tree 21db5c0f148b097198abf6a502cc0ba9c65e952a
parent faaeb2ecd8f1602b5673fede6088b6b8d4e7465b
author Cong Hou <congh@google.com> 1453838881 +0000
committer Cong Hou <congh@google.com> 1453838881 +0000

Allow X86::COND_NE_OR_P and X86::COND_NP_OR_E to be reversed.

Currently, AnalyzeBranch() fails non-equality comparison between floating points
on X86 (see https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=23875). This is because this
function can modify the branch by reversing the conditional jump and removing
unconditional jump if there is a proper fall-through. However, in the case of
non-equality comparison between floating points, this can turn the branch
"unanalyzable". Consider the following case:

jne.BB1
jp.BB1
jmp.BB2
.BB1:
...
.BB2:
...

AnalyzeBranch() will reverse "jp .BB1" to "jnp .BB2" and then "jmp .BB2" will be
removed:

jne.BB1
jnp.BB2
.BB1:
...
.BB2:
...

However, AnalyzeBranch() cannot analyze this branch anymore as there are two
conditional jumps with different targets. This may disable some optimizations
like block-placement: in this case the fall-through behavior is enforced even if
the fall-through block is very cold, which is suboptimal.

Actually this optimization is also done in block-placement pass, which means we
can remove this optimization from AnalyzeBranch(). However, currently
X86::COND_NE_OR_P and X86::COND_NP_OR_E are not reversible: there is no defined
negation conditions for them.

In order to reverse them, this patch defines two new CondCode X86::COND_E_AND_NP
and X86::COND_P_AND_NE. It also defines how to synthesize instructions for them.
Here only the second conditional jump is reversed. This is valid as we only need
them to do this "unconditional jump removal" optimization.


Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11393


git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@258847 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8