This allows us to easily support 256-bit operations that don't have
native 256-bit support. This applies to integer operations, certain
types of shuffles and various othher things.
llvm-svn: 124910
matching EXTRACT_SUBVECTOR to VEXTRACTF128 along with support routines
to examine and translate index values. VINSERTF128 comes next. With
these two in place we can begin supporting more AVX operations as
INSERT/EXTRACT can be used as a fallback when 256-bit support is not
available.
llvm-svn: 124797
Reversing the operands allows us to fold, but doesn't force us to. Also, at
this point the DAG is still being optimized, so the check for hasOneUse is not
very precise.
llvm-svn: 124773
default implementation for x86, going through the stack in a similr
fashion to how the codegen implements BUILD_VECTOR. Eventually this
will get matched to VINSERTF128 if AVX is available.
llvm-svn: 124307
implementation of EXTRACT_SUBVECTOR for x86, going through the stack
in a similr fashion to how the codegen implements BUILD_VECTOR.
Eventually this will get matched to VEXTRACTF128 if AVX is available.
llvm-svn: 124292
The theory is it's still faster than a pair of movq / a quad of movl. This
will probably hurt older chips like P4 but should run faster on current
and future Intel processors. rdar://8817010
llvm-svn: 122955
the same as setcc. Optimize ADDC(0,0,FLAGS) -> SET_CARRY(FLAGS). This is
a step towards finishing off PR5443. In the testcase in that bug we now get:
movq %rdi, %rax
addq %rsi, %rax
sbbq %rcx, %rcx
testb $1, %cl
setne %dl
ret
instead of:
movq %rdi, %rax
addq %rsi, %rax
movl $0, %ecx
adcq $0, %rcx
testq %rcx, %rcx
setne %dl
ret
llvm-svn: 122219
their carry depenedencies with MVT::Flag operands) and use clean and beautiful
EFLAGS dependences instead.
We do this by changing the modelling of SBB/ADC to have EFLAGS input and outputs
(which is what requires the previous scheduler change) and change X86 ISelLowering
to custom lower ADDC and friends down to X86ISD::ADD/ADC/SUB/SBB nodes.
With the previous series of changes, this causes no changes in the testsuite, woo.
llvm-svn: 122213
the output to the correct register. Fixes a hidden problem uncovered
by the last patch where we'd try to DAG combine our MVT::Other node
oddly.
llvm-svn: 121358
result. This allows us to compile:
void *test12(long count) {
return new int[count];
}
into:
test12:
movl $4, %ecx
movq %rdi, %rax
mulq %rcx
movq $-1, %rdi
cmovnoq %rax, %rdi
jmp __Znam ## TAILCALL
instead of:
test12:
movl $4, %ecx
movq %rdi, %rax
mulq %rcx
seto %cl
testb %cl, %cl
movq $-1, %rdi
cmoveq %rax, %rdi
jmp __Znam
Of course it would be even better if the regalloc inverted the cmov to 'cmovoq',
which would eliminate the need for the 'movq %rdi, %rax'.
llvm-svn: 120936
backend that they were all implemented except umul. This one fell back
to the default implementation that did a hi/lo multiply and compared the
top. Fix this to check the overflow flag that the 'mul' instruction
sets, so we can avoid an explicit test. Now we compile:
void *func(long count) {
return new int[count];
}
into:
__Z4funcl: ## @_Z4funcl
movl $4, %ecx ## encoding: [0xb9,0x04,0x00,0x00,0x00]
movq %rdi, %rax ## encoding: [0x48,0x89,0xf8]
mulq %rcx ## encoding: [0x48,0xf7,0xe1]
seto %cl ## encoding: [0x0f,0x90,0xc1]
testb %cl, %cl ## encoding: [0x84,0xc9]
movq $-1, %rdi ## encoding: [0x48,0xc7,0xc7,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff]
cmoveq %rax, %rdi ## encoding: [0x48,0x0f,0x44,0xf8]
jmp __Znam ## TAILCALL
instead of:
__Z4funcl: ## @_Z4funcl
movl $4, %ecx ## encoding: [0xb9,0x04,0x00,0x00,0x00]
movq %rdi, %rax ## encoding: [0x48,0x89,0xf8]
mulq %rcx ## encoding: [0x48,0xf7,0xe1]
testq %rdx, %rdx ## encoding: [0x48,0x85,0xd2]
movq $-1, %rdi ## encoding: [0x48,0xc7,0xc7,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff]
cmoveq %rax, %rdi ## encoding: [0x48,0x0f,0x44,0xf8]
jmp __Znam ## TAILCALL
Other than the silly seto+test, this is using the o bit directly, so it's going in the right
direction.
llvm-svn: 120935
The user (i.e. whoever generated a call to the intrinsic in the first place) is
essentially asking for a particular instruction to be placed in the assembler.
If that instruction won't execute on the target machine, that's their problem
not ours. Two buildbots with processors that don't support SSE3 were barfing
on the apm.ll test in CodeGen/X86 because of this assertion.
llvm-svn: 120574
legalization time. Since at legalization time there is no mapping from
SDNode back to the corresponding LLVM instruction and the return
SDNode is target specific, this requires a target hook to check for
eligibility. Only x86 and ARM support this form of sibcall optimization
right now.
rdar://8707777
llvm-svn: 120501
