rucc_codegen/shorten.rs
1//! Writing the same answer in fewer bytes, once the registers are the real ones.
2//!
3//! Design: `spec/optimizer/37-machine-level-optimization.md` section 37.4, which calls these the
4//! size directed peepholes and puts them after register allocation. tamnd/rucc#741 is the issue
5//! about the back end never learning what it is compiling for, and names three of these as free
6//! before any of that is settled and one as waiting for it.
7//!
8//! Five rewrites. A move of zero into a register becomes an exclusive or of the register with
9//! itself: `movl $0, %eax` spells the zero out in four bytes of zero bits and is five bytes, `xorl
10//! %eax, %eax` says it without spelling it and is two. The processor knows the idiom, so the
11//! shorter one is no slower, and this is not a trade of speed for size and does not wait for a size
12//! goal to arrive.
13//!
14//! And a move of a number into a sixty-four bit register becomes the thirty-two bit move where the
15//! number is one that fits, because the narrow instruction clears the half of the register it does
16//! not write rather than leaving it alone. `movq $7, %rax` is seven bytes and `movl $7, %eax` is
17//! five, and for a number above two to the thirty-first it is ten against five, since the wide move
18//! cannot reach one by sign extending and writes all eight bytes of it out.
19//!
20//! The two meet on a zero, and the order they are asked in is the order they are worth: a zero
21//! whose condition state is free becomes the exclusive or, and a zero whose state is not becomes
22//! the narrow move, which is two bytes off rather than five but costs nothing to say.
23//!
24//! And a comparison of a register against zero becomes a test of the register against itself.
25//! `cmpl $0, %eax` is three bytes and `testl %eax, %eax` is two, the byte being the zero the first
26//! one writes out. That one is asked of every instruction whatever the walk has seen, because the
27//! test writes the condition state exactly as the comparison does: both leave the sign, the zero
28//! and the parity of what is in the register and both clear the carry and the overflow, so every
29//! condition this machine jumps on reads the same answer behind either of them.
30//!
31//! And an addition of one to a register becomes the instruction that adds one and says so in its
32//! opcode. `addl $1, %eax` is three bytes, one for the opcode, one saying which register and one
33//! for the number, and `incl %eax` is two. A subtraction of one becomes the instruction that takes
34//! one away, and each of the two is also what the other one written against minus one becomes.
35//!
36//! And an address computation whose address is a register becomes a move of that register. `leaq
37//! (%rsp), %rax` works out an address that is a base and nothing else, which is what is already in
38//! the base, and `movq %rsp, %rax` puts the same number in the same place in three bytes rather than
39//! four. The byte is the one an address counted from the stack pointer has to spend saying it has no
40//! index, and the stack pointer is the register this turns up on, because what makes it is taking
41//! the address of whichever local sits at the bottom of the frame.
42//!
43//! That fifth one is the only one here worth taking for something other than bytes. A move between
44//! registers is a thing the machine can do by renaming, so it is off the critical path, and an
45//! address computation is an addition however small the numbers in it are. gcc writes no address
46//! computation of that shape anywhere in the SQLite amalgamation and rucc wrote 444 of them.
47//!
48//! That fourth one is the only one here that is not free, and it is the only one that reads the
49//! goal. An addition writes the carry and an increment leaves the carry as it found it, so the
50//! machine has to merge what was left with what the next instruction writes, which costs a little
51//! where the code is hot and is worth a byte where the goal is size. gcc writes the addition at
52//! `-O2` and the increment at `-Os`, and so does this. The goal arriving here at all is the first
53//! half of tamnd/rucc#741: before it, `-Os` was a shorter list of middle end passes and the back
54//! end compiled what came out of it exactly as `-O2` would have.
55//!
56//! The numbers over the corpus at `-Os` before this pass existed: rucc wrote a move of zero into a
57//! register 21,304 times and GCC 16 wrote it 9 times, and GCC wrote the exclusive or 23,729 times
58//! against rucc's 965. So this is not a case the selector catches most of and misses at the edges.
