From 1705a999fad9de3d1b0368fa9793ae3b3db44015 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: NAKAMURA Takumi Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 06:28:34 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Reapply r165661, Patch by Shuxin Yang . Original message: The attached is the fix to radar://11663049. The optimization can be outlined by following rules: (select (x != c), e, c) -> select (x != c), e, x), (select (x == c), c, e) -> select (x == c), x, e) where the is an integer constant. The reason for this change is that : on x86, conditional-move-from-constant needs two instructions; however, conditional-move-from-register need only one instruction. While the LowerSELECT() sounds to be the most convenient place for this optimization, it turns out to be a bad place. The reason is that by replacing the constant with a symbolic value, it obscure some instruction-combining opportunities which would otherwise be very easy to spot. For that reason, I have to postpone the change to last instruction-combining phase. The change passes the test of "make check-all -C getAPIntValue().ult(FalseC->getAPIntValue())) { CC = X86::GetOppositeBranchCondition(CC); std::swap(TrueC, FalseC); + std::swap(TrueOp, FalseOp); } // Optimize C ? 8 : 0 -> zext(setcc(C)) << 3. Likewise for any pow2/0. @@ -14714,6 +14715,46 @@ static SDValue PerformCMOVCombine(SDNode *N, SelectionDAG &DAG, } } } + + // Handle these cases: + // (select (x != c), e, c) -> select (x != c), e, x), + // (select (x == c), c, e) -> select (x == c), x, e) + // where the c is an integer constant, and the "select" is the combination + // of CMOV and CMP. + // + // The rationale for this change is that the conditional-move from a constant + // needs two instructions, however, conditional-move from a register needs + // only one instruction. + // + // CAVEAT: By replacing a constant with a symbolic value, it may obscure + // some instruction-combining opportunities. This opt needs to be + // postponed as late as possible. + // + if (!DCI.isBeforeLegalize() && !DCI.isBeforeLegalizeOps()) { + // the DCI.xxxx conditions are provided to postpone the optimization as + // late as possible. + + ConstantSDNode *CmpAgainst = 0; + if ((Cond.getOpcode() == X86ISD::CMP || Cond.getOpcode() == X86ISD::SUB) && + (CmpAgainst = dyn_cast(Cond.getOperand(1))) && + dyn_cast(Cond.getOperand(0)) == 0) { + + if (CC == X86::COND_NE && + CmpAgainst == dyn_cast(FalseOp)) { + CC = X86::GetOppositeBranchCondition(CC); + std::swap(TrueOp, FalseOp); + } + + if (CC == X86::COND_E && + CmpAgainst == dyn_cast(TrueOp)) { + SDValue Ops[] = { FalseOp, Cond.getOperand(0), + DAG.getConstant(CC, MVT::i8), Cond }; + return DAG.getNode(X86ISD::CMOV, DL, N->getVTList (), Ops, + array_lengthof(Ops)); + } + } + } + return SDValue(); } diff --git a/llvm/test/CodeGen/X86/select_const.ll b/llvm/test/CodeGen/X86/select_const.ll new file mode 100644 index 0000000..5b2409d --- /dev/null +++ b/llvm/test/CodeGen/X86/select_const.ll @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ +; RUN: llc < %s -mtriple=x86_64-apple-darwin10 -mcpu=corei7 | FileCheck %s + +define i64 @test1(i64 %x) nounwind { +entry: + %cmp = icmp eq i64 %x, 2 + %add = add i64 %x, 1 + %retval.0 = select i1 %cmp, i64 2, i64 %add + ret i64 %retval.0 + +; CHECK: test1: +; CHECK: leaq 1(%rdi), %rax +; CHECK: cmpq $2, %rdi +; CHECK: cmoveq %rdi, %rax +; CHECK: ret + +} -- 2.7.4