// Random ideas for the X86 backend: SSE-specific stuff.
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-- Consider eliminating the unaligned SSE load intrinsics, replacing them with
- unaligned LLVM load instructions.
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+SSE Variable shift can be custom lowered to something like this, which uses a
+small table + unaligned load + shuffle instead of going through memory.
+
+__m128i_shift_right:
+ .byte 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
+ .byte -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1
+
+...
+__m128i shift_right(__m128i value, unsigned long offset) {
+ return _mm_shuffle_epi8(value,
+ _mm_loadu_si128((__m128 *) (___m128i_shift_right + offset)));
+}
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+SSE has instructions for doing operations on complex numbers, we should pattern
+match them. For example, this should turn into a horizontal add:
+
+typedef float __attribute__((vector_size(16))) v4f32;
+float f32(v4f32 A) {
+ return A[0]+A[1]+A[2]+A[3];
+}
+
+Instead we get this:
+
+_f32: ## @f32
+ pshufd $1, %xmm0, %xmm1 ## xmm1 = xmm0[1,0,0,0]
+ addss %xmm0, %xmm1
+ pshufd $3, %xmm0, %xmm2 ## xmm2 = xmm0[3,0,0,0]
+ movhlps %xmm0, %xmm0 ## xmm0 = xmm0[1,1]
+ movaps %xmm0, %xmm3
+ addss %xmm1, %xmm3
+ movdqa %xmm2, %xmm0
+ addss %xmm3, %xmm0
+ ret
+
+Also, there are cases where some simple local SLP would improve codegen a bit.
+compiling this:
+
+_Complex float f32(_Complex float A, _Complex float B) {
+ return A+B;
+}
+
+into:
+
+_f32: ## @f32
+ movdqa %xmm0, %xmm2
+ addss %xmm1, %xmm2
+ pshufd $1, %xmm1, %xmm1 ## xmm1 = xmm1[1,0,0,0]
+ pshufd $1, %xmm0, %xmm3 ## xmm3 = xmm0[1,0,0,0]
+ addss %xmm1, %xmm3
+ movaps %xmm2, %xmm0
+ unpcklps %xmm3, %xmm0 ## xmm0 = xmm0[0],xmm3[0],xmm0[1],xmm3[1]
+ ret
+
+seems silly when it could just be one addps.
+
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-Think about doing i64 math in SSE regs.
+Think about doing i64 math in SSE regs on x86-32.
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-SSE doesn't have [mem] op= reg instructions. If we have an SSE instruction
-like this:
-
- X += y
-
-and the register allocator decides to spill X, it is cheaper to emit this as:
-
-Y += [xslot]
-store Y -> [xslot]
-
-than as:
-
-tmp = [xslot]
-tmp += y
-store tmp -> [xslot]
-
-..and this uses one fewer register (so this should be done at load folding
-time, not at spiller time). *Note* however that this can only be done
-if Y is dead. Here's a testcase:
-
-@.str_3 = external global [15 x i8] ; <[15 x i8]*> [#uses=0]
-declare void @printf(i32, ...)
