mirror of
https://github.com/c64scene-ar/llvm-6502.git
synced 2024-08-24 09:29:42 +00:00
This patch adds an optimization in CodeGenPrepare to move an extractelement right before a store when the target can combine them. The optimization may promote any scalar operations to vector operations in the way to make that possible. ** Context ** Some targets use different register files for both vector and scalar operations. This means that transitioning from one domain to another may incur copy from one register file to another. These copies are not coalescable and may be expensive. For example, according to the scheduling model, on cortex-A8 a vector to GPR move is 20 cycles. ** Motivating Example ** Let us consider an example: define void @foo(<2 x i32>* %addr1, i32* %dest) { %in1 = load <2 x i32>* %addr1, align 8 %extract = extractelement <2 x i32> %in1, i32 1 %out = or i32 %extract, 1 store i32 %out, i32* %dest, align 4 ret void } As it is, this IR generates the following assembly on armv7: vldr d16, [r0] @vector load vmov.32 r0, d16[1] @ cross-register-file copy: 20 cycles orr r0, r0, #1 @ scalar bitwise or str r0, [r1] @ scalar store bx lr Whereas we could generate much faster code: vldr d16, [r0] @ vector load vorr.i32 d16, #0x1 @ vector bitwise or vst1.32 {d16[1]}, [r1:32] @ vector extract + store bx lr Half of the computation made in the vector is useless, but this allows to get rid of the expensive cross-register-file copy. ** Proposed Solution ** To avoid this cross-register-copy penalty, we promote the scalar operations to vector operations. The penalty will be removed if we manage to promote the whole chain of computation in the vector domain. Currently, we do that only when the chain of computation ends by a store and the target is able to combine an extract with a store. Stores are the most likely candidates, because other instructions produce values that would need to be promoted and so, extracted as some point[1]. Moreover, this is customary that targets feature stores that perform a vector extract (see AArch64 and X86 for instance). The proposed implementation relies on the TargetTransformInfo to decide whether or not it is beneficial to promote a chain of computation in the vector domain. Unfortunately, this interface is rather inaccurate for this level of details and although this optimization may be beneficial for X86 and AArch64, the inaccuracy will lead to the optimization being too aggressive. Basically in TargetTransformInfo, everything that is legal has a cost of 1, whereas, even if a vector type is legal, usually a vector operation is slightly more expensive than its scalar counterpart. That will lead to too many promotions that may not be counter balanced by the saving of the cross-register-file copy. For instance, on AArch64 this penalty is just 4 cycles. For now, the optimization is just enabled for ARM prior than v8, since those processors have a larger penalty on cross-register-file copies, and the scope is limited to basic blocks. Because of these two factors, we limit the effects of the inaccuracy. Indeed, I did not want to build up a fancy cost model with block frequency and everything on top of that. [1] We can imagine targets that can combine an extractelement with other instructions than just stores. If we want to go into that direction, the current interfaces must be augmented and, moreover, I think this becomes a global isel problem. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5921 <rdar://problem/14170854> git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@220978 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8 |
||
---|---|---|
.. | ||
AsmPrinter | ||
SelectionDAG | ||
AggressiveAntiDepBreaker.cpp | ||
AggressiveAntiDepBreaker.h | ||
AllocationOrder.cpp | ||
AllocationOrder.h | ||
Analysis.cpp | ||
AntiDepBreaker.h | ||
AtomicExpandPass.cpp | ||
BasicTargetTransformInfo.cpp | ||
BranchFolding.cpp | ||
BranchFolding.h | ||
CalcSpillWeights.cpp | ||
CallingConvLower.cpp | ||
CMakeLists.txt | ||
CodeGen.cpp | ||
CodeGenPrepare.cpp | ||
CriticalAntiDepBreaker.cpp | ||
CriticalAntiDepBreaker.h | ||
DeadMachineInstructionElim.cpp | ||
DFAPacketizer.cpp | ||
DwarfEHPrepare.cpp | ||
EarlyIfConversion.cpp | ||
EdgeBundles.cpp | ||
ErlangGC.cpp | ||
ExecutionDepsFix.cpp | ||
ExpandISelPseudos.cpp | ||
ExpandPostRAPseudos.cpp | ||
GCMetadata.cpp | ||
GCMetadataPrinter.cpp | ||
GCStrategy.cpp | ||
GlobalMerge.cpp | ||
IfConversion.cpp | ||
InlineSpiller.cpp | ||
InterferenceCache.cpp | ||
InterferenceCache.h | ||
IntrinsicLowering.cpp | ||
JumpInstrTables.cpp | ||
LatencyPriorityQueue.cpp | ||
LexicalScopes.cpp | ||
LiveDebugVariables.cpp | ||
LiveDebugVariables.h | ||
LiveInterval.cpp | ||
LiveIntervalAnalysis.cpp | ||
LiveIntervalUnion.cpp | ||
LivePhysRegs.cpp | ||
LiveRangeCalc.cpp | ||
LiveRangeCalc.h | ||
LiveRangeEdit.cpp | ||
LiveRegMatrix.cpp | ||
LiveStackAnalysis.cpp | ||
LiveVariables.cpp | ||
LLVMBuild.txt | ||
LLVMTargetMachine.cpp | ||
LocalStackSlotAllocation.cpp | ||
MachineBasicBlock.cpp | ||
MachineBlockFrequencyInfo.cpp | ||
MachineBlockPlacement.cpp | ||
MachineBranchProbabilityInfo.cpp | ||
MachineCombiner.cpp | ||
MachineCopyPropagation.cpp | ||
MachineCSE.cpp | ||
MachineDominanceFrontier.cpp | ||
MachineDominators.cpp | ||
MachineFunction.cpp | ||
MachineFunctionAnalysis.cpp | ||
MachineFunctionPass.cpp | ||
MachineFunctionPrinterPass.cpp | ||
MachineInstr.cpp | ||
MachineInstrBundle.cpp | ||
MachineLICM.cpp | ||
MachineLoopInfo.cpp | ||
MachineModuleInfo.cpp | ||
MachineModuleInfoImpls.cpp | ||
MachinePassRegistry.cpp | ||
MachinePostDominators.cpp | ||
MachineRegionInfo.cpp | ||
MachineRegisterInfo.cpp | ||
MachineScheduler.cpp | ||
MachineSink.cpp | ||
MachineSSAUpdater.cpp | ||
MachineTraceMetrics.cpp | ||
MachineVerifier.cpp | ||
Makefile | ||
module.modulemap | ||
OcamlGC.cpp | ||
OptimizePHIs.cpp | ||
Passes.cpp | ||
PeepholeOptimizer.cpp | ||
PHIElimination.cpp | ||
PHIEliminationUtils.cpp | ||
PHIEliminationUtils.h | ||
PostRASchedulerList.cpp | ||
ProcessImplicitDefs.cpp | ||
PrologEpilogInserter.cpp | ||
PrologEpilogInserter.h | ||
PseudoSourceValue.cpp | ||
README.txt | ||
RegAllocBase.cpp | ||
RegAllocBase.h | ||
RegAllocBasic.cpp | ||
RegAllocFast.cpp | ||
RegAllocGreedy.cpp | ||
RegAllocPBQP.cpp | ||
RegisterClassInfo.cpp | ||
RegisterCoalescer.cpp | ||
RegisterCoalescer.h | ||
RegisterPressure.cpp | ||
RegisterScavenging.cpp | ||
ScheduleDAG.cpp | ||
ScheduleDAGInstrs.cpp | ||
ScheduleDAGPrinter.cpp | ||
ScoreboardHazardRecognizer.cpp | ||
ShadowStackGC.cpp | ||
SjLjEHPrepare.cpp | ||
SlotIndexes.cpp | ||
Spiller.cpp | ||
Spiller.h | ||
SpillPlacement.cpp | ||
SpillPlacement.h | ||
SplitKit.cpp | ||
SplitKit.h | ||
StackColoring.cpp | ||
StackMapLivenessAnalysis.cpp | ||
StackMaps.cpp | ||
StackProtector.cpp | ||
StackSlotColoring.cpp | ||
TailDuplication.cpp | ||
TargetFrameLoweringImpl.cpp | ||
TargetInstrInfo.cpp | ||
TargetLoweringBase.cpp | ||
TargetLoweringObjectFileImpl.cpp | ||
TargetOptionsImpl.cpp | ||
TargetRegisterInfo.cpp | ||
TargetSchedule.cpp | ||
TwoAddressInstructionPass.cpp | ||
UnreachableBlockElim.cpp | ||
VirtRegMap.cpp |
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// Common register allocation / spilling problem: mul lr, r4, lr str lr, [sp, #+52] ldr lr, [r1, #+32] sxth r3, r3 ldr r4, [sp, #+52] mla r4, r3, lr, r4 can be: mul lr, r4, lr mov r4, lr str lr, [sp, #+52] ldr lr, [r1, #+32] sxth r3, r3 mla r4, r3, lr, r4 and then "merge" mul and mov: mul r4, r4, lr str r4, [sp, #+52] ldr lr, [r1, #+32] sxth r3, r3 mla r4, r3, lr, r4 It also increase the likelihood the store may become dead. //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// bb27 ... ... %reg1037 = ADDri %reg1039, 1 %reg1038 = ADDrs %reg1032, %reg1039, %NOREG, 10 Successors according to CFG: 0x8b03bf0 (#5) bb76 (0x8b03bf0, LLVM BB @0x8b032d0, ID#5): Predecessors according to CFG: 0x8b0c5f0 (#3) 0x8b0a7c0 (#4) %reg1039 = PHI %reg1070, mbb<bb76.outer,0x8b0c5f0>, %reg1037, mbb<bb27,0x8b0a7c0> Note ADDri is not a two-address instruction. However, its result %reg1037 is an operand of the PHI node in bb76 and its operand %reg1039 is the result of the PHI node. We should treat it as a two-address code and make sure the ADDri is scheduled after any node that reads %reg1039. //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// Use local info (i.e. register scavenger) to assign it a free register to allow reuse: ldr r3, [sp, #+4] add r3, r3, #3 ldr r2, [sp, #+8] add r2, r2, #2 ldr r1, [sp, #+4] <== add r1, r1, #1 ldr r0, [sp, #+4] add r0, r0, #2 //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// LLVM aggressively lift CSE out of loop. Sometimes this can be negative side- effects: R1 = X + 4 R2 = X + 7 R3 = X + 15 loop: load [i + R1] ... load [i + R2] ... load [i + R3] Suppose there is high register pressure, R1, R2, R3, can be spilled. We need to implement proper re-materialization to handle this: R1 = X + 4 R2 = X + 7 R3 = X + 15 loop: R1 = X + 4 @ re-materialized load [i + R1] ... R2 = X + 7 @ re-materialized load [i + R2] ... R3 = X + 15 @ re-materialized load [i + R3] Furthermore, with re-association, we can enable sharing: R1 = X + 4 R2 = X + 7 R3 = X + 15 loop: T = i + X load [T + 4] ... load [T + 7] ... load [T + 15] //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// It's not always a good idea to choose rematerialization over spilling. If all the load / store instructions would be folded then spilling is cheaper because it won't require new live intervals / registers. See 2003-05-31-LongShifts for an example. //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// With a copying garbage collector, derived pointers must not be retained across collector safe points; the collector could move the objects and invalidate the derived pointer. This is bad enough in the first place, but safe points can crop up unpredictably. Consider: %array = load { i32, [0 x %obj] }** %array_addr %nth_el = getelementptr { i32, [0 x %obj] }* %array, i32 0, i32 %n %old = load %obj** %nth_el %z = div i64 %x, %y store %obj* %new, %obj** %nth_el If the i64 division is lowered to a libcall, then a safe point will (must) appear for the call site. If a collection occurs, %array and %nth_el no longer point into the correct object. The fix for this is to copy address calculations so that dependent pointers are never live across safe point boundaries. But the loads cannot be copied like this if there was an intervening store, so may be hard to get right. Only a concurrent mutator can trigger a collection at the libcall safe point. So single-threaded programs do not have this requirement, even with a copying collector. Still, LLVM optimizations would probably undo a front-end's careful work. //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// The ocaml frametable structure supports liveness information. It would be good to support it. //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// The FIXME in ComputeCommonTailLength in BranchFolding.cpp needs to be revisited. The check is there to work around a misuse of directives in inline assembly. //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// It would be good to detect collector/target compatibility instead of silently doing the wrong thing. //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// It would be really nice to be able to write patterns in .td files for copies, which would eliminate a bunch of explicit predicates on them (e.g. no side effects). Once this is in place, it would be even better to have tblgen synthesize the various copy insertion/inspection methods in TargetInstrInfo. //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// Stack coloring improvements: 1. Do proper LiveStackAnalysis on all stack objects including those which are not spill slots. 2. Reorder objects to fill in gaps between objects. e.g. 4, 1, <gap>, 4, 1, 1, 1, <gap>, 4 => 4, 1, 1, 1, 1, 4, 4 //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// The scheduler should be able to sort nearby instructions by their address. For example, in an expanded memset sequence it's not uncommon to see code like this: movl $0, 4(%rdi) movl $0, 8(%rdi) movl $0, 12(%rdi) movl $0, 0(%rdi) Each of the stores is independent, and the scheduler is currently making an arbitrary decision about the order. //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// Another opportunitiy in this code is that the $0 could be moved to a register: movl $0, 4(%rdi) movl $0, 8(%rdi) movl $0, 12(%rdi) movl $0, 0(%rdi) This would save substantial code size, especially for longer sequences like this. It would be easy to have a rule telling isel to avoid matching MOV32mi if the immediate has more than some fixed number of uses. It's more involved to teach the register allocator how to do late folding to recover from excessive register pressure.