35 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Sanjay Patel
50c3b290ed [x86] make 8-bit shl undesirable
I was looking at a potential DAGCombiner fix for 1 of the regressions in D60278, and it caused severe regression test pain because x86 TLI lies about the desirability of 8-bit shift ops.

We've hinted at making all 8-bit ops undesirable for the reason in the code comment:

// TODO: Almost no 8-bit ops are desirable because they have no actual
//       size/speed advantages vs. 32-bit ops, but they do have a major
//       potential disadvantage by causing partial register stalls.

...but that leads to massive diffs and exposes all kinds of optimization holes itself.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60286

llvm-svn: 357912
2019-04-08 13:58:50 +00:00
Nirav Dave
c6dfaa0e83 Revert r356996 "[DAG] Avoid smart constructor-based dangling nodes."
This patch appears to trigger very large compile time increases in
halide builds.

llvm-svn: 357116
2019-03-27 19:54:41 +00:00
Nirav Dave
a28c514581 [DAG] Avoid smart constructor-based dangling nodes.
Various SelectionDAG non-combine operations (e.g. the getNode smart
constructor and legalization) may leave dangling nodes by applying
optimizations or not fully pruning unused result values. This can
result in nodes that are never added to the worklist and therefore can
not be pruned.

Add a node inserter as the current node deleter to make sure such
nodes have the chance of being pruned.

Many minor changes, mostly positive.

llvm-svn: 356996
2019-03-26 15:08:14 +00:00
Roman Lebedev
b6e376ddfa [X86] Promote i8 CMOV's (PR40965)
Summary:
@mclow.lists brought up this issue up in IRC, it came up during
implementation of libc++ `std::midpoint()` implementation (D59099)
https://godbolt.org/z/oLrHBP

Currently LLVM X86 backend only promotes i8 CMOV if it came from 2x`trunc`.
This differential proposes to always promote i8 CMOV.

There are several concerns here:
* Is this actually more performant, or is it just the ASM that looks cuter?
* Does this result in partial register stalls?
* What about branch predictor?

