Generally, the ISEL is expanded into if-then-else sequence, in some
cases (like when the destination register is the same with the true
or false value register), it may just be expanded into just the if
or else sequence.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@292154 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Generally, the ISEL is expanded into if-then-else sequence, in some
cases (like when the destination register is the same with the true
or false value register), it may just be expanded into just the if
or else sequence.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@292128 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
updated instructions:
pmulld, pmullw, pmulhw, mulsd, mulps, mulpd, divss, divps, divsd, divpd, addpd and subpd.
special optimization case which replaces pmulld with pmullw\pmulhw\pshuf seq.
In case if the real operands bitwidth <= 16.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28104
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@291657 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Instructions: fctidu[.], fctiwu[.], ftdiv, ftsqrt are not implemented. Implement
them and add corresponding test cases in this patch.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@291116 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This change aims to unify and correct our logic for when we need to allow for
the possibility of the linker adding a TOC restoration instruction after a
call. This comes up in two contexts:
1. When determining tail-call eligibility. If we make a tail call (i.e.
directly branch to a function) then there is no place for the linker to add
a TOC restoration.
2. When determining when we need to add a nop instruction after a call.
Likewise, if there is a possibility that the linker might need to add a
TOC restoration after a call, then we need to put a nop after the call
(the bl instruction).
First problem: We were using similar, but different, logic to decide (1) and
(2). This is just wrong. Both the resideInSameModule function (used when
determining tail-call eligibility) and the isLocalCall function (used when
deciding if the post-call nop is needed) were supposed to be determining the
same underlying fact (i.e. might a TOC restoration be needed after the call).
The same logic should be used in both places.
Second problem: The logic in both places was wrong. We only know that two
functions will share the same TOC when both functions come from the same
section of the same object. Otherwise the linker might cause the functions to
use different TOC base addresses (unless the multi-TOC linker option is
disabled, in which case only shared-library boundaries are relevant). There are
a number of factors that can cause functions to be placed in different sections
or come from different objects (-ffunction-sections, explicitly-specified
section names, COMDAT, weak linkage, etc.). All of these need to be checked.
The existing logic only checked properties of the callee, but the properties of
the caller must also be checked (for example, calling from a function in a
COMDAT section means calling between sections).
There was a conceptual error in the resideInSameModule function in that it
allowed tail calls to functions with weak linkage and protected/hidden
visibility. While protected/hidden visibility does prevent the function
implementation from being replaced at runtime (via interposition), it does not
prevent the linker from using an alternate implementation at link time (i.e.
using some strong definition to replace the provided weak one during linking).
If this happens, then we're still potentially looking at a required TOC
restoration upon return.
Otherwise, in general, the post-call nop is needed wherever ELF interposition
needs to be supported. We don't currently support ELF interposition at the IR
level (see http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-November/107625.html
for more information), and I don't think we should try to make it appear to
work in the backend in spite of that fact. Unfortunately, because of the way
that the ABI works, we need to generate code as if we supported interposition
whenever the linker might insert stubs for the purpose of supporting it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27231
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@291003 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This patch appears to result in trampolines in vtables being miscompiled
when they in turn tail call a method.
I've posted some preliminary details about the failure on the thread for
this commit and talked to Hal. He was comfortable going ahead and
reverting until we sort out what is wrong.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@289928 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
In some situations, the BUILD_VECTOR node that builds a v18i8 vector by
a splat of an i8 constant will end up with signed 8-bit values and other
situations, it'll end up with unsigned ones. Handle both situations.
Fixes PR31340.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@289804 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Most of the PowerPC64 code generation for the ELF ABI is already PIC.
There are four main exceptions:
(1) Constant pointer arrays etc. should in writeable sections.
(2) The TOC restoration NOP after a call is needed for all global
symbols. While GNU ld has a workaround for questionable GCC self-calls,
we trigger the checks for calls from COMDAT sections as they cross input
sections and are therefore not considered self-calls. The current
decision is questionable and suboptimal, but outside the scope of the
change.
(3) TLS access can not use the initial-exec model.
(4) Jump tables should use relative addresses. Note that the current
encoding doesn't work for the large code model, but it is more compact
than the default for any non-trivial jump table. Improving this is again
beyond the scope of this change.
