5 | 2013-01-11 18:47:10 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1800 | :raw-html:`<th>NVPTX</th>` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1801 | :raw-html:`<th>PowerPC</th>` |
| 1802 | :raw-html:`<th>Sparc</th>` |
Richard Sandiford | a571a93 | 2013-05-08 14:23:43 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1803 | :raw-html:`<th>SystemZ</th>` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1804 | :raw-html:`<th>X86</th>` |
| 1805 | :raw-html:`<th>XCore</th>` |
| 1806 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 1807 | |
| 1808 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 1809 | :raw-html:`<td><a href="#feat_reliable">is generally reliable</a></td>` |
| 1810 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- ARM -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1811 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- Hexagon -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1812 | :raw-html:`<td class="unknown"></td> <!-- MSP430 -->` |
| 1813 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- Mips -->` |
Justin Holewinski | 9c0d0f5 | 2013-01-11 18:47:10 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1814 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- NVPTX -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1815 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- PowerPC -->` |
| 1816 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- Sparc -->` |
Richard Sandiford | a571a93 | 2013-05-08 14:23:43 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1817 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- SystemZ -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1818 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- X86 -->` |
Richard Osborne | e0c3454 | 2013-05-05 14:09:55 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1819 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- XCore -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1820 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 1821 | |
| 1822 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 1823 | :raw-html:`<td><a href="#feat_asmparser">assembly parser</a></td>` |
| 1824 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- ARM -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1825 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- Hexagon -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1826 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- MSP430 -->` |
| 1827 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- Mips -->` |
Justin Holewinski | 9c0d0f5 | 2013-01-11 18:47:10 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1828 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- NVPTX -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1829 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- PowerPC -->` |
| 1830 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- Sparc -->` |
Richard Sandiford | a571a93 | 2013-05-08 14:23:43 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1831 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- SystemZ -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1832 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- X86 -->` |
| 1833 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- XCore -->` |
| 1834 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 1835 | |
| 1836 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 1837 | :raw-html:`<td><a href="#feat_disassembler">disassembler</a></td>` |
| 1838 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- ARM -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1839 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- Hexagon -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1840 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- MSP430 -->` |
| 1841 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- Mips -->` |
Justin Holewinski | 9c0d0f5 | 2013-01-11 18:47:10 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1842 | :raw-html:`<td class="na"></td> <!-- NVPTX -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1843 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- PowerPC -->` |
Richard Sandiford | c3b20c2 | 2013-05-14 10:17:52 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1844 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- SystemZ -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1845 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- Sparc -->` |
| 1846 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- X86 -->` |
Richard Osborne | e0c3454 | 2013-05-05 14:09:55 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1847 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- XCore -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1848 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 1849 | |
