diff options
author | Roger Sayle <roger@nextmovesoftware.com> | 2024-07-01 12:18:26 +0100 |
---|---|---|
committer | Roger Sayle <roger@nextmovesoftware.com> | 2024-07-01 12:19:54 +0100 |
commit | 142b5263b18be96e5d9ce406ad2c1b6ab35c190f (patch) | |
tree | 5f720cbe36b3596f288a1b3ad6b619cf3e5a94db /gcc/ada | |
parent | 3d23abd3dd9c8c226ea302203b214b346f4fe8d7 (diff) | |
download | gcc-142b5263b18be96e5d9ce406ad2c1b6ab35c190f.zip gcc-142b5263b18be96e5d9ce406ad2c1b6ab35c190f.tar.gz gcc-142b5263b18be96e5d9ce406ad2c1b6ab35c190f.tar.bz2 |
i386: Additional peephole2 to use lea in round-up integer division.
A common idiom for implementing an integer division that rounds upwards is
to write (x + y - 1) / y. Conveniently on x86, the two additions to form
the numerator can be performed by a single lea instruction, and indeed gcc
currently generates a lea when both x and y are both registers.
int foo(int x, int y) {
return (x+y-1)/y;
}
generates with -O2:
foo: leal -1(%rsi,%rdi), %eax // 4 bytes
cltd
idivl %esi
ret
Oddly, however, if x is a memory, gcc currently uses two instructions:
int m;
int bar(int y) {
return (m+y-1)/y;
}
generates:
foo: movl m(%rip), %eax
addl %edi, %eax // 2 bytes
subl $1, %eax // 3 bytes
cltd
idivl %edi
ret
This discrepancy is caused by the late decision (in peephole2) to split
an addition with a memory operand, into a load followed by a reg-reg
addition. This patch improves this situation by adding a peephole2
to recognize consecutive additions and transform them into lea if
profitable.
My first attempt at fixing this was to use a define_insn_and_split:
(define_insn_and_split "*lea<mode>3_reg_mem_imm"
[(set (match_operand:SWI48 0 "register_operand")
(plus:SWI48 (plus:SWI48 (match_operand:SWI48 1 "register_operand")
(match_operand:SWI48 2 "memory_operand"))
(match_operand:SWI48 3 "x86_64_immediate_operand")))]
"ix86_pre_reload_split ()"
"#"
"&& 1"
[(set (match_dup 4) (match_dup 2))
(set (match_dup 0) (plus:SWI48 (plus:SWI48 (match_dup 1) (match_dup 4))
(match_dup 3)))]
"operands[4] = gen_reg_rtx (<MODE>mode);")
using combine to combine instructions. Unfortunately, this approach
interferes with (reload's) subtle balance of deciding when to use/avoid lea,
which can be observed as a code size regression in CSiBE. The peephole2
approach (proposed here) uniformly improves CSiBE results.
2024-07-01 Roger Sayle <roger@nextmovesoftware.com>
gcc/ChangeLog
* config/i386/i386.md (peephole2): Transform two consecutive
additions into a 3-component lea if !TARGET_AVOID_LEA_FOR_ADDR.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
* gcc.target/i386/lea-3.c: New test case.
Diffstat (limited to 'gcc/ada')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions