mirror of
https://github.com/RPCSX/llvm.git
synced 2025-01-25 05:34:59 +00:00
459d220c68
These atomic operations are conceptually both a load and store from the same location. As such, we can treat them as the most conservative of those two components which in practice, means we can treat them like stores. An cmpxchg or atomicrmw captures the values, but not the locations accessed. Note: We can probably be more aggressive about the comparison value in an cmpxhg since to have it be in memory, it must already be captured, but I figured it was better to avoid that for the moment. Note 2: It turns out that since we don't actually support cmpxchg of pointer type, writing a negative test is impossible. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17400 git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@261245 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Analysis Opportunities:
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
In test/Transforms/LoopStrengthReduce/quadradic-exit-value.ll, the
ScalarEvolution expression for %r is this:
{1,+,3,+,2}<loop>
Outside the loop, this could be evaluated simply as (%n * %n), however
ScalarEvolution currently evaluates it as
(-2 + (2 * (trunc i65 (((zext i64 (-2 + %n) to i65) * (zext i64 (-1 + %n) to i65)) /u 2) to i64)) + (3 * %n))
In addition to being much more complicated, it involves i65 arithmetic,
which is very inefficient when expanded into code.
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
In formatValue in test/CodeGen/X86/lsr-delayed-fold.ll,
ScalarEvolution is forming this expression:
((trunc i64 (-1 * %arg5) to i32) + (trunc i64 %arg5 to i32) + (-1 * (trunc i64 undef to i32)))
This could be folded to
(-1 * (trunc i64 undef to i32))
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//