# Indeed, performance should be the main point here.
Let's look at a simple microbenchmark: {F8412076}
```
#include "benchmark/benchmark.h"

#include <algorithm>
#include <cmath>
#include <cstdint>
#include <iterator>
#include <limits>
#include <random>
#include <type_traits>
#include <utility>
#include <vector>

// Future preliminary libc++ code, from Marshall Clow.
namespace std {
template <class _Tp>
__inline _Tp midpoint(_Tp __a, _Tp __b) noexcept {
  using _Up = typename std::make_unsigned<typename remove_cv<_Tp>::type>::type;

  int __sign = 1;
  _Up __m = __a;
  _Up __M = __b;
  if (__a > __b) {
    __sign = -1;
    __m = __b;
    __M = __a;
  }
  return __a + __sign * _Tp(_Up(__M - __m) >> 1);
}
}  // namespace std

template <typename T>
std::vector<T> getVectorOfRandomNumbers(size_t count) {
  std::random_device rd;
  std::mt19937 gen(rd());
  std::uniform_int_distribution<T> dis(std::numeric_limits<T>::min(),
                                       std::numeric_limits<T>::max());
  std::vector<T> v;
  v.reserve(count);
  std::generate_n(std::back_inserter(v), count,
                  [&dis, &gen]() { return dis(gen); });
  assert(v.size() == count);
  return v;
}

struct RandRand {
  template <typename T>
  static std::pair<std::vector<T>, std::vector<T>> Gen(size_t count) {
    return std::make_pair(getVectorOfRandomNumbers<T>(count),
                          getVectorOfRandomNumbers<T>(count));
  }
};
struct ZeroRand {
  template <typename T>
  static std::pair<std::vector<T>, std::vector<T>> Gen(size_t count) {
    return std::make_pair(std::vector<T>(count, T(0)),
                          getVectorOfRandomNumbers<T>(count));
  }
};

template <class T, class Gen>
void BM_StdMidpoint(benchmark::State& state) {
  const size_t Length = state.range(0);

  const std::pair<std::vector<T>, std::vector<T>> Data =
      Gen::template Gen<T>(Length);
  const std::vector<T>& a = Data.first;
  const std::vector<T>& b = Data.second;
  assert(a.size() == Length && b.size() == a.size());

  benchmark::ClobberMemory();
  benchmark::DoNotOptimize(a);
  benchmark::DoNotOptimize(a.data());
  benchmark::DoNotOptimize(b);
  benchmark::DoNotOptimize(b.data());

  for (auto _ : state) {
    for (size_t i = 0; i < Length; i++) {
      const auto calculated = std::midpoint(a[i], b[i]);
      benchmark::DoNotOptimize(calculated);
    }
  }
  state.SetComplexityN(Length);
  state.counters["midpoints"] =
      benchmark::Counter(Length, benchmark::Counter::kIsIterationInvariant);
  state.counters["midpoints/sec"] =
      benchmark::Counter(Length, benchmark::Counter::kIsIterationInvariantRate);
  const size_t BytesRead = 2 * sizeof(T) * Length;
  state.counters["bytes_read/iteration"] =
      benchmark::Counter(BytesRead, benchmark::Counter::kDefaults,
                         benchmark::Counter::OneK::kIs1024);
  state.counters["bytes_read/sec"] = benchmark::Counter(
      BytesRead, benchmark::Counter::kIsIterationInvariantRate,
      benchmark::Counter::OneK::kIs1024);
}

template <typename T>
static void CustomArguments(benchmark::internal::Benchmark* b) {
  const size_t L2SizeBytes = 2 * 1024 * 1024;
  // What is the largest range we can check to always fit within given L2 cache?
  const size_t MaxLen = L2SizeBytes / /*total bufs*/ 2 /
                        /*maximal elt size*/ sizeof(T) / /*safety margin*/ 2;
  b->RangeMultiplier(2)->Range(1, MaxLen)->Complexity(benchmark::oN);
}

// Both of the values are random.
// The comparison is unpredictable.
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_StdMidpoint, int32_t, RandRand)
    ->Apply(CustomArguments<int32_t>);
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_StdMidpoint, uint32_t, RandRand)
    ->Apply(CustomArguments<uint32_t>);
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_StdMidpoint, int64_t, RandRand)
    ->Apply(CustomArguments<int64_t>);
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_StdMidpoint, uint64_t, RandRand)
    ->Apply(CustomArguments<uint64_t>);
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_StdMidpoint, int16_t, RandRand)
    ->Apply(CustomArguments<int16_t>);
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_StdMidpoint, uint16_t, RandRand)
    ->Apply(CustomArguments<uint16_t>);
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_StdMidpoint, int8_t, RandRand)
    ->Apply(CustomArguments<int8_t>);
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_StdMidpoint, uint8_t, RandRand)
    ->Apply(CustomArguments<uint8_t>);

// One value is always zero, and another is bigger or equal than zero.
// The comparison is predictable.
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_StdMidpoint, uint32_t, ZeroRand)
    ->Apply(CustomArguments<uint32_t>);
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_StdMidpoint, uint64_t, ZeroRand)
    ->Apply(CustomArguments<uint64_t>);
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_StdMidpoint, uint16_t, ZeroRand)
    ->Apply(CustomArguments<uint16_t>);
BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_StdMidpoint, uint8_t, ZeroRand)
    ->Apply(CustomArguments<uint8_t>);
```

```
$ ~/src/googlebenchmark/tools/compare.py --no-utest benchmarks ./llvm-cmov-bench-OLD ./llvm-cmov-bench-NEW
RUNNING: ./llvm-cmov-bench-OLD --benchmark_out=/tmp/tmp5a5qjm
2019-03-06 21:53:31
Running ./llvm-cmov-bench-OLD
Run on (8 X 4000 MHz CPU s)
CPU Caches:
  L1 Data 16K (x8)
  L1 Instruction 64K (x4)
  L2 Unified 2048K (x4)
  L3 Unified 8192K (x1)
Load Average: 1.78, 1.81, 1.36
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark                                          Time             CPU   Iterations UserCounters<...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<int32_t, RandRand>/131072      300398 ns       300404 ns         2330 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=3.25083G/s midpoints=305.398M midpoints/sec=436.319M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<int32_t, RandRand>_BigO          2.29 N          2.29 N
