This requires reassociating to forms of expressions that are already available,
something that reassoc doesn't think about yet.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+This function: (derived from GCC PR19988)
+double foo(double x, double y) {
+ return ((x + 0.1234 * y) * (x + -0.1234 * y));
+}
+
+compiles to:
+_foo:
+ movapd %xmm1, %xmm2
+ mulsd LCPI1_1(%rip), %xmm1
+ mulsd LCPI1_0(%rip), %xmm2
+ addsd %xmm0, %xmm1
+ addsd %xmm0, %xmm2
+ movapd %xmm1, %xmm0
+ mulsd %xmm2, %xmm0
+ ret
+
+Reassociate should be able to turn it into:
+
+double foo(double x, double y) {
+ return ((x + 0.1234 * y) * (x - 0.1234 * y));
+}
+
+Which allows the multiply by constant to be CSE'd, producing:
+
+_foo:
+ mulsd LCPI1_0(%rip), %xmm1
+ movapd %xmm1, %xmm2
+ addsd %xmm0, %xmm2
+ subsd %xmm1, %xmm0
+ mulsd %xmm2, %xmm0
+ ret
+
+This doesn't need -ffast-math support at all. This is particularly bad because
+the llvm-gcc frontend is canonicalizing the later into the former, but clang
+doesn't have this problem.
+
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
These two functions should generate the same code on big-endian systems:
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-Turn this into a single byte store with no load (the other 3 bytes are
-unmodified):
-
-define void @test(i32* %P) {
- %tmp = load i32* %P
- %tmp14 = or i32 %tmp, 3305111552
- %tmp15 = and i32 %tmp14, 3321888767
- store i32 %tmp15, i32* %P
- ret void
-}
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
-dag/inst combine "clz(x)>>5 -> x==0" for 32-bit x.
-
-Compile:
-
-int bar(int x)
-{
- int t = __builtin_clz(x);
- return -(t>>5);
-}
-
-to:
-
-_bar: addic r3,r3,-1
- subfe r3,r3,r3
- blr
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
quantum_sigma_x in 462.libquantum contains the following loop:
for(i=0; i<reg->size; i++)
return v ^ (t >> 8);
}
+Neither is this (very standard idiom):
+
+int f(int n)
+{
+ return (((n) << 24) | (((n) & 0xff00) << 8)
+ | (((n) >> 8) & 0xff00) | ((n) >> 24));
+}
+
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+[LOOP RECOGNITION]
+
These idioms should be recognized as popcount (see PR1488):
unsigned countbits_slow(unsigned v) {
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+[LOOP RECOGNITION]
+
viterbi speeds up *significantly* if the various "history" related copy loops
are turned into memcpy calls at the source level. We need a "loops to memcpy"
pass.
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+[LOOP OPTIMIZATION]
+
+SingleSource/Benchmarks/Misc/dt.c shows several interesting optimization
+opportunities in its double_array_divs_variable function: it needs loop
+interchange, memory promotion (which LICM already does), vectorization and
+variable trip count loop unrolling (since it has a constant trip count). ICC
+apparently produces this very nice code with -ffast-math:
+
+..B1.70: # Preds ..B1.70 ..B1.69
+ mulpd %xmm0, %xmm1 #108.2
+ mulpd %xmm0, %xmm1 #108.2
+ mulpd %xmm0, %xmm1 #108.2
+ mulpd %xmm0, %xmm1 #108.2
+ addl $8, %edx #
+ cmpl $131072, %edx #108.2
+ jb ..B1.70 # Prob 99% #108.2
+
+It would be better to count down to zero, but this is a lot better than what we
+do.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
Consider:
typedef unsigned U32;
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-From GCC Bug 3756:
-int
-pn (int n)
-{
- return (n >= 0 ? 1 : -1);
-}
-Should combine to (n >> 31) | 1. Currently not optimized with "clang
--emit-llvm-bc | opt -std-compile-opts | llc".
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
void a(int variable)
{
if (variable == 4 || variable == 6)
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+[ALIAS ANALYSIS]
+
Type based alias analysis:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14705
+We should do better analysis of posix_memalign. At the least it should
+no-capture its pointer argument, at best, we should know that the out-value
+result doesn't point to anything (like malloc). One example of this is in
+SingleSource/Benchmarks/Misc/dt.c
+
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
A/B get pinned to the stack because we turn an if/then into a select instead
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-186.crafty contains this interesting pattern:
-
-%77 = call i8* @strstr(i8* getelementptr ([6 x i8]* @"\01LC5", i32 0, i32 0),
- i8* %30)
-%phitmp648 = icmp eq i8* %77, getelementptr ([6 x i8]* @"\01LC5", i32 0, i32 0)
-br i1 %phitmp648, label %bb70, label %bb76
-
-bb70: ; preds = %OptionMatch.exit91, %bb69
- %78 = call i32 @strlen(i8* %30) nounwind readonly align 1 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
-
-This is basically:
- cststr = "abcdef";
- if (strstr(cststr, P) == cststr) {
- x = strlen(P);
- ...