59//! It is one it does not do. Afterwards rucc writes the move 1,232 times and the exclusive or
60//! 21,037, and the two moved by the same number, which is what says every one that went became one
61//! of these and none of them came from anywhere else.
62//!
63//! # Why it is not something the encoder does
64//!
65//! Because the two are not the same instruction. The exclusive or writes the condition state and
66//! the move does not, so an encoder that quietly swapped one for the other would change what the
67//! instruction behind it reads. Whether anything reads it is a question about the instructions that
68//! follow rather than about this one, which is what makes this a pass. [`rucc_target::FlagInsts`]
69//! is where the answer comes from, the same description [`crate::compare`] asks, and it answers
70//! that a name it does not know writes the state, so an opcode added to a rule set and not to that
71//! table makes this find less rather than making it wrong.
72//!
73//! The narrower move and the test are a different answer to the same question. Those two an encoder
74//! could do without asking anything, since the narrower move leaves the same number in the same
75//! register and the test leaves the same condition state the comparison left. They are not done
76//! there because an encoder handed a sixty-four bit move and writing the bytes of a thirty-two bit
77//! one would be writing bytes the listing beside them does not say, and the listing and the bytes
78//! agreeing is worth more than the two bytes. Choosing the instruction is this pass and spelling
79//! the one it chose is the encoder.
80//!
81//! # Why it runs last
82//!
83//! After [`crate::compare`], because that pass takes comparisons out and a comparison that is gone
84//! is one whose write of the condition state is gone with it. Running before it would see a state
85//! written where the output has none and would refuse rewrites that are allowed. After the layout
86//! for the reason `compare` is: the layout writes the jump that reads a comparison into the same
87//! block as the comparison, and this is the other pass that has to see that pair whole.
88//!
89//! Nothing here moves an instruction, removes one or changes a block, so running after the freeze
90//! costs nothing. The rewrite is one instruction becoming one instruction in the same place.
91//!
92//! # What a block boundary is
93//!
94//! The end of everything this knows, which is the same sentence [`crate::compare`] uses and the
95//! same reason: the condition state is not a register, nothing in this back end carries one from a
96//! block to its successors, and the only place a comparison is read is the block it was made in.
97//!
98//! That is an invariant of the passes in front rather than of this one, so it is checked instead of
99//! believed. `carried` walks every block and asks whether any of them reads the condition state
100//! before writing it, which is what a block reading a predecessor's state would look like from
101//! here, and one that does turns the whole function down. What it buys is that if some later pass
102//! starts writing that shape, this pass stops rather than starts being wrong.
103//!
104//! Reads it rather than mentions it. A comparison that keeps a byte makes the comparison and reads
105//! the answer in the one instruction, so a block opening with one is not a block reading anything a
106//! predecessor left, and the description is asked which of the two kinds of read it is rather than
107//! being taken at the word. tamnd/rucc#1432 is what that cost before it was asked: 456 functions in
108//! the SQLite amalgamation were turned down and every one of them was turned down by this, which is
109//! most of the functions in it that have anything for this pass to do.
110//!
111//! Down for the exclusive or and the increment. The narrower move reads no condition state and
112//! writes none, the test writes the same state the comparison it replaces wrote, and neither an
113//! address computation nor a move touches any state at all, so where a state is alive is not a
114//! question those three have to ask, and a function this turns down still gets all of them.
115//!
116//! What the walk carries for the increment is a second answer beside the first, which is whether
117//! anything behind reads the carry rather than whether anything behind reads the state. The two are
118//! not the same question and neither implies the other: a jump on whether a value was zero reads the
119//! state and not the carry, and an increment already in the code writes the state and not the carry
120//! and so ends the life of neither. That last case is the reason the walk and the check above both
121//! ask the target which instructions leave the carry alone rather than stopping at the flag saying
122//! the state was written.