BM_StdMidpoint<int32_t, RandRand>_RMS              2 %             2 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint32_t, RandRand>/131072     300433 ns       300433 ns         2330 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=3.25052G/s midpoints=305.398M midpoints/sec=436.278M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<uint32_t, RandRand>_BigO         2.29 N          2.29 N
BM_StdMidpoint<uint32_t, RandRand>_RMS             2 %             2 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<int64_t, RandRand>/65536       169857 ns       169858 ns         4121 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=5.74929G/s midpoints=270.074M midpoints/sec=385.828M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<int64_t, RandRand>_BigO          2.59 N          2.59 N
BM_StdMidpoint<int64_t, RandRand>_RMS              3 %             3 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint64_t, RandRand>/65536      169770 ns       169771 ns         4125 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=5.75223G/s midpoints=270.336M midpoints/sec=386.026M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<uint64_t, RandRand>_BigO         2.59 N          2.59 N
BM_StdMidpoint<uint64_t, RandRand>_RMS             3 %             3 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<int16_t, RandRand>/262144      591169 ns       591179 ns         1182 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=1.65189G/s midpoints=309.854M midpoints/sec=443.426M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<int16_t, RandRand>_BigO          2.25 N          2.25 N
BM_StdMidpoint<int16_t, RandRand>_RMS              1 %             1 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint16_t, RandRand>/262144     591264 ns       591274 ns         1184 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=1.65162G/s midpoints=310.378M midpoints/sec=443.354M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<uint16_t, RandRand>_BigO         2.25 N          2.25 N
BM_StdMidpoint<uint16_t, RandRand>_RMS             1 %             1 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<int8_t, RandRand>/524288      2983669 ns      2983689 ns          235 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=335.156M/s midpoints=123.208M midpoints/sec=175.718M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<int8_t, RandRand>_BigO           5.69 N          5.69 N
BM_StdMidpoint<int8_t, RandRand>_RMS               0 %             0 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint8_t, RandRand>/524288     2668398 ns      2668419 ns          262 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=374.754M/s midpoints=137.363M midpoints/sec=196.479M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<uint8_t, RandRand>_BigO          5.09 N          5.09 N
BM_StdMidpoint<uint8_t, RandRand>_RMS              0 %             0 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint32_t, ZeroRand>/131072     300887 ns       300887 ns         2331 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=3.24561G/s midpoints=305.529M midpoints/sec=435.619M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<uint32_t, ZeroRand>_BigO         2.29 N          2.29 N
BM_StdMidpoint<uint32_t, ZeroRand>_RMS             2 %             2 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint64_t, ZeroRand>/65536      169634 ns       169634 ns         4102 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=5.75688G/s midpoints=268.829M midpoints/sec=386.338M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<uint64_t, ZeroRand>_BigO         2.59 N          2.59 N
BM_StdMidpoint<uint64_t, ZeroRand>_RMS             3 %             3 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint16_t, ZeroRand>/262144     592252 ns       592255 ns         1182 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=1.64889G/s midpoints=309.854M midpoints/sec=442.62M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<uint16_t, ZeroRand>_BigO         2.26 N          2.26 N
BM_StdMidpoint<uint16_t, ZeroRand>_RMS             1 %             1 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint8_t, ZeroRand>/524288      987295 ns       987309 ns          711 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=1012.85M/s midpoints=372.769M midpoints/sec=531.028M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<uint8_t, ZeroRand>_BigO          1.88 N          1.88 N
BM_StdMidpoint<uint8_t, ZeroRand>_RMS              1 %             1 %
RUNNING: ./llvm-cmov-bench-NEW --benchmark_out=/tmp/tmpPvwpfW
2019-03-06 21:56:58
Running ./llvm-cmov-bench-NEW
Run on (8 X 4000 MHz CPU s)
CPU Caches:
  L1 Data 16K (x8)
  L1 Instruction 64K (x4)
  L2 Unified 2048K (x4)
  L3 Unified 8192K (x1)
Load Average: 1.17, 1.46, 1.30
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark                                          Time             CPU   Iterations UserCounters<...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<int32_t, RandRand>/131072      300878 ns       300880 ns         2324 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=3.24569G/s midpoints=304.611M midpoints/sec=435.629M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<int32_t, RandRand>_BigO          2.29 N          2.29 N
BM_StdMidpoint<int32_t, RandRand>_RMS              2 %             2 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint32_t, RandRand>/131072     300231 ns       300226 ns         2330 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=3.25276G/s midpoints=305.398M midpoints/sec=436.578M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<uint32_t, RandRand>_BigO         2.29 N          2.29 N
BM_StdMidpoint<uint32_t, RandRand>_RMS             2 %             2 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<int64_t, RandRand>/65536       170819 ns       170777 ns         4115 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=5.71835G/s midpoints=269.681M midpoints/sec=383.752M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<int64_t, RandRand>_BigO          2.60 N          2.60 N
