| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Don't overwrite existing target-cpu attributes.
I've often found the replacement behavior annoying, and this is
inconsistent with how the fast math command line flags interact with
the function attributes.
Does not yet change target-features, since I think that should behave
as a concatenation.
|
| |
|
|
| |
"frame-pointer"="none" as cleanups after D56351
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45823
Change-Id: Icf6f34f6babc3cb2ff5292fde003472473037a71
llvm-svn: 330939
|
|
|
If a load follows a store and reloads data that the store has written to memory, Intel microarchitectures can in many cases forward the data directly from the store to the load, This "store forwarding" saves cycles by enabling the load to directly obtain the data instead of accessing the data from cache or memory.
A "store forward block" occurs in cases that a store cannot be forwarded to the load. The most typical case of store forward block on Intel Core microarchiticutre that a small store cannot be forwarded to a large load.
The estimated penalty for a store forward block is ~13 cycles.
This pass tries to recognize and handle cases where "store forward block" is created by the compiler when lowering memcpy calls to a sequence
of a load and a store.
The pass currently only handles cases where memcpy is lowered to XMM/YMM registers, it tries to break the memcpy into smaller copies.
breaking the memcpy should be possible since there is no atomicity guarantee for loads and stores to XMM/YMM.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41330
Change-Id: Ib48836ccdf6005989f7d4466fa2035b7b04415d9
llvm-svn: 328973
|
