diff options
author | Chris Lattner <sabre@nondot.org> | 2004-02-26 07:13:46 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | Chris Lattner <sabre@nondot.org> | 2004-02-26 07:13:46 +0000 |
commit | f2dbf50efa2690396e5e46c2a1a2ca80f4c701e9 (patch) | |
tree | f9b0c72562ec60d492f2cfed981b582d52fc9594 /lib/Transforms | |
parent | 7b1af15612e614feef08ab91a2692214a287555e (diff) | |
download | external_llvm-f2dbf50efa2690396e5e46c2a1a2ca80f4c701e9.zip external_llvm-f2dbf50efa2690396e5e46c2a1a2ca80f4c701e9.tar.gz external_llvm-f2dbf50efa2690396e5e46c2a1a2ca80f4c701e9.tar.bz2 |
turn things like:
if (X == 0 || X == 2)
...where the comparisons and branches are in different blocks... into a switch
instruction. This comes up a lot in various programs, and works well with
the switch/switch merging code I checked earlier. For example, this testcase:
int switchtest(int C) {
return C == 0 ? f(123) :
C == 1 ? f(3123) :
C == 4 ? f(312) :
C == 5 ? f(1234): f(444);
}
is converted into this:
switch int %C, label %cond_false.3 [
int 0, label %cond_true.0
int 1, label %cond_true.1
int 4, label %cond_true.2
int 5, label %cond_true.3
]
instead of a whole bunch of conditional branches.
Admittedly the code is ugly, and incomplete. To be complete, we need to add
br -> switch merging and switch -> br merging. For example, this testcase:
struct foo { int Q, R, Z; };
#define A (X->Q+X->R * 123)
int test(struct foo *X) {
return A == 123 ? X1() :
A == 12321 ? X2():
(A == 111 || A == 222) ? X3() :
A == 875 ? X4() : X5();
}
Gets compiled to this:
switch int %tmp.7, label %cond_false.2 [
int 123, label %cond_true.0
int 12321, label %cond_true.1
int 111, label %cond_true.2
int 222, label %cond_true.2
]
...
cond_false.2: ; preds = %entry
%tmp.52 = seteq int %tmp.7, 875 ; <bool> [#uses=1]
br bool %tmp.52, label %cond_true.3, label %cond_false.3
where the branch could be folded into the switch.
This kind of thing occurs *ALL OF THE TIME*, especially in programs like
176.gcc, which is a horrible mess of code. It contains stuff like *shudder*:
#define SWITCH_TAKES_ARG(CHAR) \
( (CHAR) == 'D' \
|| (CHAR) == 'U' \
|| (CHAR) == 'o' \
|| (CHAR) == 'e' \
|| (CHAR) == 'u' \
|| (CHAR) == 'I' \
|| (CHAR) == 'm' \
|| (CHAR) == 'L' \
|| (CHAR) == 'A' \
|| (CHAR) == 'h' \
|| (CHAR) == 'z')
and
#define CONST_OK_FOR_LETTER_P(VALUE, C) \
((C) == 'I' ? SMALL_INTVAL (VALUE) \
: (C) == 'J' ? SMALL_INTVAL (-(VALUE)) \
: (C) == 'K' ? (unsigned)(VALUE) < 32 \
: (C) == 'L' ? ((VALUE) & 0xffff) == 0 \
: (C) == 'M' ? integer_ok_for_set (VALUE) \
: (C) == 'N' ? (VALUE) < 0 \
: (C) == 'O' ? (VALUE) == 0 \
: (C) == 'P' ? (VALUE) >= 0 \
: 0)
and
#define LEGITIMIZE_ADDRESS(X,OLDX,MODE,WIN) \
{ \
if (GET_CODE (X) == PLUS && CONSTANT_ADDRESS_P (XEXP (X, 1))) \
(X) = gen_rtx (PLUS, SImode, XEXP (X, 0), \
copy_to_mode_reg (SImode, XEXP (X, 1))); \
if (GET_CODE (X) == PLUS && CONSTANT_ADDRESS_P (XEXP (X, 0))) \
(X) = gen_rtx (PLUS, SImode, XEXP (X, 1), \
copy_to_mode_reg (SImode, XEXP (X, 0))); \
if (GET_CODE (X) == PLUS && GET_CODE (XEXP (X, 0)) == MULT) \
(X) = gen_rtx (PLUS, SImode, XEXP (X, 1), \
force_operand (XEXP (X, 0), 0)); \
if (GET_CODE (X) == PLUS && GET_CODE (XEXP (X, 1)) == MULT) \
(X) = gen_rtx (PLUS, SImode, XEXP (X, 0), \
force_operand (XEXP (X, 1), 0)); \
if (GET_CODE (X) == PLUS && GET_CODE (XEXP (X, 0)) == PLUS) \
(X) = gen_rtx (PLUS, Pmode, force_operand (XEXP (X, 0), NULL_RTX),\
XEXP (X, 1)); \
if (GET_CODE (X) == PLUS && GET_CODE (XEXP (X, 1)) == PLUS) \
(X) = gen_rtx (PLUS, Pmode, XEXP (X, 0), \
force_operand (XEXP (X, 1), NULL_RTX)); \
if (GET_CODE (X) == SYMBOL_REF || GET_CODE (X) == CONST \
|| GET_CODE (X) == LABEL_REF) \
(X) = legitimize_address (flag_pic, X, 0, 0); \
if (memory_address_p (MODE, X)) \
goto WIN; }
and others. These macros get used multiple times of course. These are such
lovely candidates for macros, aren't they? :)
This code also nicely handles LLVM constructs that look like this:
if (isa<CastInst>(I))
...