BM_StdMidpoint<int64_t, RandRand>_RMS              3 %             3 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint64_t, RandRand>/65536      171705 ns       171708 ns         4106 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=5.68733G/s midpoints=269.091M midpoints/sec=381.671M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<uint64_t, RandRand>_BigO         2.62 N          2.62 N
BM_StdMidpoint<uint64_t, RandRand>_RMS             3 %             3 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<int16_t, RandRand>/262144      592510 ns       592516 ns         1182 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=1.64816G/s midpoints=309.854M midpoints/sec=442.425M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<int16_t, RandRand>_BigO          2.26 N          2.26 N
BM_StdMidpoint<int16_t, RandRand>_RMS              1 %             1 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint16_t, RandRand>/262144     614823 ns       614823 ns         1180 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=1.58836G/s midpoints=309.33M midpoints/sec=426.373M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<uint16_t, RandRand>_BigO         2.33 N          2.33 N
BM_StdMidpoint<uint16_t, RandRand>_RMS             4 %             4 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<int8_t, RandRand>/524288      1073181 ns      1073201 ns          650 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=931.791M/s midpoints=340.787M midpoints/sec=488.527M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<int8_t, RandRand>_BigO           2.05 N          2.05 N
BM_StdMidpoint<int8_t, RandRand>_RMS               1 %             1 %
BM_StdMidpoint<uint8_t, RandRand>/524288     1071010 ns      1071020 ns          653 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=933.689M/s midpoints=342.36M midpoints/sec=489.522M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<uint8_t, RandRand>_BigO          2.05 N          2.05 N
BM_StdMidpoint<uint8_t, RandRand>_RMS              1 %             1 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint32_t, ZeroRand>/131072     300413 ns       300416 ns         2330 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=3.2507G/s midpoints=305.398M midpoints/sec=436.302M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<uint32_t, ZeroRand>_BigO         2.29 N          2.29 N
BM_StdMidpoint<uint32_t, ZeroRand>_RMS             2 %             2 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint64_t, ZeroRand>/65536      169667 ns       169669 ns         4123 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=5.75568G/s midpoints=270.205M midpoints/sec=386.257M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<uint64_t, ZeroRand>_BigO         2.59 N          2.59 N
BM_StdMidpoint<uint64_t, ZeroRand>_RMS             3 %             3 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint16_t, ZeroRand>/262144     591396 ns       591404 ns         1184 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=1.65126G/s midpoints=310.378M midpoints/sec=443.257M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<uint16_t, ZeroRand>_BigO         2.26 N          2.26 N
BM_StdMidpoint<uint16_t, ZeroRand>_RMS             1 %             1 %
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint8_t, ZeroRand>/524288     1069421 ns      1069413 ns          655 bytes_read/iteration=1024k bytes_read/sec=935.092M/s midpoints=343.409M midpoints/sec=490.258M/s
BM_StdMidpoint<uint8_t, ZeroRand>_BigO          2.04 N          2.04 N
BM_StdMidpoint<uint8_t, ZeroRand>_RMS              0 %             0 %
Comparing ./llvm-cmov-bench-OLD to ./llvm-cmov-bench-NEW
Benchmark                                                   Time             CPU      Time Old      Time New       CPU Old       CPU New
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<int32_t, RandRand>/131072                 +0.0016         +0.0016        300398        300878        300404        300880
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint32_t, RandRand>/131072                -0.0007         -0.0007        300433        300231        300433        300226
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<int64_t, RandRand>/65536                  +0.0057         +0.0054        169857        170819        169858        170777
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint64_t, RandRand>/65536                 +0.0114         +0.0114        169770        171705        169771        171708
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<int16_t, RandRand>/262144                 +0.0023         +0.0023        591169        592510        591179        592516
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint16_t, RandRand>/262144                +0.0398         +0.0398        591264        614823        591274        614823
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<int8_t, RandRand>/524288                  -0.6403         -0.6403       2983669       1073181       2983689       1073201
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint8_t, RandRand>/524288                 -0.5986         -0.5986       2668398       1071010       2668419       1071020
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint32_t, ZeroRand>/131072                -0.0016         -0.0016        300887        300413        300887        300416
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint64_t, ZeroRand>/65536                 +0.0002         +0.0002        169634        169667        169634        169669
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint16_t, ZeroRand>/262144                -0.0014         -0.0014        592252        591396        592255        591404
<...>
BM_StdMidpoint<uint8_t, ZeroRand>/524288                 +0.0832         +0.0832        987295       1069421        987309       1069413
```

