[SystemZ] Add more future work items to the README

Based on an analysis by Ulrich Weigand.


git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@181882 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This commit is contained in:
Richard Sandiford 2013-05-15 12:53:31 +00:00
parent 363ce4085f
commit ef25bf0438

View File

@ -29,17 +29,44 @@ to load 103. This seems to be a general target-independent problem.
--
The tuning of the choice between Load Address (LA) and addition in
The tuning of the choice between LOAD ADDRESS (LA) and addition in
SystemZISelDAGToDAG.cpp is suspect. It should be tweaked based on
performance measurements.
--
We don't support tail calls at present.
--
We don't support prefetching yet.
--
There is no scheduling support.
--
We don't use the Branch on Count or Branch on Index families of instruction.
We don't use the BRANCH ON COUNT or BRANCH ON INDEX families of instruction.
--
We might want to use BRANCH ON CONDITION for conditional indirect calls
and conditional returns.
--
We don't use the combined COMPARE AND BRANCH instructions. Using them
would require a change to the way we handle out-of-range branches.
At the moment, we start with 32-bit forms like BRCL and shorten them
to forms like BRC where possible, but COMPARE AND BRANCH does not have
a 32-bit form.
--
We should probably model just CC, not the PSW as a whole. Strictly
speaking, every instruction changes the PSW since the PSW contains the
current instruction address.
--
@ -54,7 +81,30 @@ equality after an integer comparison, etc.
--
We don't optimize string and block memory operations.
We don't use the LOAD AND TEST or TEST DATA CLASS instructions.
--
We could use the generic floating-point forms of LOAD COMPLEMENT,
LOAD NEGATIVE and LOAD POSITIVE in cases where we don't need the
condition codes. For example, we could use LCDFR instead of LCDBR.
--
We don't optimize block memory operations.
It's definitely worth using things like MVC, CLC, NC, XC and OC with
constant lengths. MVCIN may be worthwhile too.
We should probably implement things like memcpy using MVC with EXECUTE.
Likewise memcmp and CLC. MVCLE and CLCLE could be useful too.
--
We don't optimize string operations.
MVST, CLST, SRST and CUSE could be useful here. Some of the TRANSLATE
family might be too, although they are probably more difficult to exploit.
--
@ -63,9 +113,33 @@ conventions require f128s to be returned by invisible reference.
--
ADD LOGICAL WITH SIGNED IMMEDIATE could be useful when we need to
produce a carry. SUBTRACT LOGICAL IMMEDIATE could be useful when we
need to produce a borrow. (Note that there are no memory forms of
ADD LOGICAL WITH CARRY and SUBTRACT LOGICAL WITH BORROW, so the high
part of 128-bit memory operations would probably need to be done
via a register.)
--
We don't use the halfword forms of LOAD REVERSED and STORE REVERSED
(LRVH and STRVH).
--
We could take advantage of the various ... UNDER MASK instructions,
such as ICM and STCM.
--
We could make more use of the ROTATE AND ... SELECTED BITS instructions.
At the moment we only use RISBG, and only then for subword atomic operations.
--
DAGCombiner can detect integer absolute, but there's not yet an associated
ISD opcode. We could add one and implement it using Load Positive.
Negated absolutes could use Load Negative.
ISD opcode. We could add one and implement it using LOAD POSITIVE.
Negated absolutes could use LOAD NEGATIVE.
--
@ -142,5 +216,15 @@ See CodeGen/SystemZ/alloca-01.ll for an example.
--
Atomic loads and stores use the default compare-and-swap based implementation.
This is probably much too conservative in practice, and the overhead is
especially bad for 8- and 16-bit accesses.
This is much too conservative in practice, since the architecture guarantees
that 1-, 2-, 4- and 8-byte loads and stores to aligned addresses are
inherently atomic.
--
If needed, we can support 16-byte atomics using LPQ, STPQ and CSDG.
--
We might want to model all access registers and use them to spill
32-bit values.