It is possible to have a fallthrough MBB prior to MBB placement. The original
addition of the BB would result in reordering the BB as not preceding the
successor. Because of the fallthrough nature of the BB, we could end up
executing incorrect code or even a constant pool island! Insert the spliced BB
into the same location to avoid that.
Thanks to Tim Northover for invaluable hints and Fiora for the discussion on
what may have been occurring!
llvm-svn: 264454
We did not have an explicit branch to the continuation BB. When the check was
hoisted, this could permit control follow to fall through into the division
trap. Add the explicit branch to the continuation basic block to ensure that
code execution is correct.
llvm-svn: 264370
This introduces a custom lowering for ISD::SETCCE (introduced in r253572)
that allows us to emit a short code sequence for 64-bit compares.
Before:
push {r7, lr}
cmp r0, r2
mov.w r0, #0
mov.w r12, #0
it hs
movhs r0, #1
cmp r1, r3
it ge
movge.w r12, #1
it eq
moveq r12, r0
cmp.w r12, #0
bne .LBB1_2
@ BB#1: @ %bb1
bl f
pop {r7, pc}
.LBB1_2: @ %bb2
bl g
pop {r7, pc}
After:
push {r7, lr}
subs r0, r0, r2
sbcs.w r0, r1, r3
bge .LBB1_2
@ BB#1: @ %bb1
bl f
pop {r7, pc}
.LBB1_2: @ %bb2
bl g
pop {r7, pc}
Saves around 80KB in Chromium's libchrome.so.
Some notes on this patch:
- I don't much like the ARMISD::BRCOND and ARMISD::CMOV combines I
introduced (nothing else needs them). However, they are necessary in
order to avoid poor codegen, and they seem similar to existing combines
in other backends (e.g. X86 combines (brcond (cmp (setcc Compare))) to
(brcond Compare)).
- No support for Thumb-1. This is in principle possible, but we'd need
to implement ARMISD::SUBE for Thumb-1.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15256
llvm-svn: 263962
The two changes together weakened the test and caused a regression with division
handling in MSVC mode. They were applied to avoid an assertion being triggered
in the block frequency analysis. However, the underlying problem was simply
being masked rather than solved properly. Address the actual underlying problem
and revert the changes. Rather than analyze the cause of the assertion, the
division failure was assumed to be an overflow.
The underlying issue was a subtle bug in the BB construction in the emission of
the div-by-zero check (WIN__DBZCHK). We did not construct the proper successor
information in the basic blocks, nor did we update the PHIs associated with the
basic block when we split them. This would result in assertions being triggered
in the block frequency analysis pass.
Although the original tests are being removed, the tests themselves performed
very little in terms of validation but merely tested that we did not assert when
generating code. Update this with new tests that actually ensure that we do not
regress on the code generation.
llvm-svn: 263714
- Rename getATOMIC to getSYNC, as llvm will soon be able to emit both
'__sync' libcalls and '__atomic' libcalls, and this function is for
the '__sync' ones.
- getInsertFencesForAtomic() has been replaced with
shouldInsertFencesForAtomic(Instruction), so that the decision can be
made per-instruction. This functionality will be used soon.
- emitLeadingFence/emitTrailingFence are no longer called if
shouldInsertFencesForAtomic returns false, and thus don't need to
check the condition themselves.
llvm-svn: 263665
This change adds a support for a preserve_most calling convention to the AArch64 backend, similar to how it was done for X86-64.
There is also a subsequent patch on top of this one to add a tail-calls support for this calling convention.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18016
llvm-svn: 263092
When div+rem calls on the same arguments are found, the ARM back-end merges the
two calls into one __aeabi_divmod call for up to 32-bits values. However,
for 64-bit values, which also have a lib call (__aeabi_ldivmod), it wasn't
merging the calls, and thus calling ldivmod twice and spilling the temporary
results, which generated pretty bad code.
This patch legalises 64-bit lib calls for divmod, so that now all the spilling
and the second call are gone. It also relaxes the DivRem combiner a bit on the
legal type check, since it was already checking for isLegalOrCustom on every
value, so the extra check for isTypeLegal was redundant.
Second attempt, creating TLI.isOperationCustom like isOperationExpand, to make
sure we only emit valid types or the ones that were explicitly marked as custom.
Now, passing check-all and test-suite on x86, ARM and AArch64.
This patch fixes PR17193 (and a long time FIXME in the tests).
llvm-svn: 262738
When div+rem calls on the same arguments are found, the ARM back-end merges the
two calls into one __aeabi_divmod call for up to 32-bits values. However,
for 64-bit values, which also have a lib call (__aeabi_ldivmod), it wasn't
merging the calls, and thus calling ldivmod twice and spilling the temporary
results, which generated pretty bad code.
This patch legalises 64-bit lib calls for divmod, so that now all the spilling
and the second call are gone. It also relaxes the DivRem combiner a bit on the
legal type check, since it was already checking for isLegalOrCustom on every
value, so the extra check for isTypeLegal was redundant.
