RPCS3/llvm
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/RPCS3/llvm.git synced 2025-01-18 07:52:35 +00:00
Code Issues Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Factor the (x & 2^n) ? 2^m : 0 instcombine into its own method and generalize it

Browse Source 
to catch cases where n != m with a shift.


git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@121608 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This commit is contained in:
Benjamin Kramer 2010-12-11 09:42:59 +00:00
parent a9688c4b57
commit 20e3b4b380
3 changed files with 79 additions and 66 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

40
lib/Target/X86/README.txt
View File

@ -1736,46 +1736,6 @@ Ideal output:
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Testcase:
int x(int a) { return (a & 0x80) ? 0x100 : 0; }
int y(int a) { return (a & 0x80) *2; }
Current:
testl $128, 4(%esp)
setne %al
movzbl %al, %eax
shll $8, %eax
ret
Better:
movl 4(%esp), %eax
addl %eax, %eax
andl $256, %eax
ret
This is another general instcombine transformation that is profitable on all
targets. In LLVM IR, these functions look like this:
define i32 @x(i32 %a) nounwind readnone {
entry:
%0 = and i32 %a, 128
%1 = icmp eq i32 %0, 0
%iftmp.0.0 = select i1 %1, i32 0, i32 256
ret i32 %iftmp.0.0
}
define i32 @y(i32 %a) nounwind readnone {
entry:
%0 = shl i32 %a, 1
%1 = and i32 %0, 256
ret i32 %1
}
Replacing an icmp+select with a shift should always be considered profitable in
instcombine.
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
Re-implement atomic builtins __sync_add_and_fetch() and __sync_sub_and_fetch
properly.

80
lib/Transforms/InstCombine/InstCombineSelect.cpp
View File

@ -446,7 +446,58 @@ Instruction *InstCombiner::FoldSPFofSPF(Instruction *Inner,
}
/// foldSelectICmpAnd - If one of the constants is zero (we know they can't
/// both be) and we have an icmp instruction with zero, and we have an 'and'
/// with the non-constant value and a power of two we can turn the select
/// into a shift on the result of the 'and'.
static Value *foldSelectICmpAnd(const SelectInst &SI, ConstantInt *TrueVal,
ConstantInt *FalseVal,
InstCombiner::BuilderTy *Builder) {
const ICmpInst *IC = dyn_cast<ICmpInst>(SI.getCondition());
if (!IC || !IC->isEquality())
return 0;
// One of the select arms must be zero.
if (!TrueVal->isZero() && !FalseVal->isZero())
return 0;
if (ConstantInt *C = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(IC->getOperand(1)))
if (!C->isZero())
return 0;
ConstantInt *AndRHS;
Value *LHS = IC->getOperand(0);
if (LHS->getType() != SI.getType() ||
!match(LHS, m_And(m_Value(), m_ConstantInt(AndRHS))))
return 0;
// Make sure the mask in the 'and' and one of the select arms is a power of 2.
if (!AndRHS->getValue().isPowerOf2() ||
(!TrueVal->getValue().isPowerOf2() &&
!FalseVal->getValue().isPowerOf2()))
return 0;
// Determine which shift is needed to transform result of the 'and' into the
// desired result.
ConstantInt *ValC = !TrueVal->isZero() ? TrueVal : FalseVal;
unsigned ValZeros = ValC->getValue().logBase2();
unsigned AndZeros = AndRHS->getValue().logBase2();
Value *V = LHS;
if (ValZeros > AndZeros)
V = Builder->CreateShl(V, ValZeros - AndZeros);
else if (ValZeros < AndZeros)
V = Builder->CreateLShr(V, AndZeros - ValZeros);
// Okay, now we know that everything is set up, we just don't know whether we
// have a icmp_ne or icmp_eq and whether the true or false val is the zero.
bool ShouldNotVal = !TrueVal->isZero();
ShouldNotVal ^= IC->getPredicate() == ICmpInst::ICMP_NE;
if (ShouldNotVal)
V = Builder->CreateXor(V, ValC);
return V;
}
Instruction *InstCombiner::visitSelectInst(SelectInst &SI) {
Value *CondVal = SI.getCondition();
@ -509,32 +560,9 @@ Instruction *InstCombiner::visitSelectInst(SelectInst &SI) {
Value *NotCond = Builder->CreateNot(CondVal, "not."+CondVal->getName());
return new SExtInst(NotCond, SI.getType());
}
if (ICmpInst *IC = dyn_cast<ICmpInst>(SI.getCondition())) {
// If one of the constants is zero (we know they can't both be) and we
// have an icmp instruction with zero, and we have an 'and' with the
// non-constant value, eliminate this whole mess. This corresponds to
// cases like this: ((X & 27) ? 27 : 0)
if (TrueValC->isZero() || FalseValC->isZero())
if (IC->isEquality() && isa<ConstantInt>(IC->getOperand(1)) &&
cast<Constant>(IC->getOperand(1))->isNullValue())
if (Instruction *ICA = dyn_cast<Instruction>(IC->getOperand(0)))
if (ICA->getOpcode() == Instruction::And &&
isa<ConstantInt>(ICA->getOperand(1)) &&
(ICA->getOperand(1) == TrueValC ||
ICA->getOperand(1) == FalseValC) &&
cast<ConstantInt>(ICA->getOperand(1))->getValue().isPowerOf2()) {
// Okay, now we know that everything is set up, we just don't
// know whether we have a icmp_ne or icmp_eq and whether the
// true or false val is the zero.
bool ShouldNotVal = !TrueValC->isZero();
ShouldNotVal ^= IC->getPredicate() == ICmpInst::ICMP_NE;
Value *V = ICA;
if (ShouldNotVal)
V = Builder->CreateXor(V, ICA->getOperand(1));
return ReplaceInstUsesWith(SI, V);
}
}
if (Value *V = foldSelectICmpAnd(SI, TrueValC, FalseValC, Builder))
return ReplaceInstUsesWith(SI, V);
}
// See if we are selecting two values based on a comparison of the two values.

25
test/Transforms/InstCombine/select.ll
View File

@ -223,6 +223,31 @@ define i32 @test15d(i32 %X) {
; CHECK: ret i32 %t1
}
;; (a & 128) ? 256 : 0
define i32 @test15e(i32 %X) {
%t1 = and i32 %X, 128
%t2 = icmp ne i32 %t1, 0
%t3 = select i1 %t2, i32 256, i32 0
ret i32 %t3
; CHECK: @test15e
; CHECK: %t1 = shl i32 %X, 1
; CHECK: and i32 %t1, 256
; CHECK: ret i32
}
;; (a & 128) ? 0 : 256
define i32 @test15f(i32 %X) {
%t1 = and i32 %X, 128
%t2 = icmp ne i32 %t1, 0
%t3 = select i1 %t2, i32 0, i32 256
ret i32 %t3
; CHECK: @test15f
; CHECK: %t1 = shl i32 %X, 1
; CHECK: and i32 %t1, 256
; CHECK: xor i32 %{{.*}}, 256
; CHECK: ret i32
}
define i32 @test16(i1 %C, i32* %P) {
%P2 = select i1 %C, i32* %P, i32* null
%V = load i32* %P2