At least (1) and (3) are assumptions made in target-independent code and
introducing additional hooks is a bit messy. Testing with clang shows
that a -fPIC binary is 600KB smaller than the corresponding -fno-pic
build. Separate testing from improved jump table encodings would explain
only about 100KB or so. The rest is expected to be a result of more
aggressive immediate forming for -fno-pic, where the -fPIC binary just
uses TOC entries.
This change brings the LLVM output in line with the GCC output, other
PPC64 compilers like XLC on AIX are known to produce PIC by default
as well. The relocation model can still be provided explicitly, i.e.
when using MCJIT.
One test case for case (1) is included, other test cases with relocation
mode sensitive behavior are wired to static for now. They will be
reviewed and adjusted separately.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26566
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@289743 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This change aims to unify and correct our logic for when we need to allow for
the possibility of the linker adding a TOC restoration instruction after a
call. This comes up in two contexts:
1. When determining tail-call eligibility. If we make a tail call (i.e.
directly branch to a function) then there is no place for the linker to add
a TOC restoration.
2. When determining when we need to add a nop instruction after a call.
Likewise, if there is a possibility that the linker might need to add a
TOC restoration after a call, then we need to put a nop after the call
(the bl instruction).
First problem: We were using similar, but different, logic to decide (1) and
(2). This is just wrong. Both the resideInSameModule function (used when
determining tail-call eligibility) and the isLocalCall function (used when
deciding if the post-call nop is needed) were supposed to be determining the
same underlying fact (i.e. might a TOC restoration be needed after the call).
The same logic should be used in both places.
Second problem: The logic in both places was wrong. We only know that two
functions will share the same TOC when both functions come from the same
section of the same object. Otherwise the linker might cause the functions to
use different TOC base addresses (unless the multi-TOC linker option is
disabled, in which case only shared-library boundaries are relevant). There are
a number of factors that can cause functions to be placed in different sections
or come from different objects (-ffunction-sections, explicitly-specified
section names, COMDAT, weak linkage, etc.). All of these need to be checked.
The existing logic only checked properties of the callee, but the properties of
the caller must also be checked (for example, calling from a function in a
COMDAT section means calling between sections).
There was a conceptual error in the resideInSameModule function in that it
allowed tail calls to functions with weak linkage and protected/hidden
visibility. While protected/hidden visibility does prevent the function
implementation from being replaced at runtime (via interposition), it does not
prevent the linker from using an alternate implementation at link time (i.e.
using some strong definition to replace the provided weak one during linking).
If this happens, then we're still potentially looking at a required TOC
restoration upon return.
Otherwise, in general, the post-call nop is needed wherever ELF interposition
needs to be supported. We don't currently support ELF interposition at the IR
level (see http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-November/107625.html
for more information), and I don't think we should try to make it appear to
work in the backend in spite of that fact. This will yield subtle bugs if
interposition is attempted. As a result, regardless of whether we're in PIC
mode, we don't assume that we need to add the nop to support the possibility of
ELF interposition. However, the necessary check is in place (i.e. calling
GV->isInterposable and TM.shouldAssumeDSOLocal) so when we have functions for
which interposition is allowed at the IR level, we'll add the nop as necessary.
In the mean time, we'll generate more tail calls and fewer nops when compiling
position-independent code.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27231
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@289638 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Power8 has MTVSRWZ but no LXSIBZX/LXSIHZX, so move 1 or 2 bytes to VSR through MTVSRWZ is much faster than store the extended value into stack and load it with LXSIWZX.
This patch fixes pr31144.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27287
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@289473 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This is the final patch in the series of patches that improves
BUILD_VECTOR handling on PowerPC. This adds a few peephole optimizations
to remove redundant instructions. It also adds a large test case which
encompasses a large set of code patterns that build vectors - this test
case was the motivator for this series of patches.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26066
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@288800 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
VSX has instructions lxsiwax/lxsdx that can load 32/64 bit value into VSX register cheaply. That patch makes it known to memory cost model, so the vectorization of the test case in pr30990 is beneficial.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26713
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@288560 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Instead, expose whether the current type is an array or a struct, if an array
what the upper bound is, and if a struct the struct type itself. This is
in preparation for a later change which will make PointerType derive from
Type rather than SequentialType.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26594
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@288458 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This patch corresponds to review:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D25980
This is the 2nd patch in a series of 4 that improve the lowering and combining
for BUILD_VECTOR nodes on PowerPC. This particular patch combines a build vector
of fp-to-int conversions into an fp-to-int conversion of a build vector of fp
values. For example:
Converts (build_vector (fp_to_[su]i $A), (fp_to_[su]i $B), ...)