-define void @main() {
-build_tree.exit:
- br label %no_exit.i7
-
-no_exit.i7: ; preds = %no_exit.i7, %build_tree.exit
- %tmp.0.1.0.i9 = phi double [ 0.000000e+00, %build_tree.exit ], [ %tmp.34.i18, %no_exit.i7 ] ; <double> [#uses=1]
- %tmp.0.0.0.i10 = phi double [ 0.000000e+00, %build_tree.exit ], [ %tmp.28.i16, %no_exit.i7 ] ; <double> [#uses=1]
- %tmp.28.i16 = add double %tmp.0.0.0.i10, 0.000000e+00 ; <double> [#uses=1]
- %tmp.34.i18 = add double %tmp.0.1.0.i9, 0.000000e+00 ; <double> [#uses=2]
- br i1 false, label %Compute_Tree.exit23, label %no_exit.i7
-
-Compute_Tree.exit23: ; preds = %no_exit.i7
- tail call void (i32, ...)* @printf( i32 0 )
- store double %tmp.34.i18, double* null
- ret void
-}
-
-We currently emit:
-
-.BBmain_1:
- xorpd %XMM1, %XMM1
- addsd %XMM0, %XMM1
-*** movsd %XMM2, QWORD PTR [%ESP + 8]
-*** addsd %XMM2, %XMM1
-*** movsd QWORD PTR [%ESP + 8], %XMM2
- jmp .BBmain_1 # no_exit.i7
-
-This is a bugpoint reduced testcase, which is why the testcase doesn't make
-much sense (e.g. its an infinite loop). :)
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
SSE should implement 'select_cc' using 'emulated conditional moves' that use
pcmp/pand/pandn/por to do a selection instead of a conditional branch:
double %X(double %Y, double %Z, double %A, double %B) {
%C = setlt double %A, %B
- %z = add double %Z, 0.0 ;; select operand is not a load
+ %z = fadd double %Z, 0.0 ;; select operand is not a load
%D = select bool %C, double %Y, double %z
ret double %D
}
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-It's not clear whether we should use pxor or xorps / xorpd to clear XMM
-registers. The choice may depend on subtarget information. We should do some
-more experiments on different x86 machines.
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
Lower memcpy / memset to a series of SSE 128 bit move instructions when it's
feasible.
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-Teach the coalescer to commute 2-addr instructions, allowing us to eliminate
-the reg-reg copy in this example:
-
-float foo(int *x, float *y, unsigned c) {
- float res = 0.0;
- unsigned i;
- for (i = 0; i < c; i++) {
- float xx = (float)x[i];
- xx = xx * y[i];
- xx += res;
- res = xx;
- }
- return res;
-}
-
-LBB_foo_3: # no_exit
- cvtsi2ss %XMM0, DWORD PTR [%EDX + 4*%ESI]
- mulss %XMM0, DWORD PTR [%EAX + 4*%ESI]
- addss %XMM0, %XMM1
- inc %ESI
- cmp %ESI, %ECX
-**** movaps %XMM1, %XMM0
- jb LBB_foo_3 # no_exit
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
Codegen:
if (copysign(1.0, x) == copysign(1.0, y))
into:
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-How to decide when to use the "floating point version" of logical ops? Here are
-some code fragments:
-
- movaps LCPI5_5, %xmm2
- divps %xmm1, %xmm2
- mulps %xmm2, %xmm3
- mulps 8656(%ecx), %xmm3
- addps 8672(%ecx), %xmm3
- andps LCPI5_6, %xmm2
- andps LCPI5_1, %xmm3
- por %xmm2, %xmm3
- movdqa %xmm3, (%edi)
-
- movaps LCPI5_5, %xmm1
- divps %xmm0, %xmm1
- mulps %xmm1, %xmm3
- mulps 8656(%ecx), %xmm3
- addps 8672(%ecx), %xmm3
- andps LCPI5_6, %xmm1
- andps LCPI5_1, %xmm3
- orps %xmm1, %xmm3
- movaps %xmm3, 112(%esp)
- movaps %xmm3, (%ebx)
-
-Due to some minor source change, the later case ended up using orps and movaps
-instead of por and movdqa. Does it matter?
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
-X86RegisterInfo::copyRegToReg() returns X86::MOVAPSrr for VR128. Is it possible
-to choose between movaps, movapd, and movdqa based on types of source and
-destination?
-
-How about andps, andpd, and pand? Do we really care about the type of the packed
-elements? If not, why not always use the "ps" variants which are likely to be
-shorter.
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
External test Nurbs exposed some problems. Look for
__ZN15Nurbs_SSE_Cubic17TessellateSurfaceE, bb cond_next140. This is what icc
emits:
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25500
-
-LLVM is producing bad code.
