| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
(PR26302)"
This is suspected to cause a miscompile in Chromium. Reverting while
investigating.
llvm-svn: 283329
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We can't use Jcc to leave a Win64 function in general, because that
confuses the unwinder. However, for "leaf" functions, that is, functions
where the return address is always on top of the stack and which don't
have unwind info, it's OK.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24836
llvm-svn: 282920
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
That confuses e.g. machine basic block placement, which then doesn't
realize that control can fall through a block that ends with a conditional
tail call. Instead, isBranch=1 should be set.
Also, mark EFLAGS as used by these instructions.
llvm-svn: 281281
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This extends the optimization in r280832 to also work for 64-bit. The only
quirk is that we can't do this for 64-bit Windows (yet).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24423
llvm-svn: 281113
|
| |
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 280835
|
|
|
When branching to a block that immediately tail calls, it is possible to fold
the call directly into the branch if the call is direct and there is no stack
adjustment, saving one byte.
Example:
define void @f(i32 %x, i32 %y) {
entry:
%p = icmp eq i32 %x, %y
br i1 %p, label %bb1, label %bb2
bb1:
tail call void @foo()
ret void
bb2:
tail call void @bar()
ret void
}
before:
f:
movl 4(%esp), %eax
cmpl 8(%esp), %eax
jne .LBB0_2
jmp foo
.LBB0_2:
jmp bar
after:
f:
movl 4(%esp), %eax
cmpl 8(%esp), %eax
jne bar
.LBB0_1:
jmp foo
I don't expect any significant size savings from this (on a Clang bootstrap I
saw 288 bytes), but it does make the code a little tighter.
This patch only does 32-bit, but 64-bit would work similarly.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24108
llvm-svn: 280832
|