What can we tell from the benchmark?
* `BM_StdMidpoint<[u]int8_t, RandRand>` indeed has the worst performance.
* All `BM_StdMidpoint<uint{8,16,32}_t, ZeroRand>` are all performant, even the 8-bit case.
  That is because there we are computing mid point between zero and some random number,
  thus if the branch predictor is in use, it is in optimal situation.
* Promoting 8-bit CMOV did improve performance of `BM_StdMidpoint<[u]int8_t, RandRand>`, by -59%..-64%.

# What about branch predictor?
* `BM_StdMidpoint<uint8_t, ZeroRand>` was faster than `BM_StdMidpoint<uint{16,32,64}_t, ZeroRand>`,
  which may mean that well-predicted branch is better than `cmov`.
* Promoting 8-bit CMOV degraded performance of `BM_StdMidpoint<uint8_t, ZeroRand>`,
  `cmov` is up to +10% worse than well-predicted branch.
* However, i do not believe this is a concern. If the branch is well predicted,  then the PGO
  will also say that it is well predicted, and LLVM will happily expand cmov back into branch:
  https://godbolt.org/z/P5ufig

# What about partial register stalls?
I'm not really able to answer that.
What i can say is that if the branch is unpredictable (if it is predictable, then use PGO and you'll have branch)
in ~50% of cases you will have to pay branch misprediction penalty.
```
$ grep -i MispredictPenalty X86Sched*.td
X86SchedBroadwell.td:  let MispredictPenalty = 16;
X86SchedHaswell.td:  let MispredictPenalty = 16;
X86SchedSandyBridge.td:  let MispredictPenalty = 16;
X86SchedSkylakeClient.td:  let MispredictPenalty = 14;
X86SchedSkylakeServer.td:  let MispredictPenalty = 14;
X86ScheduleBdVer2.td:  let MispredictPenalty = 20; // Minimum branch misdirection penalty.
X86ScheduleBtVer2.td:  let MispredictPenalty = 14; // Minimum branch misdirection penalty
X86ScheduleSLM.td:  let MispredictPenalty = 10;
X86ScheduleZnver1.td:  let MispredictPenalty = 17;
```
.. which it can be as small as 10 cycles and as large as 20 cycles.
Partial register stalls do not seem to be an issue for AMD CPU's.
For intel CPU's, they should be around ~5 cycles?
Is that actually an issue here? I'm not sure.

In short, i'd say this is an improvement, at least on this microbenchmark.

Fixes [[ https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40965 | PR40965 ]].

Reviewers: craig.topper, RKSimon, spatel, andreadb, nikic

Reviewed By: craig.topper, andreadb

Subscribers: jfb, jdoerfert, llvm-commits, mclow.lists

Tags: #llvm, #libc

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59035

llvm-svn: 356300
2019-03-15 21:17:53 +00:00
Craig Topper
572e94ca02 [X86] Enable 8-bit OR with disjoint bits to convert to LEA
We already support 8-bits adds in convertToThreeAddress. But we can also support 8-bit OR if the bits are disjoint. We already do this for 16/32/64.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58863

llvm-svn: 355423
2019-03-05 18:37:33 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
9ab23101a8 [DAGCombiner] sub X, 0/1 --> add X, 0/-1
This extends the existing transform for:
add X, 0/1 --> sub X, 0/-1
...to allow the sibling subtraction fold.

This pattern could regress with the proposed change in D57401.

llvm-svn: 352680
2019-01-30 22:41:35 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
a1dca3553e [SelectionDAG] simplify select FP with undef condition
llvm-svn: 347212
2018-11-19 14:42:28 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
7a51bdcf3b [x86] add test for select FP with undef condition; NFC
llvm-svn: 347211
2018-11-19 14:39:57 +00:00
Craig Topper
aa5eb2fbaa [X86] Force floating point values in constant pool decoding to print in scientific notation so they can't be confused with integers.
When the floating point constants are whole numbers they have no decimal point so look like integers, but mean something very different in something like an 'and' instruction.

Ideally we would just print a decimal point and a 0, but I couldn't see how to make APFloat::toString do that.

llvm-svn: 345488
2018-10-29 04:52:04 +00:00
Simon Pilgrim
ad23f270db [X86] Standardize floating point assembly comments
Consistently try to use APFloat::toString for floating point constant comments to get rid of differences between Constant / ConstantDataSequential values - it should help stop some of the linux-windows buildbot failures matching NaN/INF etc. as well.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52702

llvm-svn: 343562
2018-10-02 09:08:51 +00:00
Simon Pilgrim
2d0f20cc04 [X86] Handle COPYs of physregs better (regalloc hints)
Enable enableMultipleCopyHints() on X86.

Original Patch by @jonpa:

While enabling the mischeduler for SystemZ, it was discovered that for some reason a test needed one extra seemingly needless COPY (test/CodeGen/SystemZ/call-03.ll). The handling for that is resulted in this patch, which improves the register coalescing by providing not just one copy hint, but a sorted list of copy hints. On SystemZ, this gives ~12500 less register moves on SPEC, as well as marginally less spilling.

Instead of improving just the SystemZ backend, the improvement has been implemented in common-code (calculateSpillWeightAndHint(). This gives a lot of test failures, but since this should be a general improvement I hope that the involved targets will help and review the test updates.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38128

llvm-svn: 342578
2018-09-19 18:59:08 +00:00
Craig Topper
570d47a010 [X86] Change the MOV32ri64 pseudo instruction to def a GR64 directly instead of wrapping it in a SUBREG_TO_REG.
Now we switch to the subregister in expandPostRAPseudos where we already switched the opcode.

This simplifies a few isel patterns that used the pseudo directly. And magically seems to have improved our ability to CSE it in the undef-label.ll test.

llvm-svn: 339496
2018-08-11 05:33:00 +00:00
Puyan Lotfi
43e94b15ea Followup on Proposal to move MIR physical register namespace to '$' sigil.
Discussed here:

http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-January/120320.html

In preparation for adding support for named vregs we are changing the sigil for
physical registers in MIR to '$' from '%'. This will prevent name clashes of
named physical register with named vregs.

llvm-svn: 323922
2018-01-31 22:04:26 +00:00
Francis Visoiu Mistrih
a8a83d150f [CodeGen] Use MachineOperand::print in the MIRPrinter for MO_Register.
Work towards the unification of MIR and debug output by refactoring the
interfaces.