| 1850 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 1851 | :raw-html:`<td><a href="#feat_inlineasm">inline asm</a></td>` |
| 1852 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- ARM -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1853 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- Hexagon -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1854 | :raw-html:`<td class="unknown"></td> <!-- MSP430 -->` |
| 1855 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- Mips -->` |
Justin Holewinski | 9c0d0f5 | 2013-01-11 18:47:10 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1856 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- NVPTX -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1857 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- PowerPC -->` |
| 1858 | :raw-html:`<td class="unknown"></td> <!-- Sparc -->` |
Richard Sandiford | a571a93 | 2013-05-08 14:23:43 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1859 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- SystemZ -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1860 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- X86 -->` |
Richard Osborne | e0c3454 | 2013-05-05 14:09:55 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1861 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- XCore -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1862 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 1863 | |
| 1864 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 1865 | :raw-html:`<td><a href="#feat_jit">jit</a></td>` |
| 1866 | :raw-html:`<td class="partial"><a href="#feat_jit_arm">*</a></td> <!-- ARM -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1867 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- Hexagon -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1868 | :raw-html:`<td class="unknown"></td> <!-- MSP430 -->` |
| 1869 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- Mips -->` |
Justin Holewinski | 9c0d0f5 | 2013-01-11 18:47:10 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1870 | :raw-html:`<td class="na"></td> <!-- NVPTX -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1871 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- PowerPC -->` |
| 1872 | :raw-html:`<td class="unknown"></td> <!-- Sparc -->` |
Richard Sandiford | a571a93 | 2013-05-08 14:23:43 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1873 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- SystemZ -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1874 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- X86 -->` |
Richard Osborne | e0c3454 | 2013-05-05 14:09:55 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1875 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- XCore -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1876 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 1877 | |
| 1878 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 1879 | :raw-html:`<td><a href="#feat_objectwrite">.o file writing</a></td>` |
| 1880 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- ARM -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1881 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- Hexagon -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1882 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- MSP430 -->` |
| 1883 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- Mips -->` |
Justin Holewinski | 9c0d0f5 | 2013-01-11 18:47:10 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1884 | :raw-html:`<td class="na"></td> <!-- NVPTX -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1885 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- PowerPC -->` |
| 1886 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- Sparc -->` |
Richard Sandiford | a571a93 | 2013-05-08 14:23:43 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1887 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- SystemZ -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1888 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- X86 -->` |
| 1889 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- XCore -->` |
| 1890 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 1891 | |
| 1892 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 1893 | :raw-html:`<td><a hr:raw-html:`ef="#feat_tailcall">tail calls</a></td>` |
| 1894 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- ARM -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1895 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- Hexagon -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1896 | :raw-html:`<td class="unknown"></td> <!-- MSP430 -->` |
| 1897 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- Mips -->` |
