Commit Graph

15 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Sam Parker a3e41d4581 [ARM] Make MachineVerifier more strict about terminators
Fix the ARM backend's analyzeBranch so it doesn't ignore predicated
return instructions, and make the MachineVerifier rule more strict.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40061
2020-08-27 07:10:20 +01:00
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
David Green 146d35b6ee [ARM] CSEL generation
This adds a peephole optimisation to turn a t2MOVccr that could not be
folded into any other instruction into a CSEL on 8.1-m. The t2MOVccr
would usually be expanded into a conditional mov, that becomes an IT;
MOV pair. We can instead generate a CSEL instruction, which can
potentially be smaller and allows better register allocation freedom,
which can help reduce codesize. Performance is more variable and may
depend on the micrarchitecture details, but initial results look good.
If we need to control this per-cpu, we can add a subtarget feature as we
need it.

Original patch by David Penry.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83566
2020-07-16 11:10:53 +01:00
David Green e73bb45c2b [ARM] VQMOVN demand bits analysis
Similar to VMOVN, a VQMOVN will only demand the top/bottom lanes of it's
first input. However unlike VMOVN it will need access to the entire
second argument, as that value is saturated not just moved in place.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80515
2020-06-05 18:41:02 +01:00
David Green 2123bb843e [ARM] Patterns for VQSHRN
Given a VQMOVN(VSHR), we can fold that into a VQSHRN simply enough using
a few tablegen patterns.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77720
2020-05-16 17:46:43 +01:00
David Green 72f1fb2edf [ARM] Combines for VMOVN
This adds two combines for VMOVN, one to fold
VMOVN[tb](c, VQMOVNb(a, b)) => VQMOVN[tb](c, b)
The other to perform demand bits analysis on the lanes of a VMOVN. We
know that only the bottom lanes of the second operand and the top or
bottom lanes of the Qd operand are needed in the result, depending on if
the VMOVN is bottom or top.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77718
2020-05-16 15:13:16 +01:00
David Green 2e1fbf85b6 [ARM] MVE saturating truncates
This adds some custom lowering for VQMOVN, an instruction that can be
used to perform saturating truncates from a pair of min(max(X, -0x8000),
0x7fff), providing those constants are correct. This leaves a VQMOVNBs
which saturates the value and inserts that into the bottom lanes of an
existing vector. We then need to do something with the other lanes,
extending the value using a vmovlb.

Ideally, as will often be the case, only the bottom lane of what remains
will be demanded, allowing the vmovlb to be removed. Which should mean
the instruction is either equal or a win most of the time, and allows
some extra follow-up folding to happen.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77590
2020-05-16 15:10:20 +01:00
David Green eecba95067 [ARM] Replace arm vendor with none. NFC 2020-04-22 18:19:35 +01:00
David Green 892af45c86 [ARM] Distribute MVE post-increments
This adds some extra processing into the Pre-RA ARM load/store optimizer
to detect and merge MVE loads/stores and adds of the same base. This we
don't always turn into a post-inc during ISel, and due to the nature of
it being a graph we don't always know an order to use for the nodes, not
knowing which nodes to make post-inc and which to use the new post-inc
of. After ISel, we have an order that we can use to post-inc the
following instructions.

So this looks for a loads/store with a starting offset of 0, and an
add/sub from the same base, plus a number of other loads/stores. We then
do some checks and convert the zero offset load/store into a postinc
variant. Any loads/stores after it have the offset subtracted from their
immediates.  For example:
  LDR #4           LDR #4
  LDR #0           LDR_POSTINC #16
  LDR #8           LDR #-8
  LDR #12          LDR #-4
  ADD #16
It only handles MVE loads/stores at the moment. Normal loads/store will
be added in a followup patch, they just have some extra details to
ensure that we keep generating LDRD/LDM successfully.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77813
2020-04-22 14:16:51 +01:00
David Green 9fa38c985f [ARM] MVE vqmovn tests. NFC. 2020-04-06 11:13:02 +01:00