[PATCH] D35578: Add -fswitch-tables and -fno-switch-tables flags

[Chad Rosier via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

mcrosier added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D35578#813548, @sgundapa wrote:

> The switch-case statements generate two kinds of tables.
>
> 1. Jump tables
> 2. Lookup tables.
>
>   While the general assumption is that switch-case statements generate jump tables, the below case generates a lookup table by late simplifycfg
>
>   int foo(int x) { switch (x) { case 0: return 9; case 1: return 20; case 2: return 14; case 3: return 22; case 4: return 12; default: return 19; } } generates a @switch.table.foo = private unnamed_addr constant [5 x i32] [i32 9, i32 20, i32 14, i32 22, i32 12] The lookup table is an array of return values as opposed to an array of pointers in jump table.


IIRC, we lower switches to a combination of binaries trees, jump tables and some bitmagic when there are 3 or fewer cases in the subtree.  Somewhat beside the point, but just a bit of clarification...  ...but before lowering the switch, simplifycfg may come along and introduce a lookup table if the cases are returning a constant value.

> The "-fno-XXX-flags" disable the generation of these tables. 
>  -fno-switch-tables implies both -fno-jump-tables and -fno-lookup-tables

Okay, now I understand the differences between the flags.

What exactly is the motivation?  I'm trying to narrow down the justification for adding yet more flags.


https://reviews.llvm.org/D35578