-
-LBB_main_4: # cond_true44
- addps %xmm1, %xmm2
- subps %xmm3, %xmm2
- movaps (%ecx), %xmm4
- movaps %xmm2, %xmm1
- addps %xmm4, %xmm1
- addl $16, %ecx
- incl %edx
- cmpl $262144, %edx
- movaps %xmm3, %xmm2
- movaps %xmm4, %xmm3
- jne LBB_main_4 # cond_true44
-
-There are two problems. 1) No need to two loop induction variables. We can
-compare against 262144 * 16. 2) Known register coalescer issue. We should
-be able eliminate one of the movaps:
-
- addps %xmm2, %xmm1 <=== Commute!
- subps %xmm3, %xmm1
- movaps (%ecx), %xmm4
- movaps %xmm1, %xmm1 <=== Eliminate!
- addps %xmm4, %xmm1
- addl $16, %ecx
- incl %edx
- cmpl $262144, %edx
- movaps %xmm3, %xmm2
- movaps %xmm4, %xmm3
- jne LBB_main_4 # cond_true44
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
Consider:
__m128 test(float a) {
... saving two instructions.
The basic idea is that a reload from a spill slot, can, if only one 4-byte
-chunk is used, bring in 3 zeros the the one element instead of 4 elements.
+chunk is used, bring in 3 zeros the one element instead of 4 elements.
This can be used to simplify a variety of shuffle operations, where the
elements are fixed zeros.
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-For this:
-
-#include <emmintrin.h>
-void test(__m128d *r, __m128d *A, double B) {
- *r = _mm_loadl_pd(*A, &B);
-}
-
-We generates:
-
- subl $12, %esp
- movsd 24(%esp), %xmm0
- movsd %xmm0, (%esp)
- movl 20(%esp), %eax
- movapd (%eax), %xmm0
- movlpd (%esp), %xmm0
- movl 16(%esp), %eax
- movapd %xmm0, (%eax)
- addl $12, %esp
- ret
-
-icc generates:
-
- movl 4(%esp), %edx #3.6
- movl 8(%esp), %eax #3.6
- movapd (%eax), %xmm0 #4.22
- movlpd 12(%esp), %xmm0 #4.8
- movapd %xmm0, (%edx) #4.3
- ret #5.1
-
-So icc is smart enough to know that B is in memory so it doesn't load it and
-store it back to stack.
-
-This should be fixed by eliminating the llvm.x86.sse2.loadl.pd intrinsic,
-lowering it to a load+insertelement instead. Already match the load+shuffle
-as movlpd, so this should be easy. We already get optimal code for:
-
-define void @test2(<2 x double>* %r, <2 x double>* %A, double %B) {
-entry:
- %tmp2 = load <2 x double>* %A, align 16
- %tmp8 = insertelement <2 x double> %tmp2, double %B, i32 0
- store <2 x double> %tmp8, <2 x double>* %r, align 16
- ret void
-}
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
-__m128d test1( __m128d A, __m128d B) {
- return _mm_shuffle_pd(A, B, 0x3);
-}
-
-compiles to
-
-shufpd $3, %xmm1, %xmm0
-
-Perhaps it's better to use unpckhpd instead?
-
-unpckhpd %xmm1, %xmm0
-
-Don't know if unpckhpd is faster. But it is shorter.