Justin Holewinski | 9c0d0f5 | 2013-01-11 18:47:10 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1898 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- NVPTX -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1899 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- PowerPC -->` |
| 1900 | :raw-html:`<td class="unknown"></td> <!-- Sparc -->` |
Richard Sandiford | a571a93 | 2013-05-08 14:23:43 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1901 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- SystemZ -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1902 | :raw-html:`<td class="yes"></td> <!-- X86 -->` |
Richard Osborne | e0c3454 | 2013-05-05 14:09:55 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1903 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- XCore -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1904 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 1905 | |
| 1906 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 1907 | :raw-html:`<td><a href="#feat_segstacks">segmented stacks</a></td>` |
| 1908 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- ARM -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1909 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- Hexagon -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1910 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- MSP430 -->` |
| 1911 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- Mips -->` |
Justin Holewinski | 9c0d0f5 | 2013-01-11 18:47:10 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1912 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- NVPTX -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1913 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- PowerPC -->` |
| 1914 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- Sparc -->` |
Richard Sandiford | a571a93 | 2013-05-08 14:23:43 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1915 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- SystemZ -->` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1916 | :raw-html:`<td class="partial"><a href="#feat_segstacks_x86">*</a></td> <!-- X86 -->` |
| 1917 | :raw-html:`<td class="no"></td> <!-- XCore -->` |
| 1918 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 1919 | |
| 1920 | :raw-html:`</table>` |
| 1921 | |
| 1922 | .. _feat_reliable: |
| 1923 | |
| 1924 | Is Generally Reliable |
| 1925 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1926 | |
| 1927 | This box indicates whether the target is considered to be production quality. |
| 1928 | This indicates that the target has been used as a static compiler to compile |
| 1929 | large amounts of code by a variety of different people and is in continuous use. |
| 1930 | |
| 1931 | .. _feat_asmparser: |
| 1932 | |
| 1933 | Assembly Parser |
| 1934 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1935 | |
| 1936 | This box indicates whether the target supports parsing target specific .s files |
| 1937 | by implementing the MCAsmParser interface. This is required for llvm-mc to be |
| 1938 | able to act as a native assembler and is required for inline assembly support in |
| 1939 | the native .o file writer. |
| 1940 | |
| 1941 | .. _feat_disassembler: |
| 1942 | |
| 1943 | Disassembler |
| 1944 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1945 | |
| 1946 | This box indicates whether the target supports the MCDisassembler API for |
| 1947 | disassembling machine opcode bytes into MCInst's. |
| 1948 | |
| 1949 | .. _feat_inlineasm: |
| 1950 | |
| 1951 | Inline Asm |
| 1952 | ^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1953 | |
| 1954 | This box indicates whether the target supports most popular inline assembly |
| 1955 | constraints and modifiers. |
| 1956 | |
| 1957 | .. _feat_jit: |
| 1958 | |
| 1959 | JIT Support |
| 1960 | ^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1961 | |
| 1962 | This box indicates whether the target supports the JIT compiler through the |
| 1963 | ExecutionEngine interface. |
| 1964 | |
| 1965 | .. _feat_jit_arm: |
| 1966 | |
| 1967 | The ARM backend has basic support for integer code in ARM codegen mode, but |
| 1968 | lacks NEON and full Thumb support. |
| 1969 | |
| 1970 | .. _feat_objectwrite: |
| 1971 | |
| 1972 | .o File Writing |
| 1973 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1974 | |
| 1975 | This box indicates whether the target supports writing .o files (e.g. MachO, |
| 1976 | ELF, and/or COFF) files directly from the target. Note that the target also |
| 1977 | must include an assembly parser and general inline assembly support for full |
| 1978 | inline assembly support in the .o writer. |
| 1979 | |
| 1980 | Targets that don't support this feature can obviously still write out .o files, |
| 1981 | they just rely on having an external assembler to translate from a .s file to a |
| 1982 | .o file (as is the case for many C compilers). |
| 1983 | |