For MachineOperand::print, keep a simple version that can be easily called
from `dump()`, and a more complex one which will be called from both the
MIRPrinter and MachineInstr::print.

Add extra checks inside MachineOperand for detached operands (operands
with getParent() == nullptr).

https://reviews.llvm.org/D40836

* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/kill: ([^ ]+) ([^ ]+)<def> ([^ ]+)/kill: \1 def \2 \3/g'
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/kill: ([^ ]+) ([^ ]+) ([^ ]+)<def>/kill: \1 \2 def \3/g'
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/kill: def ([^ ]+) ([^ ]+) ([^ ]+)<def>/kill: def \1 \2 def \3/g'
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/<def>//g'
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<kill>/killed \1/g'
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<imp-use,kill>/implicit killed \1/g'
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<dead>/dead \1/g'
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<def[ ]*,[ ]*dead>/dead \1/g'
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<imp-def[ ]*,[ ]*dead>/implicit-def dead \1/g'
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<imp-def>/implicit-def \1/g'
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<imp-use>/implicit \1/g'
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<internal>/internal \1/g'
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<undef>/undef \1/g'

llvm-svn: 320022
2017-12-07 10:40:31 +00:00
Francis Visoiu Mistrih
25528d6de7 [CodeGen] Unify MBB reference format in both MIR and debug output
As part of the unification of the debug format and the MIR format, print
MBB references as '%bb.5'.

The MIR printer prints the IR name of a MBB only for block definitions.

* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#" << ([a-zA-Z0-9_]+)->getNumber\(\)/" << printMBBReference(*\1)/g'
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#" << ([a-zA-Z0-9_]+)\.getNumber\(\)/" << printMBBReference(\1)/g'
* find . \( -name "*.txt" -o -name "*.s" -o -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#([0-9]+)/%bb.\1/g'
* grep -nr 'BB#' and fix

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40422

llvm-svn: 319665
2017-12-04 17:18:51 +00:00
Francis Visoiu Mistrih
9d7bb0cb40 [CodeGen] Print register names in lowercase in both MIR and debug output
As part of the unification of the debug format and the MIR format,
always print registers as lowercase.

* Only debug printing is affected. It now follows MIR.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40417

llvm-svn: 319187
2017-11-28 17:15:09 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
2a61a821a0 [DAG] combine assertsexts around a trunc
This was a suggested follow-up to:
D37017 / https://reviews.llvm.org/rL313577

llvm-svn: 315206
2017-10-09 15:22:20 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
f31b1a00ea [DAGCombiner] fold assertzexts separated by trunc
If we have an AssertZext of a truncated value that has already been AssertZext'ed, 
we can assert on the wider source op to improve the zext-y knowledge:
 assert (trunc (assert X, i8) to iN), i1 --> trunc (assert X, i1) to iN

This moves a fold from being Mips-specific to general combining, and x86 shows
improvements.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37017

llvm-svn: 313577
2017-09-18 22:05:35 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
169dae70a6 [x86] use more shift or LEA for select-of-constants (2nd try)
The previous rev (r310208) failed to account for overflow when subtracting the
constants to see if they're suitable for shift/lea. This version add a check
for that and more test were added in r310490.

We can convert any select-of-constants to math ops:
http://rise4fun.com/Alive/d7d

For this patch, I'm enhancing an existing x86 transform that uses fake multiplies
(they always become shl/lea) to avoid cmov or branching. The current code misses
cases where we have a negative constant and a positive constant, so this is just
trying to plug that hole.

The DAGCombiner diff prevents us from hitting a terrible inefficiency: we can start
with a select in IR, create a select DAG node, convert it into a sext, convert it
back into a select, and then lower it to sext machine code.

Some notes about the test diffs:

1. 2010-08-04-MaskedSignedCompare.ll - We were creating control flow that didn't exist in the IR.
2. memcmp.ll - Choose -1 or 1 is the case that got me looking at this again. We could avoid the 
   push/pop in some cases if we used 'movzbl %al' instead of an xor on a different reg? That's a 
   post-DAG problem though.
3. mul-constant-result.ll - The trade-off between sbb+not vs. setne+neg could be addressed if
   that's a regression, but those would always be nearly equivalent.
4. pr22338.ll and sext-i1.ll - These tests have undef operands, so we don't actually care about these diffs.
5. sbb.ll - This shows a win for what is likely a common case: choose -1 or 0.
6. select.ll - There's another borderline case here: cmp+sbb+or vs. test+set+lea? Also, sbb+not vs. setae+neg shows up again.
7. select_const.ll - These are motivating cases for the enhancement; replace cmov with cheaper ops.