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
This code generates ugly code, probably due to costs being off or something:
define void @test(float* %P, <4 x float>* %P2 ) {
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-We should compile this:
-#include <xmmintrin.h>
-typedef union {
- int i[4];
- float f[4];
- __m128 v;
-} vector4_t;
-void swizzle (const void *a, vector4_t * b, vector4_t * c) {
- b->v = _mm_loadl_pi (b->v, (__m64 *) a);
- c->v = _mm_loadl_pi (c->v, ((__m64 *) a) + 1);
-}
-
-to:
-
-_swizzle:
- movl 4(%esp), %eax
- movl 8(%esp), %edx
- movl 12(%esp), %ecx
- movlps (%eax), %xmm0
- movlps %xmm0, (%edx)
- movlps 8(%eax), %xmm0
- movlps %xmm0, (%ecx)
- ret
-
-not:
-
-swizzle:
- movl 8(%esp), %eax
- movaps (%eax), %xmm0
- movl 4(%esp), %ecx
- movlps (%ecx), %xmm0
- movaps %xmm0, (%eax)
- movl 12(%esp), %eax
- movaps (%eax), %xmm0
- movlps 8(%ecx), %xmm0
- movaps %xmm0, (%eax)
- ret
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
-These functions should produce the same code:
-
-#include <emmintrin.h>
-
-typedef long long __m128i __attribute__ ((__vector_size__ (16)));
-
-int foo(__m128i* val) {
- return __builtin_ia32_vec_ext_v4si(*val, 1);
-}
-int bar(__m128i* val) {
- union vs {
- __m128i *_v;
- int* _s;
- } v = {val};
- return v._s[1];
-}
-
-We currently produce (with -m64):
-
-_foo:
- pshufd $1, (%rdi), %xmm0
- movd %xmm0, %eax
- ret
-_bar:
- movl 4(%rdi), %eax
- ret
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
We should materialize vector constants like "all ones" and "signbit" with
code like:
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-"converting 64-bit constant pool entry to 32-bit not necessarily beneficial"
-http://llvm.org/PR1264
-
-For this test case:
-
-define double @foo(double %x) {
- %y = mul double %x, 5.000000e-01
- ret double %y
-}
-
-llc -march=x86-64 currently produces a 32-bit constant pool entry and this code:
-
- cvtss2sd .LCPI1_0(%rip), %xmm1
- mulsd %xmm1, %xmm0
-
-instead of just using a 64-bit constant pool entry with this:
-
- mulsd .LCPI1_0(%rip), %xmm0
-
-This is due to the code in ExpandConstantFP in LegalizeDAG.cpp. It notices that
-x86-64 indeed has an instruction to load a 32-bit float from memory and convert
-it into a 64-bit float in a register, however it doesn't notice that this isn't
-beneficial because it prevents the load from being folded into the multiply.
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
These functions:
#include <xmmintrin.h>
define i64 @ccosf(float %z.0, float %z.1) nounwind readonly {
entry:
- %tmp6 = sub float -0.000000e+00, %z.1 ; <float> [#uses=1]
- %tmp20 = tail call i64 @ccoshf( float %tmp6, float %z.0 ) nounwind readonly ; <i64> [#uses=1]
- ret i64 %tmp20
+ %tmp6 = fsub float -0.000000e+00, %z.1 ; <float> [#uses=1]
+ %tmp20 = tail call i64 @ccoshf( float %tmp6, float %z.0 ) nounwind readonly
+ ret i64 %tmp20
}
+declare i64 @ccoshf(float %z.0, float %z.1) nounwind readonly
This currently compiles to:
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-SSE4 extract-to-mem ops aren't being pattern matched because of the AssertZext
-sitting between the truncate and the extract.
-
-//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
INSERTPS can match any insert (extract, imm1), imm2 for 4 x float, and insert
any number of 0.0 simultaneously. Currently we only use it for simple
insertions.
right, but we shouldn't have to custom lower anything. This is probably related
to <2 x i64> ops being so bad.
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+LLVM currently generates stack realignment code, when it is not necessary
+needed. The problem is that we need to know about stack alignment too early,
+before RA runs.
+
+At that point we don't know, whether there will be vector spill, or not.
+Stack realignment logic is overly conservative here, but otherwise we can
+produce unaligned loads/stores.
+
+Fixing this will require some huge RA changes.
