Commit Graph

10 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Sanjay Patel 70b36f193d [CGP] eliminate a sub instruction in memcmp expansion
As noted in D34071, there are some IR optimization opportunities that could be 
handled by normal IR passes if this expansion wasn't happening so late in CGP.

Regardless of that, it seems wasteful to knowingly produce suboptimal IR here, 
so I'm proposing this change:
  %s = sub i32 %x, %y
  %r = icmp ne %s, 0
    =>
  %r = icmp ne %x, %y

Changing the predicate to 'eq' mimics what InstCombine would do, so that's just
an efficiency improvement if we decide this expansion should happen sooner.

The fact that the PowerPC backend doesn't eliminate the 'subf.' might be 
something for PPC folks to investigate separately.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34416

llvm-svn: 306471
2017-06-27 21:46:34 +00:00
Sanjay Patel a351a61cf2 [CGP, PowerPC] try to constant fold before creating loads for memcmp expansion
This is the last step needed to avoid regressions for x86 before we flip the switch to allow 
expansion of the smallest set of memcpy() via CGP. The DAG version checks for constant strings, 
so we need to do that here too.

FWIW, the 2 constant test is not handled by LibCallSimplifier::optimizeMemCmp() because that 
code is limited to 8-bit constant arrays. LibCallSimplifier will also fail to optimize some 1 
constant tests because its alignment requirements are too strict (shouldn't require alignment 
for a constant operand).

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34071

llvm-svn: 305734
2017-06-19 19:48:35 +00:00
Sanjay Patel dd96270472 [PowerPC] add memcmp test with one constant operand and equality cmp; NFC
llvm-svn: 305131
2017-06-09 23:15:14 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 5e370850d4 [CGP] don't expand a memcmp with nobuiltin attribute
This matches the behavior used in the SDAG when expanding memcmp.

For reference, we're intentionally treating the earlier fortified call transforms differently after:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23093
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL233776

One motivation for not transforming nobuiltin calls is that it can interfere with sanitizers:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D19781
https://reviews.llvm.org/D19801

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34043

llvm-svn: 305007
2017-06-08 19:47:25 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 0edcd1d717 [PowerPC] add memcmp test with nobuiltin attr; NFC
In SDAG, we don't expand libcalls with a nobuiltin attribute.
It's not clear if that's correct from the existing code comment:
"Don't do the check if marked as nobuiltin for some reason."

...adding a test here either way to show that there is currently
a different behavior implemented in the CGP-based expansion.

llvm-svn: 304991
2017-06-08 17:09:18 +00:00
Sanjay Patel e7c5041c2a [CGP / PowerPC] avoid multi-block overhead for simple memcmp expansion
The test diff for PowerPC shows we can better optimize if this case is one block.

For x86, there's would be a substantial difference if CGP expansion was enabled because branches are assumed 
cheap and SDAG can't optimize across blocks. 

Instead of this:

_cmp_eq8:
  movq  (%rdi), %rax
  cmpq  (%rsi), %rax
  je  LBB23_1
## BB#2:                                ## %res_block
  movl  $1, %ecx
  jmp LBB23_3
LBB23_1:
  xorl  %ecx, %ecx
LBB23_3:                                ## %endblock
  xorl  %eax, %eax
  testl %ecx, %ecx
  sete  %al
  retq

We get this:

cmp_eq8:   
  movq  (%rdi), %rcx
  xorl  %eax, %eax
  cmpq  (%rsi), %rcx
  sete  %al
  retq

And that matches the optimal codegen that we get from the current expansion in SelectionDAGBuilder::visitMemCmpCall(). 
If this looks right, then I just need to confirm that vector-sized expansion will work from here, and we can enable 
CGP memcmp() expansion for x86. Ie, we'll bypass the power-of-2 special cases currently optimized in SDAG because we 
can lower the IR produced here optimally.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34005

llvm-svn: 304987
2017-06-08 16:53:18 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 8ce1e3b759 [CGP] avoid zext/trunc of a memcmp expansion compare
This could be viewed as another shortcoming of the DAGCombiner:
when both operands of a compare are zexted from the same source
type, we should be able to compare the original types.

The effect on PowerPC perf is likely unnoticeable, but there's a
visible regression for x86 if we feed the suboptimal IR for memcmp
expansion to the DAG:

_cmp_eq4_zexted_to_i64:
  movl  (%rdi), %ecx
  movl  (%rsi), %edx
  xorl  %eax, %eax
  cmpq  %rdx, %rcx
  sete  %al

_cmp_eq4_better:
  movl  (%rdi), %ecx
  xorl  %eax, %eax
  cmpl  (%rsi), %ecx
  sete  %al

llvm-svn: 304923
2017-06-07 16:16:45 +00:00
Sanjay Patel f57015d4cc [CGP / PowerPC] use direct compares if there's only one load per block in memcmp() expansion
I'd like to enable CGP memcmp expansion for x86, but the output from CGP would regress the 
special cases (memcmp(x,y,N) != 0 for N=1,2,4,8,16,32 bytes) that we already handle.

I'm not sure if we'll actually be able to produce the optimal code given the block-at-a-time 
limitation in the DAG. We might have to just avoid those special-cases here in CGP. But 
regardless of that, I think this is a win for the more general cases.

http://rise4fun.com/Alive/cbQ

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33963

llvm-svn: 304849
2017-06-07 00:17:08 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 7a52296f1f [PowerPC] auto-generate full checks and increase test coverage
3 of the tests were testing exactly the same thing: memcmp(x, y, 16) != 0.
I changed that to test 4, 7, and 16 bytes, so we can see how those differ.

llvm-svn: 304838
2017-06-06 22:06:07 +00:00
Zaara Syeda 3a7578c658 [PPC] Inline expansion of memcmp
This patch does an inline expansion of memcmp.
It changes the memcmp library call into an inline expansion when the size is
known at compile time and is under a target specified threshold.
This expansion is implemented in CodeGenPrepare and expands into straight line
code. The target specifies a maximum load size and the expansion works by using
this size to load the two sources, compare, and exit early if a difference is
found. It also has a special case when the memcmp result is used in a compare
to zero equality.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28637

llvm-svn: 304313
2017-05-31 17:12:38 +00:00