-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15.3k
[RISCV] Add helper method for checking for Zicond or XVentanaCondOps. NFC #157891
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
|
@llvm/pr-subscribers-backend-risc-v Author: Craig Topper (topperc) ChangesThese two extensions have identical functionality so we always want to treat them the same. Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157891.diff 2 Files Affected:
diff --git a/llvm/lib/Target/RISCV/RISCVISelLowering.cpp b/llvm/lib/Target/RISCV/RISCVISelLowering.cpp
index e69531b672b83..21ef630e0f692 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Target/RISCV/RISCVISelLowering.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/Target/RISCV/RISCVISelLowering.cpp
@@ -9141,9 +9141,7 @@ static SDValue lowerSelectToBinOp(SDNode *N, SelectionDAG &DAG,
return DAG.getNode(ISD::OR, DL, VT, Neg, DAG.getFreeze(TrueV));
}
- const bool HasCZero =
- VT.isScalarInteger() &&
- (Subtarget.hasStdExtZicond() || Subtarget.hasVendorXVentanaCondOps());
+ const bool HasCZero = VT.isScalarInteger() && Subtarget.hasCZEROLike();
// (select c, 0, y) -> (c-1) & y
if (isNullConstant(TrueV) && (!HasCZero || isSimm12Constant(FalseV))) {
@@ -9281,8 +9279,7 @@ SDValue RISCVTargetLowering::lowerSELECT(SDValue Op, SelectionDAG &DAG) const {
// nodes to implement the SELECT. Performing the lowering here allows for
// greater control over when CZERO_{EQZ/NEZ} are used vs another branchless
// sequence or RISCVISD::SELECT_CC node (branch-based select).
- if ((Subtarget.hasStdExtZicond() || Subtarget.hasVendorXVentanaCondOps()) &&
- VT.isScalarInteger()) {
+ if (Subtarget.hasCZEROLike() && VT.isScalarInteger()) {
// (select c, t, 0) -> (czero_eqz t, c)
if (isNullConstant(FalseV))
@@ -15487,9 +15484,7 @@ static SDValue combineSelectAndUse(SDNode *N, SDValue Slct, SDValue OtherOp,
if (!Subtarget.hasConditionalMoveFusion()) {
// (select cond, x, (and x, c)) has custom lowering with Zicond.
- if ((!Subtarget.hasStdExtZicond() &&
- !Subtarget.hasVendorXVentanaCondOps()) ||
- N->getOpcode() != ISD::AND)
+ if (!Subtarget.hasCZEROLike() || N->getOpcode() != ISD::AND)
return SDValue();
// Maybe harmful when condition code has multiple use.
@@ -18953,8 +18948,7 @@ static SDValue useInversedSetcc(SDNode *N, SelectionDAG &DAG,
// Replace (setcc eq (and x, C)) with (setcc ne (and x, C))) to generate
// BEXTI, where C is power of 2.
if (Subtarget.hasStdExtZbs() && VT.isScalarInteger() &&
- (Subtarget.hasStdExtZicond() || Subtarget.hasVendorXVentanaCondOps() ||
- Subtarget.hasVendorXTHeadCondMov())) {
+ (Subtarget.hasCZEROLike() || Subtarget.hasVendorXTHeadCondMov())) {
SDValue LHS = Cond.getOperand(0);
SDValue RHS = Cond.getOperand(1);
ISD::CondCode CC = cast<CondCodeSDNode>(Cond.getOperand(2))->get();
@@ -24938,7 +24932,7 @@ RISCVTargetLowering::BuildSDIVPow2(SDNode *N, const APInt &Divisor,
bool RISCVTargetLowering::shouldFoldSelectWithSingleBitTest(
EVT VT, const APInt &AndMask) const {
- if (Subtarget.hasStdExtZicond() || Subtarget.hasVendorXVentanaCondOps())
+ if (Subtarget.hasCZEROLike())
return !Subtarget.hasStdExtZbs() && AndMask.ugt(1024);
return TargetLowering::shouldFoldSelectWithSingleBitTest(VT, AndMask);
}
diff --git a/llvm/lib/Target/RISCV/RISCVSubtarget.h b/llvm/lib/Target/RISCV/RISCVSubtarget.h
index fd57e02c25d05..a7e12276b6ff7 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Target/RISCV/RISCVSubtarget.h
+++ b/llvm/lib/Target/RISCV/RISCVSubtarget.h
@@ -186,6 +186,10 @@ class RISCVSubtarget : public RISCVGenSubtargetInfo {
return HasStdExtZfhmin || HasStdExtZfbfmin;
}
+ bool hasCZEROLike() const {
+ return HadStdExtZicond || HasVendorXVentanaCondOps;
+ }
+
bool hasConditionalMoveFusion() const {
// Do we support fusing a branch+mv or branch+c.mv as a conditional move.
return (hasConditionalCompressedMoveFusion() && hasStdExtZca()) ||
|
preames
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
pfusik
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
These two extensions have identical functionality so we always want to treat them the same.