123//!
124//! # A template a program wrote
125//!
126//! An `asm` statement is not opaque to this. `rucc_target::x86_64::read` turns the text of a
127//! template into the opcodes this back end already has, so by the time this runs a template is
128//! ordinary instructions carrying ordinary names, and the ones in it that read the condition state
129//! are seen the same way any other instruction's read is. A move of zero in front of a template is
130//! rewritten when nothing in that template reads a state it did not write itself, which is the same
131//! rule as everywhere else and not a rule about templates.
132//!
133//! Nothing weaker is being assumed there than what a program could already rely on. On this machine
134//! GCC has every `asm` clobber the condition state whether the statement said so or not, so a
135//! template reading one set before it was never something to hold on to.
136//!
137//! # What it will not do
138//!
139//! Turn a move into the exclusive or when anything reads its condition state before anything
140//! writes. That is the rule and what it costs is now a small number: the zero going into a register
141//! right before a comparison of something else stays a move, and the most the other rewrite can do
142//! for it is make it a narrower one. Of the 215 moves of zero left over the corpus at `-Os`, 146
143//! are this and the other 69 are the eight bit rule below. Not one of them is sixty-four bits wide.
144//!
145//! It was 1,232 until the whole function check stopped counting a comparison that keeps a byte as a
146//! state read from in front of it, which is tamnd/rucc#1432 and was most of what this pass was
147//! leaving alone rather than anything about the instructions it was looking at.
148//!
149//! Eight bits. `movb $0, %al` and `xorb %al, %al` are both two bytes, so the exchange buys nothing
150//! and would spend the condition state on it. The target's table is where that is written down.
151//!
152//! Write an increment at a level that asked for fast code. That is the goal doing its job rather
153//! than a limit, and it is why the same corpus compiled at `-O2` and at `-Os` now differs by
154//! something other than which middle end passes ran.
155//!
156//! Add or take away anything but one. The machine has an opcode for one and for nothing else, so a
157//! constant of two is already as short as it is going to be written.
158//!
159//! Turn an address computation into a move when the address is anything more than a register. An
160//! index is a multiplication, a constant is an addition and a symbol is an address the assembler
161//! fills in, and a move does none of those. That is what most address computations are for, so this
162//! last rewrite is about the ones that were not computing anything rather than about address
163//! computation in general.
164
165use rucc_base::Interner;
166use rucc_cost::Goal;
167use rucc_mir::{self as mir, Role};
168use rucc_target::{FlagInsts, MachineInsts, Reads, ShortInsts};
169
170use crate::changes::{self, Changes, Plan};
171
172/// Rewrites every instruction that has a shorter spelling nothing would notice.
173///
174/// Gives back how many were rewritten, which the tests read and nothing else does.
175pub fn shorter(
176 func: &mut mir::Func,
177 short: &ShortInsts,
178 flags: &FlagInsts,
179 machine: &MachineInsts,
180 names: &mut Interner,
181 goal: Goal,
182) -> usize {
183 // Every name a rewrite could want, before the walk rather than inside it, because the walk
184 // holds a name it read out of the interner while it edits the function and interning a new one
185 // there would be the same interner borrowed twice. The same reason [`crate::compare`] has.
186 let wanted = short.zeroing.iter().map(|entry| entry.into);
187 let wanted = wanted.chain(short.narrowing.iter().map(|entry| entry.into));
188 let wanted = wanted.chain(short.testing.iter().map(|entry| entry.into));
189 let wanted = wanted.chain(short.stepping.iter().map(|entry| entry.into));
190 let wanted = wanted.chain(short.copying.iter().map(|entry| entry.into));
191 let opcodes: Vec<(&'static str, mir::Opcode)> = wanted
192 .map(|into| (into, mir::Opcode::new(names.intern(&format!("{}{into}", short.prefix)))))
193 .collect();
194 let names = &*names;
195 let mut counts = changes::Reads::of(func);
196 let mut took = 0;
197 // Whether the rewrite that spends the condition state may be asked for at all. The narrower
198 // instruction neither reads the state nor writes it, so it is not asked this and a function
199 // this turns down still gets that one.