| 1984 | .. _feat_tailcall: |
| 1985 | |
| 1986 | Tail Calls |
| 1987 | ^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1988 | |
| 1989 | This box indicates whether the target supports guaranteed tail calls. These are |
| 1990 | calls marked "`tail <LangRef.html#i_call>`_" and use the fastcc calling |
| 1991 | convention. Please see the `tail call section more more details`_. |
| 1992 | |
| 1993 | .. _feat_segstacks: |
| 1994 | |
| 1995 | Segmented Stacks |
| 1996 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 1997 | |
| 1998 | This box indicates whether the target supports segmented stacks. This replaces |
| 1999 | the traditional large C stack with many linked segments. It is compatible with |
| 2000 | the `gcc implementation <http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/SplitStacks>`_ used by the Go |
| 2001 | front end. |
| 2002 | |
| 2003 | .. _feat_segstacks_x86: |
| 2004 | |
| 2005 | Basic support exists on the X86 backend. Currently vararg doesn't work and the |
| 2006 | object files are not marked the way the gold linker expects, but simple Go |
| 2007 | programs can be built by dragonegg. |
| 2008 | |
| 2009 | .. _tail call section more more details: |
| 2010 | |
| 2011 | Tail call optimization |
| 2012 | ---------------------- |
| 2013 | |
| 2014 | Tail call optimization, callee reusing the stack of the caller, is currently |
| 2015 | supported on x86/x86-64 and PowerPC. It is performed if: |
| 2016 | |
Duncan Sands | dc7f174 | 2012-11-16 12:36:39 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 2017 | * Caller and callee have the calling convention ``fastcc``, ``cc 10`` (GHC |
| 2018 | calling convention) or ``cc 11`` (HiPE calling convention). |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 2019 | |
| 2020 | * The call is a tail call - in tail position (ret immediately follows call and |
| 2021 | ret uses value of call or is void). |
| 2022 | |
| 2023 | * Option ``-tailcallopt`` is enabled. |
| 2024 | |
| 2025 | * Platform specific constraints are met. |
| 2026 | |
| 2027 | x86/x86-64 constraints: |
| 2028 | |
| 2029 | * No variable argument lists are used. |
| 2030 | |
| 2031 | * On x86-64 when generating GOT/PIC code only module-local calls (visibility = |
| 2032 | hidden or protected) are supported. |
| 2033 | |
| 2034 | PowerPC constraints: |
| 2035 | |
| 2036 | * No variable argument lists are used. |
| 2037 | |
| 2038 | * No byval parameters are used. |
| 2039 | |
| 2040 | * On ppc32/64 GOT/PIC only module-local calls (visibility = hidden or protected) |
| 2041 | are supported. |
| 2042 | |
| 2043 | Example: |
| 2044 | |
| 2045 | Call as ``llc -tailcallopt test.ll``. |
| 2046 | |
| 2047 | .. code-block:: llvm |
| 2048 | |
| 2049 | declare fastcc i32 @tailcallee(i32 inreg %a1, i32 inreg %a2, i32 %a3, i32 %a4) |
| 2050 | |
| 2051 | define fastcc i32 @tailcaller(i32 %in1, i32 %in2) { |
| 2052 | %l1 = add i32 %in1, %in2 |
| 2053 | %tmp = tail call fastcc i32 @tailcallee(i32 %in1 inreg, i32 %in2 inreg, i32 %in1, i32 %l1) |
| 2054 | ret i32 %tmp |
| 2055 | } |
| 2056 | |
| 2057 | Implications of ``-tailcallopt``: |
| 2058 | |
| 2059 | To support tail call optimization in situations where the callee has more |
| 2060 | arguments than the caller a 'callee pops arguments' convention is used. This |
| 2061 | currently causes each ``fastcc`` call that is not tail call optimized (because |
| 2062 | one or more of above constraints are not met) to be followed by a readjustment |
| 2063 | of the stack. So performance might be worse in such cases. |
| 2064 | |
| 2065 | Sibling call optimization |
| 2066 | ------------------------- |
| 2067 | |
| 2068 | Sibling call optimization is a restricted form of tail call optimization. |
| 2069 | Unlike tail call optimization described in the previous section, it can be |
| 2070 | performed automatically on any tail calls when ``-tailcallopt`` option is not |
| 2071 | specified. |
| 2072 | |
| 2073 | Sibling call optimization is currently performed on x86/x86-64 when the |
| 2074 | following constraints are met: |
| 2075 | |
| 2076 | * Caller and callee have the same calling convention. It can be either ``c`` or |
| 2077 | ``fastcc``. |
| 2078 | |
| 2079 | * The call is a tail call - in tail position (ret immediately follows call and |
| 2080 | ret uses value of call or is void). |
| 2081 | |
| 2082 | * Caller and callee have matching return type or the callee result is not used. |
| 2083 | |
| 2084 | * If any of the callee arguments are being passed in stack, they must be |
| 2085 | available in caller's own incoming argument stack and the frame offsets must |
| 2086 | be the same. |
| 2087 | |
| 2088 | Example: |
| 2089 | |
| 2090 | .. code-block:: llvm |
| 2091 | |
| 2092 | declare i32 @bar(i32, i32) |
| 2093 | |
| 2094 | define i32 @foo(i32 %a, i32 %b, i32 %c) { |
