>Hi Jonas,
>
>Are you talking specifically about the induction variable? You might look at
what I did for PowerPC's counter-based loops
>(lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCCTRLoops.cpp, etc.).
>
> -Hal
Hi Hal,
thanks for the pointer! I have made a pass based on PPCCTRLoops.cpp for
review on http://reviews.llvm.org/D18900. I took most of the code
straight, but simplified it a bit to use the L->getLatch() method, which
made more sense to me. I would appreciate any suggestions / comments.
>On that note, I think that in general it would be useful to have some
target-independent (CodeGen) pass that would do the majority of the work
for >hardware loop generation. I have thought about it, but I won't be
able to do anything in the short term.
>
>-Krzysztof
I guess either of PPCCTRLLoops or SystemZBRCTLoops pass could
potentially easily form the beginning of such a loop pass.
LSR seemed to me to be too complex already to dare try and add a lot of
more new functionality to it. It seems to only care about compare with
zero right
now, and I couldn't see an obvious way to make it generate a formula for
any compare with step -1 to 0. Or did I miss something here?
/Jonas
On 2016-03-31 11:25, Jonas Paulsson wrote:>
>> On that note, I think that in general it would be useful to have some
>> target-independent (CodeGen) pass that would do the majority of the
>> work for hardware loop generation. I have thought about it, but I
>> won't be able to do anything in the short term.
>>
>> -Krzysztof
>>
> I think a first and useful step would be to let targets optionally
> have the loop induction variable which controls the back-branching be
> reformulated as a decrement towards zero with a -1 step. Should this
> be an extension of LSR, or should it be a simple beginning of a
> HW-loop pass running after it?
>
> /Jonas