200 let free = !carried(func, short, flags, names);
201 // Whether the rewrite that trades the carry for a byte may be asked for. It is the one thing
202 // here that is not free, so it waits for a level that said it wanted small code.
203 let small = free && goal == Goal::Size;
204 for block in func.blocks().collect::<Vec<_>>() {
205 // Backwards, because the question each instruction asks is about the ones behind it. The
206 // state is dead at the end of a block, which is the invariant [`carried`] has just held the
207 // function to.
208 let mut live = false;
209 // The same question about the carry alone, which is the part of the state the shorter
210 // addition does not write. It starts false for the reason `live` does and moves separately,
211 // because an instruction that writes the whole state ends the life of both and one that
212 // writes everything but the carry ends the life of neither.
213 let mut carry = false;
214 for inst in func.insts(block).collect::<Vec<_>>().into_iter().rev() {
215 if free && !live {
216 let into = shorter_form(func, short, names, &opcodes, inst);
217 if into.is_some_and(|op| zeroed(func, &mut counts, machine, names, inst, op)) {
218 took += 1;
219 // What stands there now writes the state, and the state was already dead, so
220 // nothing about what the instructions in front of it may do has changed.
221 continue;
222 }
223 }
224 // The zero that could not become an exclusive or can still be written in fewer bytes,
225 // which is why this is asked after that one and not instead of it.
226 let into = narrower_form(func, short, names, &opcodes, inst);
227 if into.is_some_and(|op| narrowed(func, &mut counts, machine, names, inst, op)) {
228 took += 1;
229 // What stands there now is the same instruction at half the width, which is a
230 // move either way, so what it does to the state is what it did before: nothing.
231 }
232 // A comparison against zero asked of the register alone. Nothing about where the state
233 // is live comes into it, because the shorter instruction writes the same five bits of
234 // state the comparison wrote, so this is asked of every instruction whatever the walk
235 // has seen behind it.
236 let into = tested_form(func, short, names, &opcodes, inst);
237 if into.is_some_and(|op| tested(func, &mut counts, machine, names, inst, op)) {
238 took += 1;
239 }
240 // An address that is a register, written as the move it is. Nothing about the condition
241 // state comes into it either, since neither instruction writes any, so this is asked of
242 // every instruction the same way the narrower move is.
243 let into = copied_form(func, short, names, &opcodes, inst);
244 if into.is_some_and(|op| copied(func, &mut counts, machine, names, inst, op)) {
245 took += 1;
246 }
247 // Adding one with the one in the opcode, which is the only rewrite here that is a
248 // trade. It needs the carry to be dead rather than the whole state, since that is the
249 // only part of the state the shorter instruction leaves behind, and it needs the level
250 // to have asked for small code.
251 if small && !carry {
252 let into = stepped_form(func, short, names, &opcodes, inst);
253 if into.is_some_and(|op| stepped(func, &mut counts, machine, names, inst, op)) {
254 took += 1;
255 // What stands there now writes everything but the carry, and the carry was
256 // already dead, so both answers below are the ones they already are and the
257 // walk past it is the walk it would have taken anyway.
258 }
259 }
260 let Some(name) = opcode(func, flags, names, inst) else {
261 // A name the description does not cover may have read the state and may have
262 // written it, and the answer that finds fewer rewrites is that it read it.
263 live = true;
264 carry = true;
265 continue;
266 };
267 // What it reads before whether it writes, because an instruction can do both and the
268 // read it does is a read of what is there now. An add with carry is the one that does,
269 // and asking the other way round would call it the end of the state's life and let a
270 // rewrite in front of it take the carry away.
