[llvm-commits] patch: use addressing modes for "m" constraints fed by bitcast/GEP

[Nick Lewycky]

On 30 September 2011 17:25, Nick Lewycky <nlewycky at google.com> wrote:

> On 30 September 2011 17:20, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Nick Lewycky <nlewycky at google.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On 30 September 2011 16:30, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Nick Lewycky <nlewycky at google.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> > The attached patch eagerly evaluates bitcasts and GEPs feeding inline
>> >> > assembly constraints. That reduces the chance that we'll copy the
>> >> > result into a register. On this testcase:
>> >> >
>> >> > void test(short *a,short *b,float *c) {
>> >> >    char tmp[256];
>> >> >    __asm__ volatile(
>> >> >        "%0 %1 %2 %3 %4"
>> >> >        :
>> >> >        :"m"(a),"m"(b),"m"(c),"m"(tmp[0]), "m"(tmp[128])
>> >> >        :"memory","%eax","%ebx","%ecx","%edx","%esi","%edi");
>> >> > }
>> >> >
>> >> > previously we'd run out of registers. Now, we emit:
>> >> >
>> >> >        pushl   %ebx
>> >> >        pushl   %edi
>> >> >        pushl   %esi
>> >> >        subl    $268, %esp              # imm = 0x10C
>> >> >        movl    292(%esp), %eax
>> >> >        movl    288(%esp), %ecx
>> >> >        movl    284(%esp), %edx
>> >> >        movl    %edx, 264(%esp)
>> >> >        movl    %ecx, 260(%esp)
>> >> >        movl    %eax, 256(%esp)
>> >> >        #APP
>> >> >        264(%esp) 260(%esp) 256(%esp) (%esp) 128(%esp)
>> >> >        #NO_APP
>> >> >        addl    $268, %esp              # imm = 0x10C
>> >> >        popl    %esi
>> >> >        popl    %edi
>> >> >        popl    %ebx
>> >> >        ret
>> >> >
>> >> > which clearly has an extra copy, but that's a bug which existed
>> >> > without my patch anyways. The tmp[0] and tmp[128] don't have any
>> >> > copies.
>> >> >
>> >> > Please review!
>> >>
>> >> I follow the concept, but I don't think the place you're hacking it in
>> >> is really appropriate.  This is a fast-isel-specific problem, so it
>> >> seems like the fix should also be in fast-isel code.
>> >
>> > Thanks. I don't like where it is now, but I don't see where else to put
>> > it. It is not fast-isel specific, the same testcase fails at -O2 before
>> and
>> > works after. Can't explain that!
>>
>> The given testcase works fine for me at -O2 without your patch... is
>> there some case which doesn't work?
>>
>
> You're right. I fooled myself at some point by producing a testcase that
> failed under -O2, but then that testcase failed under GCC anyways.
>
> I'll see if I can move this into FastISel specific code path, somewhere.
>

Here we go! When FastISel has given up selecting the inline asm, I added a
loop over the arguments to build them first before selecting the inline asm.

Please review!

Nick
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20110930/010d34fd/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: m-constraint-3.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 2618 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20110930/010d34fd/attachment.bin>