+
+Testcase:
+#include <emmintrin.h>
+
+typedef short vSInt16 __attribute__ ((__vector_size__ (16)));
+
+static const vSInt16 a = {- 22725, - 12873, - 22725, - 12873, - 22725, - 12873,
+- 22725, - 12873};;
+
+vSInt16 madd(vSInt16 b)
+{
+ return _mm_madd_epi16(a, b);
+}
+
+Generated code (x86-32, linux):
+madd:
+ pushl %ebp
+ movl %esp, %ebp
+ andl $-16, %esp
+ movaps .LCPI1_0, %xmm1
+ pmaddwd %xmm1, %xmm0
+ movl %ebp, %esp
+ popl %ebp
+ ret
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+Consider:
+#include <emmintrin.h>
+__m128 foo2 (float x) {
+ return _mm_set_ps (0, 0, x, 0);
+}
+
+In x86-32 mode, we generate this spiffy code:
+
+_foo2:
+ movss 4(%esp), %xmm0
+ pshufd $81, %xmm0, %xmm0
+ ret
+
+in x86-64 mode, we generate this code, which could be better:
+
+_foo2:
+ xorps %xmm1, %xmm1
+ movss %xmm0, %xmm1
+ pshufd $81, %xmm1, %xmm0
+ ret
+
+In sse4 mode, we could use insertps to make both better.
+
+Here's another testcase that could use insertps [mem]:
+
+#include <xmmintrin.h>
+extern float x2, x3;
+__m128 foo1 (float x1, float x4) {
+ return _mm_set_ps (x2, x1, x3, x4);
+}
+
+gcc mainline compiles it to:
+
+foo1:
+ insertps $0x10, x2(%rip), %xmm0
+ insertps $0x10, x3(%rip), %xmm1
+ movaps %xmm1, %xmm2
+ movlhps %xmm0, %xmm2
+ movaps %xmm2, %xmm0
+ ret
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+We compile vector multiply-by-constant into poor code:
+
+define <4 x i32> @f(<4 x i32> %i) nounwind {
+ %A = mul <4 x i32> %i, < i32 10, i32 10, i32 10, i32 10 >
+ ret <4 x i32> %A
+}
+
+On targets without SSE4.1, this compiles into:
+
+LCPI1_0: ## <4 x i32>
+ .long 10
+ .long 10
+ .long 10
+ .long 10
+ .text
+ .align 4,0x90
+ .globl _f
+_f:
+ pshufd $3, %xmm0, %xmm1
+ movd %xmm1, %eax
+ imull LCPI1_0+12, %eax
+ movd %eax, %xmm1
+ pshufd $1, %xmm0, %xmm2
+ movd %xmm2, %eax
+ imull LCPI1_0+4, %eax
+ movd %eax, %xmm2
+ punpckldq %xmm1, %xmm2
+ movd %xmm0, %eax
+ imull LCPI1_0, %eax
+ movd %eax, %xmm1
+ movhlps %xmm0, %xmm0
+ movd %xmm0, %eax
+ imull LCPI1_0+8, %eax
+ movd %eax, %xmm0
+ punpckldq %xmm0, %xmm1
+ movaps %xmm1, %xmm0
+ punpckldq %xmm2, %xmm0
+ ret
+
+It would be better to synthesize integer vector multiplication by constants
+using shifts and adds, pslld and paddd here. And even on targets with SSE4.1,
+simple cases such as multiplication by powers of two would be better as
+vector shifts than as multiplications.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+We compile this:
+
+__m128i
+foo2 (char x)
+{
+ return _mm_set_epi8 (1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, x, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0);
+}
+
+into:
+ movl $1, %eax
+ xorps %xmm0, %xmm0
+ pinsrw $2, %eax, %xmm0
+ movzbl 4(%esp), %eax
+ pinsrw $3, %eax, %xmm0
+ movl $256, %eax
+ pinsrw $7, %eax, %xmm0
+ ret
+
+
+gcc-4.2:
+ subl $12, %esp
+ movzbl 16(%esp), %eax
+ movdqa LC0, %xmm0
+ pinsrw $3, %eax, %xmm0
+ addl $12, %esp
+ ret
+ .const
+ .align 4
+LC0:
+ .word 0
+ .word 0
+ .word 1
+ .word 0
+ .word 0
+ .word 0
+ .word 0
+ .word 256
+
+With SSE4, it should be
+ movdqa .LC0(%rip), %xmm0
+ pinsrb $6, %edi, %xmm0
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+We should transform a shuffle of two vectors of constants into a single vector
+of constants. Also, insertelement of a constant into a vector of constants
+should also result in a vector of constants. e.g. 2008-06-25-VecISelBug.ll.