| 2095 | entry: |
| 2096 | %0 = tail call i32 @bar(i32 %a, i32 %b) |
| 2097 | ret i32 %0 |
| 2098 | } |
| 2099 | |
| 2100 | The X86 backend |
| 2101 | --------------- |
| 2102 | |
| 2103 | The X86 code generator lives in the ``lib/Target/X86`` directory. This code |
| 2104 | generator is capable of targeting a variety of x86-32 and x86-64 processors, and |
| 2105 | includes support for ISA extensions such as MMX and SSE. |
| 2106 | |
| 2107 | X86 Target Triples supported |
| 2108 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 2109 | |
| 2110 | The following are the known target triples that are supported by the X86 |
| 2111 | backend. This is not an exhaustive list, and it would be useful to add those |
| 2112 | that people test. |
| 2113 | |
| 2114 | * **i686-pc-linux-gnu** --- Linux |
| 2115 | |
| 2116 | * **i386-unknown-freebsd5.3** --- FreeBSD 5.3 |
| 2117 | |
| 2118 | * **i686-pc-cygwin** --- Cygwin on Win32 |
| 2119 | |
| 2120 | * **i686-pc-mingw32** --- MingW on Win32 |
| 2121 | |
| 2122 | * **i386-pc-mingw32msvc** --- MingW crosscompiler on Linux |
| 2123 | |
| 2124 | * **i686-apple-darwin*** --- Apple Darwin on X86 |
| 2125 | |
| 2126 | * **x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu** --- Linux |
| 2127 | |
| 2128 | X86 Calling Conventions supported |
| 2129 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 2130 | |
| 2131 | The following target-specific calling conventions are known to backend: |
| 2132 | |
| 2133 | * **x86_StdCall** --- stdcall calling convention seen on Microsoft Windows |
| 2134 | platform (CC ID = 64). |
| 2135 | |
| 2136 | * **x86_FastCall** --- fastcall calling convention seen on Microsoft Windows |
| 2137 | platform (CC ID = 65). |
| 2138 | |
| 2139 | * **x86_ThisCall** --- Similar to X86_StdCall. Passes first argument in ECX, |
| 2140 | others via stack. Callee is responsible for stack cleaning. This convention is |
| 2141 | used by MSVC by default for methods in its ABI (CC ID = 70). |
| 2142 | |
| 2143 | .. _X86 addressing mode: |
| 2144 | |
| 2145 | Representing X86 addressing modes in MachineInstrs |
| 2146 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 2147 | |
| 2148 | The x86 has a very flexible way of accessing memory. It is capable of forming |
| 2149 | memory addresses of the following expression directly in integer instructions |
| 2150 | (which use ModR/M addressing): |
| 2151 | |
| 2152 | :: |
| 2153 | |
| 2154 | SegmentReg: Base + [1,2,4,8] * IndexReg + Disp32 |
| 2155 | |
| 2156 | In order to represent this, LLVM tracks no less than 5 operands for each memory |
| 2157 | operand of this form. This means that the "load" form of '``mov``' has the |
| 2158 | following ``MachineOperand``\s in this order: |
| 2159 | |
| 2160 | :: |
| 2161 | |
| 2162 | Index: 0 | 1 2 3 4 5 |
| 2163 | Meaning: DestReg, | BaseReg, Scale, IndexReg, Displacement Segment |
| 2164 | OperandTy: VirtReg, | VirtReg, UnsImm, VirtReg, SignExtImm PhysReg |
| 2165 | |
| 2166 | Stores, and all other instructions, treat the four memory operands in the same |
| 2167 | way and in the same order. If the segment register is unspecified (regno = 0), |
| 2168 | then no segment override is generated. "Lea" operations do not have a segment |
| 2169 | register specified, so they only have 4 operands for their memory reference. |
| 2170 | |
| 2171 | X86 address spaces supported |
| 2172 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 2173 | |
| 2174 | x86 has a feature which provides the ability to perform loads and stores to |
| 2175 | different address spaces via the x86 segment registers. A segment override |
| 2176 | prefix byte on an instruction causes the instruction's memory access to go to |
| 2177 | the specified segment. LLVM address space 0 is the default address space, which |
| 2178 | includes the stack, and any unqualified memory accesses in a program. Address |
| 2179 | spaces 1-255 are currently reserved for user-defined code. The GS-segment is |
| 2180 | represented by address space 256, while the FS-segment is represented by address |
| 2181 | space 257. Other x86 segments have yet to be allocated address space |
| 2182 | numbers. |
| 2183 | |
| 2184 | While these address spaces may seem similar to TLS via the ``thread_local`` |
| 2185 | keyword, and often use the same underlying hardware, there are some fundamental |
| 2186 | differences. |
| 2187 | |
| 2188 | The ``thread_local`` keyword applies to global variables and specifies that they |
| 2189 | are to be allocated in thread-local memory. There are no type qualifiers |
| 2190 | involved, and these variables can be pointed to with normal pointers and |
| 2191 | accessed with normal loads and stores. The ``thread_local`` keyword is |
| 2192 | target-independent at the LLVM IR level (though LLVM doesn't yet have |
| 2193 | implementations of it for some configurations) |
