1//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
2// Random notes about and ideas for the SystemZ backend.
3//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
4
5The initial backend is deliberately restricted to z10. We should add support
6for later architectures at some point.
7
8--
9
10If an inline asm ties an i32 "r" result to an i64 input, the input
11will be treated as an i32, leaving the upper bits uninitialised.
12For example:
13
14define void @f4(i32 *%dst) {
15 %val = call i32 asm "blah $0", "=r,0" (i64 103)
16 store i32 %val, i32 *%dst
17 ret void
18}
19
20from CodeGen/SystemZ/asm-09.ll will use LHI rather than LGHI.
21to load 103. This seems to be a general target-independent problem.
22
23--
24
25The tuning of the choice between LOAD ADDRESS (LA) and addition in
26SystemZISelDAGToDAG.cpp is suspect. It should be tweaked based on
27performance measurements.
28
29--
30
31There is no scheduling support.
32
33--
34
35We don't use the BRANCH ON INDEX instructions.
36
37--
38
39We only use MVC, XC and CLC for constant-length block operations.
40We could extend them to variable-length operations too,
41using EXECUTE RELATIVE LONG.
42
43MVCIN, MVCLE and CLCLE may be worthwhile too.
44
45--
46
47We don't use CUSE or the TRANSLATE family of instructions for string
48operations. The TRANSLATE ones are probably more difficult to exploit.
49
50--
51
52We don't take full advantage of builtins like fabsl because the calling
53conventions require f128s to be returned by invisible reference.
54
55--
56
57ADD LOGICAL WITH SIGNED IMMEDIATE could be useful when we need to
58produce a carry. SUBTRACT LOGICAL IMMEDIATE could be useful when we
59need to produce a borrow. (Note that there are no memory forms of
60ADD LOGICAL WITH CARRY and SUBTRACT LOGICAL WITH BORROW, so the high
61part of 128-bit memory operations would probably need to be done
62via a register.)
63
64--
65
66We don't use ICM, STCM, or CLM.
67
68--
69
70We don't use ADD (LOGICAL) HIGH, SUBTRACT (LOGICAL) HIGH,
71or COMPARE (LOGICAL) HIGH yet.
72
73--
74
75DAGCombiner doesn't yet fold truncations of extended loads. Functions like:
76
77 unsigned long f (unsigned long x, unsigned short *y)
78 {
79 return (x << 32) | *y;
80 }
81
82therefore end up as:
83
84 sllg %r2, %r2, 32
85 llgh %r0, 0(%r3)
86 lr %r2, %r0
87 br %r14
88
89but truncating the load would give:
90
91 sllg %r2, %r2, 32
92 lh %r2, 0(%r3)
93 br %r14
94
95--
96
97Functions like:
98
99define i64 @f1(i64 %a) {
100 %and = and i64 %a, 1
101 ret i64 %and
102}
103
104ought to be implemented as:
105
106 lhi %r0, 1
107 ngr %r2, %r0
108 br %r14
109
110but two-address optimizations reverse the order of the AND and force:
111
112 lhi %r0, 1
113 ngr %r0, %r2
114 lgr %r2, %r0
115 br %r14
116
117CodeGen/SystemZ/and-04.ll has several examples of this.
118
119--
120
121Out-of-range displacements are usually handled by loading the full
122address into a register. In many cases it would be better to create
123an anchor point instead. E.g. for:
124
125define void @f4a(i128 *%aptr, i64 %base) {
126 %addr = add i64 %base, 524288
127 %bptr = inttoptr i64 %addr to i128 *
128 %a = load volatile i128 *%aptr
129 %b = load i128 *%bptr
130 %add = add i128 %a, %b
131 store i128 %add, i128 *%aptr
132 ret void
133}
134
135(from CodeGen/SystemZ/int-add-08.ll) we load %base+524288 and %base+524296
136into separate registers, rather than using %base+524288 as a base for both.
137
138--
139
140Dynamic stack allocations round the size to 8 bytes and then allocate
141that rounded amount. It would be simpler to subtract the unrounded
142size from the copy of the stack pointer and then align the result.
143See CodeGen/SystemZ/alloca-01.ll for an example.
144
145--
146
147If needed, we can support 16-byte atomics using LPQ, STPQ and CSDG.
148
149--
150
151We might want to model all access registers and use them to spill
15232-bit values.
153
154--
155
156We might want to use the 'overflow' condition of eg. AR to support
157llvm.sadd.with.overflow.i32 and related instructions - the generated code
158for signed overflow check is currently quite bad. This would improve
159the results of using -ftrapv.
160