[llvm-dev] should we do this time-consuming transform in InstCombine?
Zheng CZ Chen via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Mon Dec 17 23:18:31 PST 2018
There is an opportunity in instCombine for following instruction pattern:
%mul = mul nsw i32 %b, %a
%cmp = icmp sgt i32 %mul, -1
%sub = sub i32 0, %a
%mul2 = mul nsw i32 %sub, %b
%cond = select i1 %cmp, i32 %mul, i32 %mul2
Source code for above pattern:
return (a*b) >=0 ? (a*b) : -a*b;
Currently, llvm(-O3) can not recognize this as abs(a*b).
I initially think we could do this in instCombine phase in opt. Below is
what I think:
%res = OP i32 %b, %a
%sub = sub i32 0, %b
%res2 = OP i32 %sub, %a
We could do the transform:
%res2 = OP i32 %sub, %a ==> %res2 = sub i32 0, %res
Then we can get the advantage:
1: if %res2 is the only user of %sub, %sub can be eliminated;
2: if %res2 is not the only user of %sub, we could change some heavy
instruction like div to sub;
3: expose more abs opportunity for later pass.
But my concern is finding %res is a little compiling time-consuming.
At least we need MIN(user_count(%b), user_count(%a)) times to check if
instruction with same opcode and same operands exists.
Could you guys give some comment? Is there any better idea for this
Power Compiler Backend Developer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the llvm-dev