Into (fp_to_[su]i (build_vector $A, $B, ...))).
Which is a natural match for much cleaner code.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@288218 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This commit caused some miscompiles that did not show up on any of the bots.
Reverting until we can investigate the cause of those failures.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@288214 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
In rL283190, I added some InstAlias definitions to generate extended mnemonics
for some uses of the XXPERMDI instruction. However, when the assembler matches
these extended mnemonics, it matches the new instruction in situations where it
should match the old one.
This patch removes these definitions and accomplishes that by defining these
mnemonics with additional instructions that are isCodeGenOnly.
Fixes PR31127.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@287765 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
* ARM is omitted from this patch because this check appears to expose bugs in this target.
* Mips is omitted from this patch because this check either detects bugs or deliberate
emission of instructions that don't satisfy their predicates. One deliberate
use is the SYNC instruction where the version with an operand is correctly
defined as requiring MIPS32 while the version without an operand is defined
as an alias of 'SYNC 0' and requires MIPS2.
* X86 is omitted from this patch because it doesn't use the tablegen-erated
MCCodeEmitter infrastructure.
Patches for ARM and Mips will follow.
Depends on D25617
Reviewers: tstellarAMD, jmolloy
Subscribers: wdng, jmolloy, aemerson, rengolin, arsenm, jyknight, nemanjai, nhaehnle, tstellarAMD, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25618
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@287439 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
When we see a SETCC whose only users are zero extend operations, we can replace
it with a subtraction. This results in doing all calculations in GPRs and
avoids CR use.
Currently we do this only for ULT, ULE, UGT and UGE condition codes. There are
ways that this can be extended. For example for signed condition codes. In that
case we will be introducing additional sign extend instructions, so more careful
profitability analysis may be required.
Another direction to extend this is for equal, not equal conditions. Also when
users of SETCC are any_ext or sign_ext, we might be able to do something
similar.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@287329 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
For the default, small and medium code model, use the existing
difference from the jump table towards the label. For all other code
models, setup the picbase and use the difference between the picbase and
the block address.
Overall, this results in smaller data tables at the expensive of one or
two more arithmetic operation at the jump site. Given that we only create
jump tables with a lot more than two entries, it is a net win in size.
For larger code models the assumption remains that individual functions
are no larger than 2GB.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26336
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@287059 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This patch implements all the overloads for vec_xl_be and vec_xst_be. On BE,
they behaves exactly the same with vec_xl and vec_xst, therefore they are
simply implemented by defining a matching macro. On LE, they are implemented
by defining new builtins and intrinsics. For int/float/long long/double, it
is just a load (lxvw4x/lxvd2x) or store(stxvw4x/stxvd2x). For char/char/short,
we also need some extra shuffling before or after call the builtins to get the
desired BE order. For int128, simply call vec_xl or vec_xst.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@286967 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
The generic infrastructure to compute the Newton series for reciprocal and
reciprocal square root was conceived to allow a target to compute the series
itself. However, the original code did not properly consider this condition
if returned by a target. This patch addresses the issues to allow a target
to compute the series on its own.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D22975
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@286523 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
behind the test that the MachineModuleInfo analysis was
actually available and can be used.
While the MachO bits may well be reasonable to assume in the darwin
assembly printer, the analysis isn't constructively guaranteed anywhere
I could find so it seems safest to avoid crashing here.
This issue was found with PVS-Studio. Pretty sure the Clang Static
Anaylzer flags similar issues but we've probably never pointed it at
this code effectively.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@285972 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
GPRC and GPRC_NOR0 (or the 64bit equivalent) and not just the latter.
GPRC_NOR0 contains ZERO as alternative meaning of r0 and is therefore
not a true subclass of GPRC.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@285813 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