| 2194 | |
| 2195 | Special address spaces, in contrast, apply to static types. Every load and store |
| 2196 | has a particular address space in its address operand type, and this is what |
| 2197 | determines which address space is accessed. LLVM ignores these special address |
| 2198 | space qualifiers on global variables, and does not provide a way to directly |
| 2199 | allocate storage in them. At the LLVM IR level, the behavior of these special |
| 2200 | address spaces depends in part on the underlying OS or runtime environment, and |
| 2201 | they are specific to x86 (and LLVM doesn't yet handle them correctly in some |
| 2202 | cases). |
| 2203 | |
| 2204 | Some operating systems and runtime environments use (or may in the future use) |
| 2205 | the FS/GS-segment registers for various low-level purposes, so care should be |
| 2206 | taken when considering them. |
| 2207 | |
| 2208 | Instruction naming |
| 2209 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 2210 | |
| 2211 | An instruction name consists of the base name, a default operand size, and a a |
| 2212 | character per operand with an optional special size. For example: |
| 2213 | |
| 2214 | :: |
| 2215 | |
| 2216 | ADD8rr -> add, 8-bit register, 8-bit register |
| 2217 | IMUL16rmi -> imul, 16-bit register, 16-bit memory, 16-bit immediate |
| 2218 | IMUL16rmi8 -> imul, 16-bit register, 16-bit memory, 8-bit immediate |
| 2219 | MOVSX32rm16 -> movsx, 32-bit register, 16-bit memory |
| 2220 | |
| 2221 | The PowerPC backend |
| 2222 | ------------------- |
| 2223 | |
| 2224 | The PowerPC code generator lives in the lib/Target/PowerPC directory. The code |
| 2225 | generation is retargetable to several variations or *subtargets* of the PowerPC |
| 2226 | ISA; including ppc32, ppc64 and altivec. |
| 2227 | |
| 2228 | LLVM PowerPC ABI |
| 2229 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 2230 | |
| 2231 | LLVM follows the AIX PowerPC ABI, with two deviations. LLVM uses a PC relative |
| 2232 | (PIC) or static addressing for accessing global values, so no TOC (r2) is |
| 2233 | used. Second, r31 is used as a frame pointer to allow dynamic growth of a stack |
| 2234 | frame. LLVM takes advantage of having no TOC to provide space to save the frame |
| 2235 | pointer in the PowerPC linkage area of the caller frame. Other details of |
| 2236 | PowerPC ABI can be found at `PowerPC ABI |
| 2237 | <http://developer.apple.com/documentation/DeveloperTools/Conceptual/LowLevelABI/Articles/32bitPowerPC.html>`_\ |
| 2238 | . Note: This link describes the 32 bit ABI. The 64 bit ABI is similar except |
| 2239 | space for GPRs are 8 bytes wide (not 4) and r13 is reserved for system use. |
| 2240 | |
| 2241 | Frame Layout |
| 2242 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 2243 | |
| 2244 | The size of a PowerPC frame is usually fixed for the duration of a function's |
| 2245 | invocation. Since the frame is fixed size, all references into the frame can be |
| 2246 | accessed via fixed offsets from the stack pointer. The exception to this is |
| 2247 | when dynamic alloca or variable sized arrays are present, then a base pointer |
| 2248 | (r31) is used as a proxy for the stack pointer and stack pointer is free to grow |
| 2249 | or shrink. A base pointer is also used if llvm-gcc is not passed the |
| 2250 | -fomit-frame-pointer flag. The stack pointer is always aligned to 16 bytes, so |
| 2251 | that space allocated for altivec vectors will be properly aligned. |
| 2252 | |
| 2253 | An invocation frame is laid out as follows (low memory at top): |
| 2254 | |
| 2255 | :raw-html:`<table border="1" cellspacing="0">` |
| 2256 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2257 | :raw-html:`<td>Linkage<br><br></td>` |
| 2258 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2259 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2260 | :raw-html:`<td>Parameter area<br><br></td>` |
| 2261 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2262 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2263 | :raw-html:`<td>Dynamic area<br><br></td>` |
| 2264 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2265 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2266 | :raw-html:`<td>Locals area<br><br></td>` |
| 2267 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2268 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2269 | :raw-html:`<td>Saved registers area<br><br></td>` |
| 2270 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2271 | :raw-html:`<tr style="border-style: none hidden none hidden;">` |
| 2272 | :raw-html:`<td><br></td>` |
| 2273 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2274 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2275 | :raw-html:`<td>Previous Frame<br><br></td>` |
| 2276 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2277 | :raw-html:`</table>` |
