+/// \brief Check if the order of \p Op0 and \p Op1 as operand in an ICmpInst
+/// should be swapped.
+/// The decision is based on how many times these two operands are reused
+/// as subtract operands and their positions in those instructions.
+/// The rational is that several architectures use the same instruction for
+/// both subtract and cmp, thus it is better if the order of those operands
+/// match.
+/// \return true if Op0 and Op1 should be swapped.
+static bool swapMayExposeCSEOpportunities(const Value * Op0,
+ const Value * Op1) {
+ // Filter out pointer value as those cannot appears directly in subtract.
+ // FIXME: we may want to go through inttoptrs or bitcasts.
+ if (Op0->getType()->isPointerTy())
+ return false;
+ // Count every uses of both Op0 and Op1 in a subtract.
+ // Each time Op0 is the first operand, count -1: swapping is bad, the
+ // subtract has already the same layout as the compare.
+ // Each time Op0 is the second operand, count +1: swapping is good, the
+ // subtract has a different layout as the compare.
+ // At the end, if the benefit is greater than 0, Op0 should come second to
+ // expose more CSE opportunities.
+ int GlobalSwapBenefits = 0;
+ for (Value::const_use_iterator UI = Op0->use_begin(), UIEnd = Op0->use_end(); UI != UIEnd; ++UI) {
+ const BinaryOperator *BinOp = dyn_cast<BinaryOperator>(*UI);
+ if (!BinOp || BinOp->getOpcode() != Instruction::Sub)
+ continue;
+ // If Op0 is the first argument, this is not beneficial to swap the
+ // arguments.
+ int LocalSwapBenefits = -1;
+ unsigned Op1Idx = 1;
+ if (BinOp->getOperand(Op1Idx) == Op0) {
+ Op1Idx = 0;
+ LocalSwapBenefits = 1;
+ }
+ if (BinOp->getOperand(Op1Idx) != Op1)
+ continue;
+ GlobalSwapBenefits += LocalSwapBenefits;
+ }
+ return GlobalSwapBenefits > 0;
+}
+