X-Git-Url: http://plrg.eecs.uci.edu/git/?a=blobdiff_plain;f=lib%2FCodeGen%2FREADME.txt;h=7f75f65167a382b515f79f547f2988ba06a66564;hb=1b3f9198ab3880be34b6252423b9e388b5cd6a5e;hp=d5ddd217962100d8b2c0c70e867dee3ae9282d64;hpb=877333b99dd830c3e8bb7eaa1345ea942d29fc06;p=oota-llvm.git diff --git a/lib/CodeGen/README.txt b/lib/CodeGen/README.txt index d5ddd217962..7f75f65167a 100644 --- a/lib/CodeGen/README.txt +++ b/lib/CodeGen/README.txt @@ -26,45 +26,7 @@ and then "merge" mul and mov: sxth r3, r3 mla r4, r3, lr, r4 -It also increase the likelyhood the store may become dead. - -//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// - -I think we should have a "hasSideEffects" flag (which is automatically set for -stuff that "isLoad" "isCall" etc), and the remat pass should eventually be able -to remat any instruction that has no side effects, if it can handle it and if -profitable. - -For now, I'd suggest having the remat stuff work like this: - -1. I need to spill/reload this thing. -2. Check to see if it has side effects. -3. Check to see if it is simple enough: e.g. it only has one register -destination and no register input. -4. If so, clone the instruction, do the xform, etc. - -Advantages of this are: - -1. the .td file describes the behavior of the instructions, not the way the - algorithm should work. -2. as remat gets smarter in the future, we shouldn't have to be changing the .td - files. -3. it is easier to explain what the flag means in the .td file, because you - don't have to pull in the explanation of how the current remat algo works. - -Some potential added complexities: - -1. Some instructions have to be glued to it's predecessor or successor. All of - the PC relative instructions and condition code setting instruction. We could - mark them as hasSideEffects, but that's not quite right. PC relative loads - from constantpools can be remat'ed, for example. But it requires more than - just cloning the instruction. Some instructions can be remat'ed but it - expands to more than one instruction. But allocator will have to make a - decision. - -4. As stated in 3, not as simple as cloning in some cases. The target will have - to decide how to remat it. For example, an ARM 2-piece constant generation - instruction is remat'ed as a load from constantpool. +It also increase the likelihood the store may become dead. //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// @@ -87,14 +49,14 @@ scheduled after any node that reads %reg1039. Use local info (i.e. register scavenger) to assign it a free register to allow reuse: - ldr r3, [sp, #+4] - add r3, r3, #3 - ldr r2, [sp, #+8] - add r2, r2, #2 - ldr r1, [sp, #+4] <== - add r1, r1, #1 - ldr r0, [sp, #+4] - add r0, r0, #2 + ldr r3, [sp, #+4] + add r3, r3, #3 + ldr r2, [sp, #+8] + add r2, r2, #2 + ldr r1, [sp, #+4] <== + add r1, r1, #1 + ldr r0, [sp, #+4] + add r0, r0, #2 //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// @@ -200,9 +162,38 @@ synthesize the various copy insertion/inspection methods in TargetInstrInfo. //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// -Stack coloring improvments: +Stack coloring improvements: 1. Do proper LiveStackAnalysis on all stack objects including those which are not spill slots. 2. Reorder objects to fill in gaps between objects. e.g. 4, 1, , 4, 1, 1, 1, , 4 => 4, 1, 1, 1, 1, 4, 4 + +//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// + +The scheduler should be able to sort nearby instructions by their address. For +example, in an expanded memset sequence it's not uncommon to see code like this: + + movl $0, 4(%rdi) + movl $0, 8(%rdi) + movl $0, 12(%rdi) + movl $0, 0(%rdi) + +Each of the stores is independent, and the scheduler is currently making an +arbitrary decision about the order. + +//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// + +Another opportunitiy in this code is that the $0 could be moved to a register: + + movl $0, 4(%rdi) + movl $0, 8(%rdi) + movl $0, 12(%rdi) + movl $0, 0(%rdi) + +This would save substantial code size, especially for longer sequences like +this. It would be easy to have a rule telling isel to avoid matching MOV32mi +if the immediate has more than some fixed number of uses. It's more involved +to teach the register allocator how to do late folding to recover from +excessive register pressure. +