-
-The strstr call would be significantly cheaper written as:
-
-cststr = "abcdef";
-if (memcmp(P, str, strlen(P)))
- x = strlen(P);
-
-This is memcmp+strlen instead of strstr. This also makes the strlen fully
-redundant.
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
186.crafty also contains this code:
%1906 = call i32 @strlen(i8* getelementptr ([32 x i8]* @pgn_event, i32 0,i32 0))
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-FunctionAttrs is not marking this function as readnone (just readonly):
-$ clang t.c -emit-llvm -S -o - -O0 | opt -mem2reg -S -functionattrs
-
-int t(int a, int b, int c) {
- int *p;
- if (a)
- p = &a;
- else
- p = &c;
- return *p;
-}
-
-This is because we codegen this to:
-
-define i32 @t(i32 %a, i32 %b, i32 %c) nounwind readonly ssp {
-entry:
- %a.addr = alloca i32 ; <i32*> [#uses=3]
- %c.addr = alloca i32 ; <i32*> [#uses=2]
-...
-
-if.end:
- %p.0 = phi i32* [ %a.addr, %if.then ], [ %c.addr, %if.else ]
- %tmp2 = load i32* %p.0 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
- ret i32 %tmp2
-}
-
-And functionattrs doesn't realize that the p.0 load points to function local
-memory.
-
-Also, functionattrs doesn't know about memcpy/memset. This function should be
+functionattrs doesn't know much about memcpy/memset. This function should be
marked readnone rather than readonly, since it only twiddles local memory, but
functionattrs doesn't handle memset/memcpy/memmove aggressively:
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+Missed instcombine transformation:
+define i1 @a(i32 %x) nounwind readnone {
+entry:
+ %cmp = icmp eq i32 %x, 30
+ %sub = add i32 %x, -30
+ %cmp2 = icmp ugt i32 %sub, 9
+ %or = or i1 %cmp, %cmp2
+ ret i1 %or
+}
+This should be optimized to a single compare. Testcase derived from gcc.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+Missed instcombine transformation:
+void b();
+void a(int x) { if (((1<<x)&8)==0) b(); }
+
+The shift should be optimized out. Testcase derived from gcc.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+Missed instcombine or reassociate transformation:
+int a(int a, int b) { return (a==12)&(b>47)&(b<58); }
+
+The sgt and slt should be combined into a single comparison. Testcase derived
+from gcc.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+Missed instcombine transformation:
+define i32 @a(i32 %x) nounwind readnone {
+entry:
+ %rem = srem i32 %x, 32
+ %shl = shl i32 1, %rem
+ ret i32 %shl
+}
+
+The srem can be transformed to an and because if x is negative, the shift is
+undefined. Testcase derived from gcc.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+Missed instcombine/dagcombine transformation:
+define i32 @a(i32 %x, i32 %y) nounwind readnone {
+entry:
+ %mul = mul i32 %y, -8
+ %sub = sub i32 %x, %mul
+ ret i32 %sub
+}
+
+Should compile to something like x+y*8, but currently compiles to an
+inefficient result. Testcase derived from gcc.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+Missed instcombine/dagcombine transformation:
+define void @lshift_lt(i8 zeroext %a) nounwind {
+entry:
+ %conv = zext i8 %a to i32
+ %shl = shl i32 %conv, 3
+ %cmp = icmp ult i32 %shl, 33
+ br i1 %cmp, label %if.then, label %if.end
+
+if.then:
+ tail call void @bar() nounwind
+ ret void
+
+if.end:
+ ret void
+}
+declare void @bar() nounwind
+
+The shift should be eliminated. Testcase derived from gcc.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+These compile into different code, one gets recognized as a switch and the
+other doesn't due to phase ordering issues (PR6212):
+
+int test1(int mainType, int subType) {
+ if (mainType == 7)
+ subType = 4;
+ else if (mainType == 9)
+ subType = 6;
+ else if (mainType == 11)
+ subType = 9;
+ return subType;
+}
+
+int test2(int mainType, int subType) {
+ if (mainType == 7)
+ subType = 4;
+ if (mainType == 9)
+ subType = 6;
+ if (mainType == 11)
+ subType = 9;
+ return subType;
+}
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+The following test case (from PR6576):
+
+define i32 @mul(i32 %a, i32 %b) nounwind readnone {
+entry:
+ %cond1 = icmp eq i32 %b, 0 ; <i1> [#uses=1]
+ br i1 %cond1, label %exit, label %bb.nph
+bb.nph: ; preds = %entry
+ %tmp = mul i32 %b, %a ; <i32> [#uses=1]
+ ret i32 %tmp
+exit: ; preds = %entry
+ ret i32 0
+}
+
+could be reduced to:
+
+define i32 @mul(i32 %a, i32 %b) nounwind readnone {
+entry:
+ %tmp = mul i32 %b, %a
+ ret i32 %tmp
+}
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+We should use DSE + llvm.lifetime.end to delete dead vtable pointer updates.