| 2278 | |
| 2279 | The *linkage* area is used by a callee to save special registers prior to |
| 2280 | allocating its own frame. Only three entries are relevant to LLVM. The first |
| 2281 | entry is the previous stack pointer (sp), aka link. This allows probing tools |
| 2282 | like gdb or exception handlers to quickly scan the frames in the stack. A |
| 2283 | function epilog can also use the link to pop the frame from the stack. The |
| 2284 | third entry in the linkage area is used to save the return address from the lr |
| 2285 | register. Finally, as mentioned above, the last entry is used to save the |
| 2286 | previous frame pointer (r31.) The entries in the linkage area are the size of a |
| 2287 | GPR, thus the linkage area is 24 bytes long in 32 bit mode and 48 bytes in 64 |
| 2288 | bit mode. |
| 2289 | |
| 2290 | 32 bit linkage area: |
| 2291 | |
| 2292 | :raw-html:`<table border="1" cellspacing="0">` |
| 2293 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2294 | :raw-html:`<td>0</td>` |
| 2295 | :raw-html:`<td>Saved SP (r1)</td>` |
| 2296 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2297 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2298 | :raw-html:`<td>4</td>` |
| 2299 | :raw-html:`<td>Saved CR</td>` |
| 2300 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2301 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2302 | :raw-html:`<td>8</td>` |
| 2303 | :raw-html:`<td>Saved LR</td>` |
| 2304 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2305 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2306 | :raw-html:`<td>12</td>` |
| 2307 | :raw-html:`<td>Reserved</td>` |
| 2308 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2309 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2310 | :raw-html:`<td>16</td>` |
| 2311 | :raw-html:`<td>Reserved</td>` |
| 2312 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2313 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2314 | :raw-html:`<td>20</td>` |
| 2315 | :raw-html:`<td>Saved FP (r31)</td>` |
| 2316 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2317 | :raw-html:`</table>` |
| 2318 | |
| 2319 | 64 bit linkage area: |
| 2320 | |
| 2321 | :raw-html:`<table border="1" cellspacing="0">` |
| 2322 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2323 | :raw-html:`<td>0</td>` |
| 2324 | :raw-html:`<td>Saved SP (r1)</td>` |
| 2325 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2326 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2327 | :raw-html:`<td>8</td>` |
| 2328 | :raw-html:`<td>Saved CR</td>` |
| 2329 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2330 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2331 | :raw-html:`<td>16</td>` |
| 2332 | :raw-html:`<td>Saved LR</td>` |
| 2333 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2334 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2335 | :raw-html:`<td>24</td>` |
| 2336 | :raw-html:`<td>Reserved</td>` |
| 2337 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2338 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2339 | :raw-html:`<td>32</td>` |
| 2340 | :raw-html:`<td>Reserved</td>` |
| 2341 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2342 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2343 | :raw-html:`<td>40</td>` |
| 2344 | :raw-html:`<td>Saved FP (r31)</td>` |
| 2345 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2346 | :raw-html:`</table>` |
| 2347 | |
| 2348 | The *parameter area* is used to store arguments being passed to a callee |
| 2349 | function. Following the PowerPC ABI, the first few arguments are actually |
| 2350 | passed in registers, with the space in the parameter area unused. However, if |
| 2351 | there are not enough registers or the callee is a thunk or vararg function, |
| 2352 | these register arguments can be spilled into the parameter area. Thus, the |
| 2353 | parameter area must be large enough to store all the parameters for the largest |
| 2354 | call sequence made by the caller. The size must also be minimally large enough |
| 2355 | to spill registers r3-r10. This allows callees blind to the call signature, |
| 2356 | such as thunks and vararg functions, enough space to cache the argument |
| 2357 | registers. Therefore, the parameter area is minimally 32 bytes (64 bytes in 64 |
| 2358 | bit mode.) Also note that since the parameter area is a fixed offset from the |
| 2359 | top of the frame, that a callee can access its spilt arguments using fixed |
| 2360 | offsets from the stack pointer (or base pointer.) |
| 2361 | |
| 2362 | Combining the information about the linkage, parameter areas and alignment. A |
| 2363 | stack frame is minimally 64 bytes in 32 bit mode and 128 bytes in 64 bit mode. |
| 2364 | |
| 2365 | The *dynamic area* starts out as size zero. If a function uses dynamic alloca |