This patch fixes PR17193 (and a long time FIXME in the tests).
llvm-svn: 262507
Summary:
If we want classify OoO or not, using getSchedModel().isOutOfOrder()
could be more proper way than using Subtarget->isLikeA9().
Reviewers: jmolloy, rengolin
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17433
llvm-svn: 261623
Add support for TLS access for Windows on ARM. This generates a similar access
to MSVC for ARM.
The changes to the tablegen data is needed to support loading an external symbol
global that is not for a call. The adjustments to the DAG to DAG transforms are
needed to preserve the 32-bit move.
llvm-svn: 259676
The GNU toolchain emits __aeabi_divmod for soft-divide on ARM cores
which happens to be a lot faster than __divsi3/__modsi3 when the core
has hardware divide instructions. Do the same here.
Fixes PR26450.
llvm-svn: 259657
Various bits we want to use the new ABI actually compile with "-arch armv7k
-miphoneos-version-min=9.0". Not ideal, but also not ridiculous given how
slices work.
llvm-svn: 258975
When we have a single basic block, the explicit copy-back instructions should
be inserted right before the terminator. Before this fix, they were wrongly
placed at the beginning of the basic block.
PR26136
llvm-svn: 257930
Summary:
r255334 matches bit-reverse pattern in InstCombine and generates calls to Instrinsic::bitreverse.
RBIT instruction is only available for ARMv6t2 and above. This patch has the intrinsic expanded during legalization for ARMv4 and ARMv5.
Patch by Z. Zheng <zhaoshiz@codeaurora.org>
Reviewers: apazos, jmolloy, weimingz
Subscribers: aemerson, rengolin, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15932
llvm-svn: 257188
Darwin TLS accesses most closely resemble ELF's general-dynamic situation,
since they have to be able to handle all possible situations. The descriptors
and so on are obviously slightly different though.
llvm-svn: 257039
This patch adds some missing calls to MBB::normalizeSuccProbs() in several
locations where it should be called. Those places are found by checking if the
sum of successors' probabilities is approximate one in MachineBlockPlacement
pass with some instrumented code (not in this patch).
Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15259
llvm-svn: 255455
After much discussion, ending here:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20151123/315620.html
it has been decided that, instead of having the vectorizer directly generate
special absdiff and horizontal-add intrinsics, we'll recognize the relevant
reduction patterns during CodeGen. Accordingly, these intrinsics are not needed
(the operations they represent can be pattern matched, as is already done in
some backends). Thus, we're backing these out in favor of the current
development work.
r248483 - Codegen: Fix llvm.*absdiff semantic.
r242546 - [ARM] Use [SU]ABSDIFF nodes instead of intrinsics for VABD/VABA
r242545 - [AArch64] Use [SU]ABSDIFF nodes instead of intrinsics for ABD/ABA
r242409 - [Codegen] Add intrinsics 'absdiff' and corresponding SDNodes for absolute difference operation
llvm-svn: 255387
Otherwise, we think that most types that look like they'd fit in a
legal vector type are legal (so, basically, *any* vector type with a
size between 33 and 128 bits, I think, since we use pow2 alignment;
e.g., v2i25, v3f32, ...).
DataLayout::getTypeAllocSize rounds up based on alignment.
When checking for target intrinsic legality, that's not what we want:
if rounding makes a difference, the type isn't legal, and the
target intrinsics shouldn't be used, as they are always assumed legal.
One could make the argument that alloc size is ultimately the most
relevant here, since we're dealing with LD/ST intrinsics. That's only
true if we did legalize them though; that's a problem for another day.
Use DataLayout::getTypeSizeInBits instead of getTypeAllocSizeInBits.
Type::getSizeInBits can't be used because that'd gratuitously break
pointer vector support.
Some of these uses are currently fine, because we only hit them when
the type is already known legal (e.g., r114454). Update them for
consistency. It's faster to avoid the rounding anyway!
llvm-svn: 255089
with its source instead of forcing the values on GPRs.
This improves the lowering of vector code when such bitcasts happen in the
middle of vector computations.
rdar://problem/23691584
llvm-svn: 254684
The ARM ARM is clear that 128-bit loads are only guaranteed to have been atomic
if there has been a corresponding successful stxp. It's less clear for AArch32, so
I'm leaving that alone for now.
llvm-svn: 254524
(This is the second attempt to submit this patch. The first caused two assertion
failures and was reverted. See https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=25687)
The patch in http://reviews.llvm.org/D13745 is broken into four parts:
1. New interfaces without functional changes (http://reviews.llvm.org/D13908).
2. Use new interfaces in SelectionDAG, while in other passes treat probabilities
as weights (http://reviews.llvm.org/D14361).
3. Use new interfaces in all other passes.
4. Remove old interfaces.
This patch is 3+4 above. In this patch, MBB won't provide weight-based
interfaces any more, which are totally replaced by probability-based ones.
The interface addSuccessor() is redesigned so that the default probability is
unknown. We allow unknown probabilities but don't allow using it together
with known probabilities in successor list. That is to say, we either have a
list of successors with all known probabilities, or all unknown
probabilities. In the latter case, we assume each successor has 1/N
probability where N is the number of successors. An assertion checks if the
user is attempting to add a successor with the disallowed mixed use as stated
above. This can help us catch many misuses.