+
+We compiled it to something horrible:
+
+ .align 4
+LCPI1_1: ## float
+ .long 1065353216 ## float 1
+ .const
+
+ .align 4
+LCPI1_0: ## <4 x float>
+ .space 4
+ .long 1065353216 ## float 1
+ .space 4
+ .long 1065353216 ## float 1
+ .text
+ .align 4,0x90
+ .globl _t
+_t:
+ xorps %xmm0, %xmm0
+ movhps LCPI1_0, %xmm0
+ movss LCPI1_1, %xmm1
+ movaps %xmm0, %xmm2
+ shufps $2, %xmm1, %xmm2
+ shufps $132, %xmm2, %xmm0
+ movaps %xmm0, 0
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+rdar://5907648
+
+This function:
+
+float foo(unsigned char x) {
+ return x;
+}
+
+compiles to (x86-32):
+
+define float @foo(i8 zeroext %x) nounwind {
+ %tmp12 = uitofp i8 %x to float ; <float> [#uses=1]
+ ret float %tmp12
+}
+
+compiles to:
+
+_foo:
+ subl $4, %esp
+ movzbl 8(%esp), %eax
+ cvtsi2ss %eax, %xmm0
+ movss %xmm0, (%esp)
+ flds (%esp)
+ addl $4, %esp
+ ret
+
+We should be able to use:
+ cvtsi2ss 8($esp), %xmm0
+since we know the stack slot is already zext'd.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+Consider using movlps instead of movsd to implement (scalar_to_vector (loadf64))
+when code size is critical. movlps is slower than movsd on core2 but it's one
+byte shorter.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+We should use a dynamic programming based approach to tell when using FPStack
+operations is cheaper than SSE. SciMark montecarlo contains code like this
+for example:
+
+double MonteCarlo_num_flops(int Num_samples) {
+ return ((double) Num_samples)* 4.0;
+}
+
+In fpstack mode, this compiles into:
+
+LCPI1_0:
+ .long 1082130432 ## float 4.000000e+00
+_MonteCarlo_num_flops:
+ subl $4, %esp
+ movl 8(%esp), %eax
+ movl %eax, (%esp)
+ fildl (%esp)
+ fmuls LCPI1_0
+ addl $4, %esp
+ ret
+
+in SSE mode, it compiles into significantly slower code:
+
+_MonteCarlo_num_flops:
+ subl $12, %esp
+ cvtsi2sd 16(%esp), %xmm0
+ mulsd LCPI1_0, %xmm0
+ movsd %xmm0, (%esp)
+ fldl (%esp)
+ addl $12, %esp
+ ret
+
+There are also other cases in scimark where using fpstack is better, it is
+cheaper to do fld1 than load from a constant pool for example, so
+"load, add 1.0, store" is better done in the fp stack, etc.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+The X86 backend should be able to if-convert SSE comparisons like "ucomisd" to
+"cmpsd". For example, this code:
+
+double d1(double x) { return x == x ? x : x + x; }
+
+Compiles into:
+
+_d1:
+ ucomisd %xmm0, %xmm0
+ jnp LBB1_2
+ addsd %xmm0, %xmm0
+ ret
+LBB1_2:
+ ret
+
+Also, the 'ret's should be shared. This is PR6032.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+These should compile into the same code (PR6214): Perhaps instcombine should
+canonicalize the former into the later?
