Skip to content
  1. Aug 23, 2010
  2. Aug 09, 2010
  3. Aug 06, 2010
  4. Jul 16, 2010
  5. Jul 11, 2010
  6. Jul 10, 2010
  7. Jul 08, 2010
  8. Jul 07, 2010
  9. Jul 03, 2010
  10. Jul 02, 2010
    • Evan Cheng's avatar
      - Two-address pass should not assume unfolding is always successful. · 0ce84486
      Evan Cheng authored
      - X86 unfolding should check if the instructions being unfolded has memoperands.
        If there is no memoperands, then it must assume conservative alignment. If this
        would introduce an expensive sse unaligned load / store, then unfoldMemoryOperand
        etc. should not unfold the instruction.
      
      llvm-svn: 107509
      0ce84486
  11. Jun 22, 2010
  12. Jun 19, 2010
  13. Jun 15, 2010
  14. Jun 09, 2010
  15. Jun 08, 2010
  16. Jun 04, 2010
    • Bob Wilson's avatar
      Add some missing checks in TwoAddressInstructionPass::CoalesceExtSubRegs. · a733daf1
      Bob Wilson authored
      Check that all the instructions are in the same basic block, that the
      EXTRACT_SUBREGs write to the same subregs that are being extracted, and that
      the source and destination registers are in the same regclass.  Some of
      these constraints can be relaxed with a bit more work.  Jakob suggested
      that the loop that checks for subregs when NewSubIdx != 0 should use the
      "nodbg" iterator, so I made that change here, too.
      
      llvm-svn: 105437
      a733daf1
  17. Jun 03, 2010
    • Jakob Stoklund Olesen's avatar
      Slightly change the meaning of the reMaterialize target hook when the original · a8ad9774
      Jakob Stoklund Olesen authored
      instruction defines subregisters.
      
      Any existing subreg indices on the original instruction are preserved or
      composed with the new subreg index.
      
      Also substitute multiple operands mentioning the original register by using the
      new MachineInstr::substituteRegister() function. This is necessary because there
      will soon be <imp-def> operands added to non read-modify-write partial
      definitions. This instruction:
      
        %reg1234:foo = FLAP %reg1234<imp-def>
      
      will reMaterialize(%reg3333, bar) like this:
      
        %reg3333:bar-foo = FLAP %reg333:bar<imp-def>
      
      Finally, replace the TargetRegisterInfo pointer argument with a reference to
      indicate that it cannot be NULL.
      
      llvm-svn: 105358
      a8ad9774
  18. Jun 02, 2010
  19. May 29, 2010
  20. May 21, 2010
    • Evan Cheng's avatar
      - Change MachineInstr::findRegisterDefOperandIdx so it can also look for defs · 3858451e
      Evan Cheng authored
      that are aliases of the specified register.
      - Rename modifiesRegister to definesRegister since it's looking a def of the
      specific register or one of its super-registers. It's not looking for def of a
      sub-register or alias that could change the specified register.
      - Added modifiesRegister to look for defs of aliases.
      
      llvm-svn: 104377
      3858451e
  21. May 19, 2010
  22. May 18, 2010
  23. May 17, 2010
  24. May 15, 2010
    • Evan Cheng's avatar
      Teach two-address pass to do some coalescing while eliminating REG_SEQUENCE · 8c2d062e
      Evan Cheng authored
      instructions.
      
      e.g.
      %reg1026<def> = VLDMQ %reg1025<kill>, 260, pred:14, pred:%reg0
      %reg1027<def> = EXTRACT_SUBREG %reg1026, 6
      %reg1028<def> = EXTRACT_SUBREG %reg1026<kill>, 5
      ...
      %reg1029<def> = REG_SEQUENCE %reg1028<kill>, 5, %reg1027<kill>, 6, %reg1028, 7, %reg1027, 8, %reg1028, 9, %reg1027, 10, %reg1030<kill>, 11, %reg1032<kill>, 12
      
      After REG_SEQUENCE is eliminated, we are left with:
      
      %reg1026<def> = VLDMQ %reg1025<kill>, 260, pred:14, pred:%reg0
      %reg1029:6<def> = EXTRACT_SUBREG %reg1026, 6
      %reg1029:5<def> = EXTRACT_SUBREG %reg1026<kill>, 5
      
      The regular coalescer will not be able to coalesce reg1026 and reg1029 because it doesn't
      know how to combine sub-register indices 5 and 6. Now 2-address pass will consult the
      target whether sub-registers 5 and 6 of reg1026 can be combined to into a larger
      sub-register (or combined to be reg1026 itself as is the case here). If it is possible, 
      it will be able to replace references of reg1026 with reg1029 + the larger sub-register
      index.
      
      llvm-svn: 103835
      8c2d062e
  25. May 13, 2010
  26. May 12, 2010
  27. May 11, 2010
  28. May 10, 2010
  29. May 06, 2010
Loading