[libc-commits] [PATCH] D148717: [libc] Improve memcmp latency and codegen
Guillaume Chatelet via Phabricator via libc-commits
libc-commits at lists.llvm.org
Wed Jun 28 07:10:44 PDT 2023
gchatelet marked an inline comment as done.
gchatelet added inline comments.
================
Comment at: libc/src/string/memory_utils/utils.h:198-201
+ // cmp rdi, rsi <- serializing
+ // mov ecx, -5 <- can be done in parallel
+ // mov eax, 5 <- can be done in parallel
+ // cmovb eax, ecx <- serializing
----------------
lntue wrote:
> I wonder what's the tradeoffs between this and what is generated for 1 and -1? If this is better, then the compiler should just use this for 1 and -1 also, right?
> I wonder what's the tradeoffs between this and what is generated for 1 and -1? If this is better, then the compiler should just use this for 1 and -1 also, right?
x86 does not have conditional negate and codegen for returning 1 and -1 has higher latency.
```
xor eax, eax
cmp rdi, rsi <- serializing
sbb eax, eax <- dep on previous instruction
or eax, 1 <- dep on previous instruction
```
I think the tradeoff is around register pressure, in the `-1` / `1` case we just need `eax` at the expense of a longer dependency chain.
In the `-5` / `5` case we need `ecx` on top of `eax` but the dependency chain is shorter and then latency is reduced. Since latency matters for `memcmp` it makes more sense to use this construct.
Now TBH I haven't measured that the overall generated code is better but I'll run a few tests before landing.
https://godbolt.org/z/Gqahv7r7e
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D148717/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D148717
More information about the libc-commits
mailing list