X86: Improve BT instruction selection for 64-bit values.

If a 64-bit value is tested against a bit which is known to be in the range
[0..31) (modulo 64), we can use the 32-bit BT instruction, which has a slightly
shorter encoding.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25862

llvm-svn: 284864

1 files changed, 8 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp b/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp
index 28397d8648d..665ab04b6c6 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp
@@ -15314,6 +15314,14 @@ static SDValue getBitTestCondition(SDValue Src, SDValue BitNo, ISD::CondCode CC,
   if (Src.getValueType() == MVT::i8 || Src.getValueType() == MVT::i16)
     Src = DAG.getNode(ISD::ANY_EXTEND, dl, MVT::i32, Src);
 
+  // See if we can use the 32-bit instruction instead of the 64-bit one for a
+  // shorter encoding. Since the former takes the modulo 32 of BitNo and the
+  // latter takes the modulo 64, this is only valid if the 5th bit of BitNo is
+  // known to be zero.
+  if (Src.getValueType() == MVT::i64 &&
+      DAG.MaskedValueIsZero(BitNo, APInt(BitNo.getValueSizeInBits(), 32)))
+    Src = DAG.getNode(ISD::TRUNCATE, dl, MVT::i32, Src);
+
   // If the operand types disagree, extend the shift amount to match.  Since
   // BT ignores high bits (like shifts) we can use anyextend.
   if (Src.getValueType() != BitNo.getValueType())