All uses of weight-based interfaces are now updated to use probability-based
ones.
Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D14973
llvm-svn: 254377
and the follow-up r254356: "Fix a bug in MachineBlockPlacement that may cause assertion failure during BranchProbability construction."
Asserts were firing in Chromium builds. See PR25687.
llvm-svn: 254366
The patch in http://reviews.llvm.org/D13745 is broken into four parts:
1. New interfaces without functional changes (http://reviews.llvm.org/D13908).
2. Use new interfaces in SelectionDAG, while in other passes treat probabilities
as weights (http://reviews.llvm.org/D14361).
3. Use new interfaces in all other passes.
4. Remove old interfaces.
This patch is 3+4 above. In this patch, MBB won't provide weight-based
interfaces any more, which are totally replaced by probability-based ones.
The interface addSuccessor() is redesigned so that the default probability is
unknown. We allow unknown probabilities but don't allow using it together
with known probabilities in successor list. That is to say, we either have a
list of successors with all known probabilities, or all unknown
probabilities. In the latter case, we assume each successor has 1/N
probability where N is the number of successors. An assertion checks if the
user is attempting to add a successor with the disallowed mixed use as stated
above. This can help us catch many misuses.
All uses of weight-based interfaces are now updated to use probability-based
ones.
Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D14973
llvm-svn: 254348
Building on r253865 the crash is not limited to signed overflows.
Disable custom handling of unsigned 32-bit and 64-bit integer divide.
Add test cases for both 32-bit and 64-bit unsigned integer overflow.
llvm-svn: 254158
Summary:
Many target lowerings copy-paste the code to test SDValues for known constants.
This code can instead be shared in SelectionDAG.cpp, and reused in the targets.
Reviewers: MatzeB, andreadb, tstellarAMD
Subscribers: arsenm, jyknight, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D14945
llvm-svn: 254085
Disable custom handling of signed 32-bit and 64-bit integer divide.
Add test cases for both 32-bit and 64-bit integer overflow crashes.
llvm-svn: 253865
This was left implicit and never ever checked, which means we could have a CMPZ against some non-zero value and we were carrying on with BFI conversion regardless.
Caught by Oliver Stannard using csmith; regression test added.
llvm-svn: 253195
I completely misunderstood what ARMISD::CMPZ means. It's not "compare equal to zero", it's "compare, only setting the zero/Z flag". It can either be equal-to-zero or not-equal-to-zero, and we weren't checking what sense it was.
If it's equal-to-zero, we can swap the operands around and pretend like it is not-equal-to-zero, which is both a bug fix and lets us handle more cases.
llvm-svn: 252891
I missed the side-effects of ParseBFI in my previous attempt (r252748).
Thanks dblaikie for the suggestion of adding a void use of the unused
variable instead.
llvm-svn: 252751
If we have a chain of BFIs, we may be able to combine several together into one merged BFI. We can do this if the "from" bits from one BFI OR'd with the "from" bits from the other BFI form a contiguous range, and the same with the "to" bits.
llvm-svn: 252740
ARM V6T2 has instructions for efficient count-leading/trailing-zeros, so this should be
considered a cheap operation (and therefore fair game for speculation) for any ARM V6T2
implementation.
The net result of allowing this speculation for the regression tests in this patch is
that we get this code:
ctlz:
clz r0, r0
bx lr
cttz:
rbit r0, r0
clz r0, r0
bx lr
Instead of:
ctlz:
cmp r0, #0
moveq r0, #32
clzne r0, r0
bx lr
cttz:
cmp r0, #0
moveq r0, #32
rbitne r0, r0
clzne r0, r0
bx lr
This will help solve a general speculation/despeculation problem noted in PR24818:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24818
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D14469
llvm-svn: 252639
Added fixes for stage2 failures: CMOV is not commutable; commuting the operands results in the condition being flipped! d'oh!
Original commit message:
If we have a CMOV, OR and AND combination such as:
if (x & CN)
y |= CM;
And:
* CN is a single bit;
* All bits covered by CM are known zero in y;
Then we can convert this to a sequence of BFI instructions. This will always be a win if CM is a single bit, will always be no worse than the TST & OR sequence if CM is two bits, and for thumb will be no worse if CM is three bits (due to the extra IT instruction).
llvm-svn: 252606
"GCC requires the freestanding environment provide memcpy, memmove, memset
and memcmp": https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-5.2.0/gcc/Standards.html
Hence in GNUEABI targets LLVM should not convert 'memops' to their equivalent
'__aeabi_memops'. This convertion violates GCC contract.
The -meabi flag controls whether or not LLVM will modify 'memops' in GNUEABI
targets.
Without -meabi: use the triple default EABI.
With -meabi=default: use the triple default EABI.
With -meabi=gnu: use 'memops'.
With -meabi=4 or -meabi=5: use '__aeabi_memops'.
With -meabi set to an unknown value: same as -meabi=default.
Patch by Vinicius Tinti.
llvm-svn: 252462
