[llvm] [PowerPC] Implement a more efficient memcmp in cases where the length is known. (PR #158657)
via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Mon Oct 6 11:23:21 PDT 2025
================
@@ -122,23 +117,17 @@ define signext i32 @equalityFoldOneConstant(ptr %X) {
; CHECK-LABEL: equalityFoldOneConstant:
; CHECK: # %bb.0:
; CHECK-NEXT: li 5, 1
-; CHECK-NEXT: ld 4, 0(3)
+; CHECK-NEXT: ld 4, 8(3)
+; CHECK-NEXT: ld 3, 0(3)
; CHECK-NEXT: rldic 5, 5, 32, 31
-; CHECK-NEXT: cmpld 4, 5
-; CHECK-NEXT: bne 0, .LBB6_2
-; CHECK-NEXT: # %bb.1: # %loadbb1
+; CHECK-NEXT: xor 3, 3, 5
; CHECK-NEXT: lis 5, -32768
-; CHECK-NEXT: ld 4, 8(3)
-; CHECK-NEXT: li 3, 0
; CHECK-NEXT: ori 5, 5, 1
; CHECK-NEXT: rldic 5, 5, 1, 30
-; CHECK-NEXT: cmpld 4, 5
-; CHECK-NEXT: beq 0, .LBB6_3
-; CHECK-NEXT: .LBB6_2: # %res_block
-; CHECK-NEXT: li 3, 1
-; CHECK-NEXT: .LBB6_3: # %endblock
-; CHECK-NEXT: cntlzw 3, 3
-; CHECK-NEXT: srwi 3, 3, 5
+; CHECK-NEXT: xor 4, 4, 5
+; CHECK-NEXT: or 3, 3, 4
+; CHECK-NEXT: cntlzd 3, 3
+; CHECK-NEXT: rldicl 3, 3, 58, 63
----------------
RolandF77 wrote:
Can we not change this sequence? It seems like a side effect and I'm not sure it's faster or slower.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/158657
More information about the llvm-commits
mailing list