| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Most are named "atomic-something" so rename the few which were "atomic_something". I keep typing the wrong name due to the inconsistency. :)
llvm-svn: 353956
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
and the normal instructions instead
At one point in time acquire implied mayLoad and mayStore as did release. Thus we needed separate pseudos that also carried that property. This appears to no longer be the case. I believe it was changed in 2012 with a comment saying that atomic memory accesses are marked volatile which preserves the ordering.
So from what I can tell we shouldn't need additional pseudos since they aren't carry any flags that are different from the normal instructions. The only thing I can think of is that we may consider them for load folding candidates in the peephole pass now where we didn't before. If that's important hopefully there's something in the memory operand we can check to prevent the folding without relying on pseudo instructions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50212
llvm-svn: 338925
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 338799
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
`llc -march` is problematic because it only switches the target
architecture, but leaves the operating system unchanged. This
occasionally leads to indeterministic tests because the OS from
LLVM_DEFAULT_TARGET_TRIPLE is used.
However we can simply always use `llc -mtriple` instead. This changes
all the tests to do this to avoid people using -march when they copy and
paste parts of tests.
See also the discussion in https://reviews.llvm.org/D35287
llvm-svn: 309774
|
|
|
Summary:
I originally tried doing this specifically for X86 in the backend in D5091,
but it was rather brittle and generally running too late to be general.
Furthermore, other targets may want to implement similar optimizations.
So I reimplemented it at the IR-level, fitting it into AtomicExpandPass
as it interacts with that pass (which could not be cleanly done before
at the backend level).
This optimization relies on a new target hook, which is only used by X86
for now, as the correctness of the optimization on other targets remains
an open question. If it is found correct on other targets, it should be
trivial to enable for them.
Details of the optimization are discussed in D5091.
Test Plan: make check-all + a new test
Reviewers: jfb
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5422
llvm-svn: 218455
|