Assembly differences between movzbl and xor to avoid a partial reg stall are caused later by the X86 Fixup SetCC pass.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35340

llvm-svn: 310717
2017-08-11 15:44:14 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
6f80d6b46f [x86] add more tests for select-of-constants; NFC
This is to help recommit a fixed version of r310208. As shown in PR34097, 
we could miscompile if subtraction of the constants overflowed.

llvm-svn: 310490
2017-08-09 15:57:02 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
807f92b8ff [x86] revert r310208 to investigate test-suite failures (PR34105 / PR34097)
llvm-svn: 310264
2017-08-07 15:47:48 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
a923c2ee95 [x86] use more shift or LEA for select-of-constants
We can convert any select-of-constants to math ops:
http://rise4fun.com/Alive/d7d

For this patch, I'm enhancing an existing x86 transform that uses fake multiplies 
(they always become shl/lea) to avoid cmov or branching. The current code misses 
cases where we have a negative constant and a positive constant, so this is just 
trying to plug that hole.

The DAGCombiner diff prevents us from hitting a terrible inefficiency: we can start 
with a select in IR, create a select DAG node, convert it into a sext, convert it 
back into a select, and then lower it to sext machine code.

Some notes about the test diffs:

1. 2010-08-04-MaskedSignedCompare.ll - We were creating control flow that didn't exist in the IR.
2. memcmp.ll - Choose -1 or 1 is the case that got me looking at this again. I 
   think we could avoid the push/pop in some cases if we used 'movzbl %al' instead of an xor on 
   a different reg? That's a post-DAG problem though.
3. mul-constant-result.ll - The trade-off between sbb+not vs. setne+neg could be addressed if 
   that's a regression, but I think those would always be nearly equivalent.
4. pr22338.ll and sext-i1.ll - These tests have undef operands, so I don't think we actually care about these diffs.
5. sbb.ll - This shows a win for what I think is a common case: choose -1 or 0.
6. select.ll - There's another borderline case here: cmp+sbb+or vs. test+set+lea? Also, sbb+not vs. setae+neg shows up again.
7. select_const.ll - These are motivating cases for the enhancement; replace cmov with cheaper ops.

Assembly differences between movzbl and xor to avoid a partial reg stall are caused later by the X86 Fixup SetCC pass.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35340

llvm-svn: 310208
2017-08-06 16:27:07 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
ac29895173 [x86] add select-of-constant tests; NFC
We're using cmov in these cases, but we could reduce to simpler ops.

llvm-svn: 307859
2017-07-12 22:42:39 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
066f3208bf [DAGCombiner] allow transforming (select Cond, C +/- 1, C) to (add(ext Cond), C)
select Cond, C +/- 1, C --> add(ext Cond), C -- with a target hook.

This is part of the ongoing process to obsolete D24480.  The motivation is to 
canonicalize to select IR in InstCombine whenever possible, so we need to have a way to
undo that easily in codegen.
 
PowerPC is an obvious winner for this kind of transform because it has fast and complete 
bit-twiddling abilities but generally lousy conditional execution perf (although this might
have changed in recent implementations).

x86 also sees some wins, but the effect is limited because these transforms already mostly
exist in its target-specific combineSelectOfTwoConstants(). The fact that we see any x86 
changes just shows that that code is a mess of special-case holes. We may be able to remove 
some of that logic now.

My guess is that other targets will want to enable this hook for most cases. The likely 
follow-ups would be to add value type and/or the constants themselves as parameters for the
hook. As the tests in select_const.ll show, we can transform any select-of-constants to 
math/logic, but the general transform for any 2 constants needs one more instruction 
(multiply or 'and').

ARM is one target that I think may not want this for most cases. I see infinite loops there
because it wants to use selects to enable conditionally executed instructions.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30537

llvm-svn: 296977
2017-03-04 19:18:09 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
fffa179837 [DAGCombiner] avoid assertion when folding binops with opaque constants
This bug was introduced with:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL296699

There may be a way to loosen the restriction, but for now just bail out
on any opaque constant.

The tests show that opacity is target-specific. This goes back to cost
calculations in ConstantHoisting based on TTI->getIntImmCost().

llvm-svn: 296768
2017-03-02 17:18:56 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
92938657a0 [DAGCombiner] fold binops with constant into select-of-constants
This is part of the ongoing attempt to improve select codegen for all targets and select 
canonicalization in IR (see D24480 for more background). The transform is a subset of what
is done in InstCombine's FoldOpIntoSelect().

I first noticed a regression in the x86 avx512-insert-extract.ll tests with a patch that 
hopes to convert more selects to basic math ops. This appears to be a general missing DAG
transform though, so I added tests for all standard binops in rL296621 
(PowerPC was chosen semi-randomly; it has scripted FileCheck support, but so do ARM and x86).

