Commit Graph

11 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Dávid Bolvanský 0f14b2e6cb Revert "[BPI] Improve static heuristics for integer comparisons"
This reverts commit 50c743fa71. Patch will be split to smaller ones.
2020-08-17 20:44:33 +02:00
Dávid Bolvanský 50c743fa71 [BPI] Improve static heuristics for integer comparisons
Similarly as for pointers, even for integers a == b is usually false.

GCC also uses this heuristic.

Reviewed By: ebrevnov

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85781
2020-08-13 19:54:27 +02:00
Dávid Bolvanský f9264995a6 Revert "[BPI] Improve static heuristics for integer comparisons"
This reverts commit 44587e2f7e. Sanitizer tests need to be updated.
2020-08-13 14:37:40 +02:00
Dávid Bolvanský 44587e2f7e [BPI] Improve static heuristics for integer comparisons
Similarly as for pointers, even for integers a == b is usually false.

GCC also uses this heuristic.

Reviewed By: ebrevnov

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85781
2020-08-13 14:23:58 +02:00
Dávid Bolvanský a0485421d2 Revert "[BPI] Improve static heuristics for integer comparisons"
This reverts commit 385c9d673f.
2020-08-13 12:59:15 +02:00
Dávid Bolvanský 385c9d673f [BPI] Improve static heuristics for integer comparisons
Similarly as for pointers, even for integers a == b is usually false.

GCC also uses this heuristic.

Reviewed By: ebrevnov

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85781
2020-08-13 12:45:40 +02:00
Nemanja Ivanovic f2c8f3b181 [PowerPC] Turn on CR-Logical reducer pass
This re-commits r375152 which was pulled in r375233 because it broke
the EXPENSIVE_CHECKS bot on Windows.

The reason for the failure was a bug in the pass that the commit turned
on by default. This patch fixes that bug and turns the pass back on.
This patch has been verified on the buildbot that originally failed
thanks to Simon Pilgrim.

Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52431

llvm-svn: 375497
2019-10-22 12:20:38 +00:00
Nemanja Ivanovic dd7021d466 Revert r375152 as it is causing failures on EXPENSIVE_CHECKS bot
llvm-svn: 375233
2019-10-18 13:38:46 +00:00
Nemanja Ivanovic 8a3d7c9cbd [PowerPC] Turn on CR-Logical reducer pass
Quite a while ago, we implemented a pass that will reduce the number of
CR-logical operations we emit. It does so by converting a CR-logical operation
into a branch. We have kept this off by default because it seemed to cause a
significant regression with one benchmark.
However, that regression turned out to be due to a completely unrelated
reason - AADB introducing a self-copy that is a priority-setting nop and it was
just exacerbated by this pass.

Now that we understand the reason for the only degradation, we can turn this
pass on by default. We have long since fixed the cause for the degradation.

Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52431

llvm-svn: 375152
2019-10-17 18:24:28 +00:00
Li Jia He bcae407a3c [PowerPC] Fix a conversion is not considered when the ISD::BR_CC node making the instruction selection
Summary:
 A signed comparison of i1 values produces the opposite result to an unsigned one if the condition code 
 includes less-than or greater-than. This is so because 1 is the most negative signed i1 number and the 
 most positive unsigned i1 number. The CR-logical operations used for such comparisons are non-commutative
 so for signed comparisons vs. unsigned ones, the input operands just need to be swapped.

Reviewed By: steven.zhang

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54825

llvm-svn: 347831
2018-11-29 03:04:39 +00:00
Li Jia He 339af52804 [PowerPC] [NFC] Add test cases to the ISD::BR_CC node in the instruction selection
Add the following test case for the ISD::BR_CC node in the instruction selection
define i64 @testi64slt(i64 %c1, i64 %c2, i64 %c3, i64 %c4, i64 %a1, i64 %a2) #0 {
entry:
  %cmp1 = icmp eq i64 %c3, %c4
  %cmp3tmp = icmp eq i64 %c1, %c2
  %cmp3 = icmp slt i1 %cmp3tmp, %cmp1
  br i1 %cmp3, label %iftrue, label %iffalse
iftrue:
  ret i64 %a1
iffalse:
  ret i64 %a2
}
The data type i64 can be replaced by i32, i64, float, double

And condition codes can be replaced by: SETEQ, SETEN, SELT, SETLE, SETGT, SETGE,SETULT, SETULE, SSETGT, and SETUGE

Reviewed By: steven.zhang

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54824

llvm-svn: 347828
2018-11-29 02:51:03 +00:00