271 //
272 // Unless what it reads is what it wrote itself. A comparison that keeps a byte makes
273 // the comparison and reads the answer in the one instruction, so the state it was
274 // handed is state it wrote over before anything looked at it, and it ends a life rather
275 // than extending one. Asking the description which kind it is rather than stopping at
276 // the word read is most of what this pass gets to do in real code, since a C function
277 // of any size has one of these in it.
278 if flags.asks_what_it_reads(name) {
279 live = false;
280 carry = false;
281 } else if let Some(reads) = flags.reads(name) {
282 live = true;
283 // Which part of the state the condition on it is about. A condition that asks where
284 // a value sits as an unsigned number reads the carry, and so does an instruction
285 // that is adding a carry on rather than asking a question about one.
286 if matches!(reads, Reads::Unsigned | Reads::Carry) {
287 carry = true;
288 }
289 } else if (flags.writes)(name) && !short.steps(name) {
290 // An instruction that writes the state ends the life of everything in it. One that
291 // writes all of it but the carry ends the life of none of it, which is the second
292 // half of the sentence and is why this asks the description rather than stopping at
293 // the flag. That answer is about `live` as much as about `carry`: a rewrite in front
294 // that spends the state would be spending a carry this instruction was going to
295 // leave for something behind it.
296 live = false;
297 carry = false;
298 }
299 }
300 }
301 took
302}
303
304/// Whether any block reads the condition state before writing it, which is what a state carried in
305/// from a predecessor would look like from inside this pass.
306///
307/// The passes in front are the ones that promise this does not happen and the promise is theirs to
308/// keep, so what this does is hold them to it rather than restate it. A function where it is broken
309/// gets no rewrites at all, which is the answer that is wrong about nothing.
310///
311/// An instruction that leaves the carry alone does not count as having written the state here, for
312/// the same reason it does not count as having written it in the walk. A block opening with one and
313/// reading a carry afterwards is reading a carry a predecessor left, which is exactly the shape this
314/// is looking for, and stopping at it would be calling that block clean.
315///
316/// An instruction that reads what it wrote itself does not count as having read the state, for the
317/// same reason it does not in the walk. A block opening with a comparison that keeps a byte opens
318/// with a comparison, and what the comparison found is not what anything in front of it left.
319/// Counting it as a read is the difference between this turning down a few functions and turning
320/// down most of them, because a comparison that keeps a byte is what every `!` and every `==` in a
321/// value position comes out as.
322fn carried(func: &mir::Func, short: &ShortInsts, flags: &FlagInsts, names: &Interner) -> bool {
323 func.blocks().any(|block| {
324 for inst in func.insts(block) {
325 let Some(name) = opcode(func, flags, names, inst) else { return true };
326 if flags.reads(name).is_some() && !flags.asks_what_it_reads(name) {
327 return true;
328 }
329 if (flags.writes)(name) && !short.steps(name) {
330 return false;
331 }
332 }
333 false
334 })
335}
336
337/// The shorter instruction this one has, when it has one and the constant it carries is the one
338/// that instruction writes.
339///
340/// The name says which instruction it is and the description says which names have a shorter
341/// spelling, and neither of them says what number this one holds. That is the half that decides
342/// whether the shorter spelling says the same thing, since the short way of writing zero is only
343/// the short way of writing zero.
344fn shorter_form(
345 func: &mir::Func,
346 short: &ShortInsts,
347 names: &Interner,
348 opcodes: &[(&'static str, mir::Opcode)],
349 inst: mir::Inst,
350) -> Option<mir::Opcode> {
351 let name = names.resolve(func[inst].opcode.name()).strip_prefix(short.prefix)?;
352 let into = short.zeroed(name)?;
353 if func[inst].imm.map(|at| func[at].0) != Some(0) {
354 return None;
355 }
356 opcodes.iter().find(|&&(at, _)| at == into).map(|&(_, opcode)| opcode)
357}
358
359/// The narrower instruction this one has, when it has one and the number it carries is one that
360/// instruction holds.