The poor output for "sel_constants_shl_constant" is tracked with:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32105

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30502

llvm-svn: 296699
2017-03-01 22:51:31 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
f8edc3e870 [x86] add vector tests for more coverage of D30502; NFC
llvm-svn: 296671
2017-03-01 20:31:23 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
832b1622d8 [DAGCombiner] add missing folds for scalar select of {-1,0,1}
The motivation for filling out these select-of-constants cases goes back to D24480, 
where we discussed removing an IR fold from add(zext) --> select. And that goes back to:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL75531
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL159230

The idea is that we should always canonicalize patterns like this to a select-of-constants 
in IR because that's the smallest IR and the best for value tracking. Note that we currently 
do the opposite in some cases (like the cases in *this* patch). Ie, the proposed folds in 
this patch already exist in InstCombine today:
https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/blob/master/lib/Transforms/InstCombine/InstCombineSelect.cpp#L1151

As this patch shows, most targets generate better machine code for simple ext/add/not ops 
rather than a select of constants. So the follow-up steps to make this less of a patchwork 
of special-case folds and missing IR canonicalization:

1. Have DAGCombiner convert any select of constants into ext/add/not ops.
2  Have InstCombine canonicalize in the other direction (create more selects).

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30180

llvm-svn: 296137
2017-02-24 17:17:33 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
8e55b685c2 [x86] add more tests of select of constants; NFC
llvm-svn: 295346
2017-02-16 18:15:16 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
87eea10711 [x86] add tests for {-1,0,1} select of constants
llvm-svn: 285005
2016-10-24 19:13:29 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
7b12e36740 [x86] regenerate checks
llvm-svn: 284982
2016-10-24 15:43:40 +00:00
Stephen Lin
f799e3f944 Convert CodeGen/*/*.ll tests to use the new CHECK-LABEL for easier debugging. No functionality change and all tests pass after conversion.
This was done with the following sed invocation to catch label lines demarking function boundaries:
    sed -i '' "s/^;\( *\)\([A-Z0-9_]*\):\( *\)test\([A-Za-z0-9_-]*\):\( *\)$/;\1\2-LABEL:\3test\4:\5/g" test/CodeGen/*/*.ll
which was written conservatively to avoid false positives rather than false negatives. I scanned through all the changes and everything looks correct.

llvm-svn: 186258
2013-07-13 20:38:47 +00:00
NAKAMURA Takumi
1705a999fa Reapply r165661, Patch by Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm@gmail.com>.
Original message:

The attached is the fix to radar://11663049. The optimization can be outlined by following rules:

   (select (x != c), e, c) -> select (x != c), e, x),
   (select (x == c), c, e) -> select (x == c), x, e)
where the <c> is an integer constant.

 The reason for this change is that : on x86, conditional-move-from-constant needs two instructions;
however, conditional-move-from-register need only one instruction.

  While the LowerSELECT() sounds to be the most convenient place for this optimization, it turns out to be a bad place. The reason is that by replacing the constant <c> with a symbolic value, it obscure some instruction-combining opportunities which would otherwise be very easy to spot. For that reason, I have to postpone the change to last instruction-combining phase.

  The change passes the test of "make check-all -C <build-root/test" and "make -C project/test-suite/SingleSource".

Original message since r165661:

My previous change has a bug: I negated the condition code of a CMOV, and go ahead creating a new CMOV using the *ORIGINAL* condition code.

llvm-svn: 166017
2012-10-16 06:28:34 +00:00
NAKAMURA Takumi
da0730c2d7 Revert r165661, "Patch by Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm@gmail.com>."
It broke stage2 clang and test-suite/MultiSource/Benchmarks/mediabench/g721/g721encode.

llvm-svn: 165692
2012-10-11 02:02:05 +00:00
Nadav Rotem
17418964f8 Patch by Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm@gmail.com>.
Original message:

The attached is the fix to radar://11663049. The optimization can be outlined by following rules:

   (select (x != c), e, c) -> select (x != c), e, x),
   (select (x == c), c, e) -> select (x == c), x, e)
where the <c> is an integer constant.

 The reason for this change is that : on x86, conditional-move-from-constant needs two instructions;
however, conditional-move-from-register need only one instruction.

  While the LowerSELECT() sounds to be the most convenient place for this optimization, it turns out to be a bad place. The reason is that by replacing the constant <c> with a symbolic value, it obscure some instruction-combining opportunities which would otherwise be very easy to spot. For that reason, I have to postpone the change to last instruction-combining phase.

  The change passes the test of "make check-all -C <build-root/test" and "make -C project/test-suite/SingleSource".

llvm-svn: 165661
2012-10-10 21:31:55 +00:00