+
+define float @foo(float %x) nounwind {
+ %t = bitcast float %x to i32
+ %s = and i32 %t, 2147483647
+ %d = bitcast i32 %s to float
+ ret float %d
+}
+
+declare float @fabsf(float %n)
+define float @bar(float %x) nounwind {
+ %d = call float @fabsf(float %x)
+ ret float %d
+}
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+This IR (from PR6194):
+
+target datalayout = "e-p:64:64:64-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:64:64-f32:32:32-f64:64:64-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-s0:64:64-f80:128:128-n8:16:32:64-S128"
+target triple = "x86_64-apple-darwin10.0.0"
+
+%0 = type { double, double }
+%struct.float3 = type { float, float, float }
+
+define void @test(%0, %struct.float3* nocapture %res) nounwind noinline ssp {
+entry:
+ %tmp18 = extractvalue %0 %0, 0 ; <double> [#uses=1]
+ %tmp19 = bitcast double %tmp18 to i64 ; <i64> [#uses=1]
+ %tmp20 = zext i64 %tmp19 to i128 ; <i128> [#uses=1]
+ %tmp10 = lshr i128 %tmp20, 32 ; <i128> [#uses=1]
+ %tmp11 = trunc i128 %tmp10 to i32 ; <i32> [#uses=1]
+ %tmp12 = bitcast i32 %tmp11 to float ; <float> [#uses=1]
+ %tmp5 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.float3* %res, i64 0, i32 1 ; <float*> [#uses=1]
+ store float %tmp12, float* %tmp5
+ ret void
+}
+
+Compiles to:
+
+_test: ## @test
+ movd %xmm0, %rax
+ shrq $32, %rax
+ movl %eax, 4(%rdi)
+ ret
+
+This would be better kept in the SSE unit by treating XMM0 as a 4xfloat and
+doing a shuffle from v[1] to v[0] then a float store.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+On SSE4 machines, we compile this code:
+
+define <2 x float> @test2(<2 x float> %Q, <2 x float> %R,
+ <2 x float> *%P) nounwind {
+ %Z = fadd <2 x float> %Q, %R
+
+ store <2 x float> %Z, <2 x float> *%P
+ ret <2 x float> %Z
+}
+
+into:
+
+_test2: ## @test2
+## BB#0:
+ insertps $0, %xmm2, %xmm2
+ insertps $16, %xmm3, %xmm2
+ insertps $0, %xmm0, %xmm3
+ insertps $16, %xmm1, %xmm3
+ addps %xmm2, %xmm3
+ movq %xmm3, (%rdi)
+ movaps %xmm3, %xmm0
+ pshufd $1, %xmm3, %xmm1
+ ## kill: XMM1<def> XMM1<kill>
+ ret
+
+The insertps's of $0 are pointless complex copies.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+[UNSAFE FP]
+
+void foo(double, double, double);
+void norm(double x, double y, double z) {
+ double scale = __builtin_sqrt(x*x + y*y + z*z);
+ foo(x/scale, y/scale, z/scale);
+}
+
+We currently generate an sqrtsd and 3 divsd instructions. This is bad, fp div is
+slow and not pipelined. In -ffast-math mode we could compute "1.0/scale" first
+and emit 3 mulsd in place of the divs. This can be done as a target-independent
+transform.
+
+If we're dealing with floats instead of doubles we could even replace the sqrtss
+and inversion with an rsqrtss instruction, which computes 1/sqrt faster at the
+cost of reduced accuracy.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+This function should be matched to haddpd when the appropriate CPU is enabled:
+
+#include <x86intrin.h>
+double f (__m128d p) {
+ return p[0] + p[1];
+}
+
+similarly, v[0]-v[1] should match to hsubpd, and {v[0]-v[1], w[0]-w[1]} should
+turn into hsubpd also.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+define <2 x i32> @foo(<2 x double> %in) {
+ %x = fptosi <2 x double> %in to <2 x i32>
+ ret <2 x i32> %x
+}
+
+Should compile into cvttpd2dq instead of being scalarized into 2 cvttsd2si.
+
+//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
projects / oota-llvm.git / blobdiff