else if (isa<BranchInst>(I))
...
else if (isa<SetCondInst>(I))
...
else if (isa<UnwindInst>(I))
...
else if (isa<VAArgInst>(I))
...
where the isa can obviously be a dyn_cast as well. Switch instructions are a
good thing.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@11870 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Diffstat (limited to 'lib/Transforms')
-rw-r--r-- | lib/Transforms/Utils/SimplifyCFG.cpp | 74 |
1 files changed, 74 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/lib/Transforms/Utils/SimplifyCFG.cpp b/lib/Transforms/Utils/SimplifyCFG.cpp index ca59276..0ea1079 100644 --- a/lib/Transforms/Utils/SimplifyCFG.cpp +++ b/lib/Transforms/Utils/SimplifyCFG.cpp @@ -690,6 +690,80 @@ bool llvm::SimplifyCFG(BasicBlock *BB) { return true; } + // If there is a single predecessor for this block, and if this block is a + // simple value comparison block (ie, contains X == C), see if we can fold + // this comparison into the comparison in our predecessor block, making the + // predecessor block terminator into a switch (or adding cases to a + // preexisting switch). + if (OnlyPred) { + if (SetCondInst *SCI = dyn_cast<SetCondInst>(BB->begin())) + if (SCI->getOpcode() == Instruction::SetEQ && SCI->hasOneUse() && + isa<BranchInst>(SCI->use_back()) && + SCI->getNext() == cast<BranchInst>(SCI->use_back())) { + // Okay, we know we have a block containing (only) a seteq and a + // conditional branch instruction. If an integer value is being + // compared, if the comparison value is a constant, then check the + // predecessor. + BranchInst *BBBr = cast<BranchInst>(BB->getTerminator()); + Value *CompVal = SCI->getOperand(0); + if (ConstantInt *CVal = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(SCI->getOperand(1))) { + // We can do the merge if the predecessor contains either a + // conditional branch or a switch instruction which is operating on + // the CompVal. + if (BranchInst *BI = dyn_cast<BranchInst>(OnlyPred->getTerminator())){ + // If it is a branch, then it must be a conditional branch, + // otherwise we would have merged it in before. We can only handle + // this if the block we are looking at is the 'false' branch. + assert(BI->isConditional() && + "Should have previously merged blocks!"); + if (SetCondInst *PredSCC= dyn_cast<SetCondInst>(BI->getCondition())) + if (PredSCC->getOperand(0) == CompVal && + PredSCC->getOpcode() == Instruction::SetEQ && + isa<ConstantInt>(PredSCC->getOperand(1)) && + BB == BI->getSuccessor(1) && + SafeToMergeTerminators(BI, BBBr)) { + // If the constants being compared are the same, then the + // comparison in this block could never come true. + if (SCI->getOperand(1) == PredSCC->getOperand(1)) { + // Tell the block to skip over us, making us dead. + BI->setSuccessor(1, BBBr->getSuccessor(1)); + AddPredecessorToBlock(BBBr->getSuccessor(1), OnlyPred, BB); + return SimplifyCFG(BB); + } + + // Otherwise, create the switch instruction! + SwitchInst *SI = new SwitchInst(CompVal, BBBr->getSuccessor(1), + BI); + // Add the edge from our predecessor, and remove the + // predecessors (now obsolete branch instruction). This makes + // the current block dead. + SI->addCase(cast<Constant>(PredSCC->getOperand(1)), + BI->getSuccessor(0)); + OnlyPred->getInstList().erase(BI); + if (PredSCC->use_empty()) + PredSCC->getParent()->getInstList().erase(PredSCC); + + // Add our case... + SI->addCase(cast<Constant>(SCI->getOperand(1)), + BBBr->getSuccessor(0)); + + AddPredecessorToBlock(BBBr->getSuccessor(0), OnlyPred, BB); + AddPredecessorToBlock(BBBr->getSuccessor(1), OnlyPred, BB); + + //std::cerr << "Formed Switch: " << SI; + + // Made a big change! Now this block is dead, so remove it. + return SimplifyCFG(BB); + } + + } else if (SwitchInst *SI = + dyn_cast<SwitchInst>(OnlyPred->getTerminator())) { + + } + } + } + } + for (pred_iterator PI = pred_begin(BB), E = pred_end(BB); PI != E; ++PI) if (BranchInst *BI = dyn_cast<BranchInst>((*PI)->getTerminator())) // Change br (X == 0 | X == 1), T, F into a switch instruction. |