The first variant contains all current transformations except
transforming switches into lookup tables. The second variant
contains all current transformations.
The switch-to-lookup-table conversion results in code that is more
difficult to analyze and optimize by other passes. Most importantly,
it can inhibit Dead Code Elimination. As such it is often beneficial to
only apply this transformation very late. A common example is inlining,
which can often result in range restrictions for the switch expression.
Changes in execution time according to LNT:
SingleSource/Benchmarks/Misc/fp-convert +3.03%
MultiSource/Benchmarks/ASC_Sequoia/CrystalMk/CrystalMk -11.20%
MultiSource/Benchmarks/Olden/perimeter/perimeter -10.43%
and a couple of smaller changes. For perimeter it also results 2.6%
a smaller binary.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30333
llvm-svn: 298799
With the ROPI and RWPI relocation models we can't always have pointers
to global data or functions in constant data, so don't try to convert switches
into lookup tables if any value in the lookup table would require a relocation.
We can still safely emit lookup tables of other values, such as simple
constants.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24462
llvm-svn: 283530
Joerg Sonnenberger