On 12/12/11 16:28, Andrew Stubbs wrote: > On 07/12/11 13:42, Richard Earnshaw wrote: >> So it looks like the code generated for core registers with thumb2 is >> pretty rubbish (no real surprise there -- to get the best code you need >> to make use of the fact that on ARM a shift by a small negative number >> (< -128) will give zero. This gives us sequences like: >> >> For ARM state it's something like (untested) >> >> @ shft< 32 , >> shft>= 32 >> __ashldi3_v3: >> sub r3, r2, #32 @ -ve , shft >> - 32 >> lsl ah, ah, r2 @ ah<< shft , 0 >> rsb ip, r2, #32 @ 32 - shft , -ve >> orr ah, ah, al, lsl r3 @ ah<< shft , al<< >> shft - 32 >> orr ah, ah, al, lsr ip @ ah<< shft | al>> 32 - shft , al<< >> shft - 32 >> lsl al, al, r2 @ al<< shft , 0 >> >> For Thumb2 (where there is no orr with register shift) >> >> lsls ah, ah, r2 @ ah<< shft , 0 >> sub r3, r2, #32 @ -ve , shft >> - 32 >> lsl ip, al, r3 @ 0 , al<< >> shft - 32 >> negs r3, r3 @ 32 - shft , -ve >> orr ah, ah, ip @ ah<< shft , al<< >> shft - 32 >> lsr r3, al, r3 @ al>> 32 - shft , 0 >> orrs ah, ah, r3 @ ah<< shft | al>> 32 - shft , al<< >> shft - 32 >> lsls al, al, r2 @ al<< shft , 0 >> >> Neither of which needs the condition flags during execution (and indeed >> is probably better in both cases than the code currently in lib1funcs.asm >> for a modern core). The flag clobbering behaviour in the thumb2 variant >> is only for code size saving; that would normally be added by a late >> optimization pass. >> >> None of this directly helps with your neon usage, but it does show that we >> really don't need to clobber the condition code register to get an >> efficient sequence. > > Unfortunately, both these sequences use two scratch registers, as shown, > and that's worse than clobbering CC. > > Now, I can implement this for non-Neon easily enough, I think, and that > would be a win, but I'm trying to figure out how best to do it for both > that case and the case where neon is available but the compiler chooses > not to do it. > > The problem is that when there is no neon available, this can be > converted at expand or split1 time, but when neon *is* available we have > to wait until a post-reload split, and then we'd be forced to expand > this in early-clobber mode, which is far less optimal. > > Any suggestions now to do this without pessimizing the code in the case > that neon is available but not used? > > In fact, is the general shift operation sufficiently expensive that I > should I just abandon the fall back alternatives and *always* use Neon > when available? In this case, what about A8 vs. A9? > > Thanks > > Andrew >
Can't you write the pattern with the scratch registers, but use "X" as the constraint when neon (so that no register gets allocated)? It's easier to do that for real registers than the condition codes register because they really can just go away if they aren't needed. R.