| 2366 | then space is added to the stack, the linkage and parameter areas are shifted to |
| 2367 | top of stack, and the new space is available immediately below the linkage and |
| 2368 | parameter areas. The cost of shifting the linkage and parameter areas is minor |
| 2369 | since only the link value needs to be copied. The link value can be easily |
| 2370 | fetched by adding the original frame size to the base pointer. Note that |
| 2371 | allocations in the dynamic space need to observe 16 byte alignment. |
| 2372 | |
| 2373 | The *locals area* is where the llvm compiler reserves space for local variables. |
| 2374 | |
| 2375 | The *saved registers area* is where the llvm compiler spills callee saved |
| 2376 | registers on entry to the callee. |
| 2377 | |
| 2378 | Prolog/Epilog |
| 2379 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 2380 | |
| 2381 | The llvm prolog and epilog are the same as described in the PowerPC ABI, with |
| 2382 | the following exceptions. Callee saved registers are spilled after the frame is |
| 2383 | created. This allows the llvm epilog/prolog support to be common with other |
| 2384 | targets. The base pointer callee saved register r31 is saved in the TOC slot of |
| 2385 | linkage area. This simplifies allocation of space for the base pointer and |
| 2386 | makes it convenient to locate programatically and during debugging. |
| 2387 | |
| 2388 | Dynamic Allocation |
| 2389 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 2390 | |
| 2391 | .. note:: |
| 2392 | |
| 2393 | TODO - More to come. |
| 2394 | |
Justin Holewinski | 9c0d0f5 | 2013-01-11 18:47:10 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 2395 | The NVPTX backend |
| 2396 | ----------------- |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 2397 | |
Justin Holewinski | 9c0d0f5 | 2013-01-11 18:47:10 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 2398 | The NVPTX code generator under lib/Target/NVPTX is an open-source version of |
| 2399 | the NVIDIA NVPTX code generator for LLVM. It is contributed by NVIDIA and is |
| 2400 | a port of the code generator used in the CUDA compiler (nvcc). It targets the |
| 2401 | PTX 3.0/3.1 ISA and can target any compute capability greater than or equal to |
| 2402 | 2.0 (Fermi). |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 2403 | |
Justin Holewinski | 9c0d0f5 | 2013-01-11 18:47:10 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 2404 | This target is of production quality and should be completely compatible with |
| 2405 | the official NVIDIA toolchain. |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 2406 | |
| 2407 | Code Generator Options: |
| 2408 | |
| 2409 | :raw-html:`<table border="1" cellspacing="0">` |
| 2410 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2411 | :raw-html:`<th>Option</th>` |
| 2412 | :raw-html:`<th>Description</th>` |
| 2413 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2414 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
Justin Holewinski | 9c0d0f5 | 2013-01-11 18:47:10 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 2415 | :raw-html:`<td>sm_20</td>` |
| 2416 | :raw-html:`<td align="left">Set shader model/compute capability to 2.0</td>` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 2417 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2418 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
Justin Holewinski | 9c0d0f5 | 2013-01-11 18:47:10 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 2419 | :raw-html:`<td>sm_21</td>` |
| 2420 | :raw-html:`<td align="left">Set shader model/compute capability to 2.1</td>` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 2421 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2422 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
Justin Holewinski | 9c0d0f5 | 2013-01-11 18:47:10 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 2423 | :raw-html:`<td>sm_30</td>` |
| 2424 | :raw-html:`<td align="left">Set shader model/compute capability to 3.0</td>` |
| 2425 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2426 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2427 | :raw-html:`<td>sm_35</td>` |
| 2428 | :raw-html:`<td align="left">Set shader model/compute capability to 3.5</td>` |
| 2429 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2430 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2431 | :raw-html:`<td>ptx30</td>` |
| 2432 | :raw-html:`<td align="left">Target PTX 3.0</td>` |
| 2433 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2434 | :raw-html:`<tr>` |
| 2435 | :raw-html:`<td>ptx31</td>` |
| 2436 | :raw-html:`<td align="left">Target PTX 3.1</td>` |
Bill Wendling | 31ce7bf | 2012-08-02 08:49:53 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 2437 | :raw-html:`</tr>` |
| 2438 | :raw-html:`</table>` |
| 2439 | |