+See GCC PR34949
+
+Another interesting case is that something related could be used for variables
+that go const after their ctor has finished. In these cases, globalopt (which
+can statically run the constructor) could mark the global const (so it gets put
+in the readonly section). A testcase would be:
+
+#include <complex>
+using namespace std;
+const complex<char> should_be_in_rodata (42,-42);
+complex<char> should_be_in_data (42,-42);
+complex<char> should_be_in_bss;
+
+Where we currently evaluate the ctors but the globals don't become const because
+the optimizer doesn't know they "become const" after the ctor is done. See
+GCC PR4131 for more examples.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+In this code:
+
+long foo(long x) {
+ return x > 1 ? x : 1;
+}
+
+LLVM emits a comparison with 1 instead of 0. 0 would be equivalent
+and cheaper on most targets.
+
+LLVM prefers comparisons with zero over non-zero in general, but in this
+case it choses instead to keep the max operation obvious.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+Take the following testcase on x86-64 (similar testcases exist for all targets
+with addc/adde):
+
+define void @a(i64* nocapture %s, i64* nocapture %t, i64 %a, i64 %b,
+i64 %c) nounwind {
+entry:
+ %0 = zext i64 %a to i128 ; <i128> [#uses=1]
+ %1 = zext i64 %b to i128 ; <i128> [#uses=1]
+ %2 = add i128 %1, %0 ; <i128> [#uses=2]
+ %3 = zext i64 %c to i128 ; <i128> [#uses=1]
+ %4 = shl i128 %3, 64 ; <i128> [#uses=1]
+ %5 = add i128 %4, %2 ; <i128> [#uses=1]
+ %6 = lshr i128 %5, 64 ; <i128> [#uses=1]
+ %7 = trunc i128 %6 to i64 ; <i64> [#uses=1]
+ store i64 %7, i64* %s, align 8
+ %8 = trunc i128 %2 to i64 ; <i64> [#uses=1]
+ store i64 %8, i64* %t, align 8
+ ret void
+}
+
+Generated code:
+ addq %rcx, %rdx
+ movl $0, %eax
+ adcq $0, %rax
+ addq %r8, %rax
+ movq %rax, (%rdi)
+ movq %rdx, (%rsi)
+ ret
+
+Expected code:
+ addq %rcx, %rdx
+ adcq $0, %r8
+ movq %r8, (%rdi)
+ movq %rdx, (%rsi)
+ ret
+
+The generated SelectionDAG has an ADD of an ADDE, where both operands of the
+ADDE are zero. Replacing one of the operands of the ADDE with the other operand
+of the ADD, and replacing the ADD with the ADDE, should give the desired result.
+
+(That said, we are doing a lot better than gcc on this testcase. :) )
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+Switch lowering generates less than ideal code for the following switch:
+define void @a(i32 %x) nounwind {
+entry:
+ switch i32 %x, label %if.end [
+ i32 0, label %if.then
+ i32 1, label %if.then
+ i32 2, label %if.then
+ i32 3, label %if.then
+ i32 5, label %if.then
+ ]
+if.then:
+ tail call void @foo() nounwind
+ ret void
+if.end:
+ ret void
+}
+declare void @foo()
+
+Generated code on x86-64 (other platforms give similar results):
+a:
+ cmpl $5, %edi
+ ja .LBB0_2
+ movl %edi, %eax
+ movl $47, %ecx
+ btq %rax, %rcx
+ jb .LBB0_3
+.LBB0_2:
+ ret
+.LBB0_3:
+ jmp foo # TAILCALL
+
+The movl+movl+btq+jb could be simplified to a cmpl+jne.
+
+Or, if we wanted to be really clever, we could simplify the whole thing to
+something like the following, which eliminates a branch:
+ xorl $1, %edi
+ cmpl $4, %edi
+ ja .LBB0_2
+ ret
+.LBB0_2:
+ jmp foo # TAILCALL
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+Given a branch where the two target blocks are identical ("ret i32 %b" in
+both), simplifycfg will simplify them away. But not so for a switch statement:
+
+define i32 @f(i32 %a, i32 %b) nounwind readnone {
+entry:
+ switch i32 %a, label %bb3 [
+ i32 4, label %bb
+ i32 6, label %bb
+ ]
+
+bb: ; preds = %entry, %entry
+ ret i32 %b
+
+bb3: ; preds = %entry
+ ret i32 %b
+}
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
projects / oota-llvm.git / blobdiff