361///
362/// A number the narrower instruction cannot hold is every negative one and everything above what
363/// fits in the bits it writes, since what it does to the rest of the register is clear it. So the
364/// question is not whether the number fits in that many bits the way the program meant it, which is
365/// a question about a type, but whether the bits the wide instruction would leave in the register
366/// are the bits the narrow one leaves there, which is a question about the number.
367fn narrower_form(
368 func: &mir::Func,
369 short: &ShortInsts,
370 names: &Interner,
371 opcodes: &[(&'static str, mir::Opcode)],
372 inst: mir::Inst,
373) -> Option<mir::Opcode> {
374 let name = names.resolve(func[inst].opcode.name()).strip_prefix(short.prefix)?;
375 let narrow = short.narrowed(name)?;
376 let held = u64::try_from(func[func[inst].imm?].0).ok()?;
377 if narrow.writes >= u64::BITS || held >= 1u64 << narrow.writes {
378 return None;
379 }
380 opcodes.iter().find(|&&(at, _)| at == narrow.into).map(|&(_, opcode)| opcode)
381}
382
383/// Rewrites the move into the narrower move, which is the same instruction with a different name.
384///
385/// So the operands are the ones it had, where the exclusive or below needs its own built: the two
386/// moves take a register they write and a number, and the number is the one that was already there.
387/// A description where that is not so is one [`Changes`] turns down, and a rewrite it turns down is
388/// one this reports as not taken rather than one that goes in anyway.
389fn narrowed(
390 func: &mut mir::Func,
391 counts: &mut changes::Reads,
392 machine: &MachineInsts,
393 names: &Interner,
394 inst: mir::Inst,
395 opcode: mir::Opcode,
396) -> bool {
397 let mut set = Changes::new();
398 set.rewrite(inst, Plan { opcode, ..Plan::of(func, inst) });
399 set.commit(func, counts, names, machine).is_ok()
400}
401
402/// The shorter comparison this one has, when it has one and the constant it carries is zero.
403///
404/// Zero is the whole of it. A comparison of a register against itself asks whether the register is
405/// zero and nothing else, so the description's entry says what to write instead of a comparison
406/// against zero and says nothing about a comparison against anything, and an instruction carrying
407/// any other number is one this walks past.
408fn tested_form(
409 func: &mir::Func,
410 short: &ShortInsts,
411 names: &Interner,
412 opcodes: &[(&'static str, mir::Opcode)],
413 inst: mir::Inst,
414) -> Option<mir::Opcode> {
415 let name = names.resolve(func[inst].opcode.name()).strip_prefix(short.prefix)?;
416 let into = short.tested(name)?;
417 if func[inst].imm.map(|at| func[at].0) != Some(0) {
418 return None;
419 }
420 opcodes.iter().find(|&&(at, _)| at == into).map(|&(_, opcode)| opcode)
421}
422
423/// Rewrites the comparison into the test, which reads the register the comparison read and drops
424/// the constant.
425///
426/// The operands are the ones it had, for the reason [`narrowed`] keeps them: both instructions name
427/// one register and read it, and what changes is the number, which the shorter one does not carry.
428/// So the constant goes and nothing else does. A description where the two are not that shape is one
429/// [`Changes`] turns down, and this reports a rewrite it turned down as not taken.
430fn tested(
431 func: &mut mir::Func,
432 counts: &mut changes::Reads,
433 machine: &MachineInsts,
434 names: &Interner,
435 inst: mir::Inst,
436 opcode: mir::Opcode,
437) -> bool {
438 let mut set = Changes::new();
439 set.rewrite(inst, Plan { opcode, imm: None, ..Plan::of(func, inst) });
440 set.commit(func, counts, names, machine).is_ok()
441}
442
443/// The move this address computation is, when the address it works out is a register.
444///
445/// Which is an addressing mode naming a base and nothing else. An index is a multiplication and an
446/// addition, a constant is an addition, and a symbol or a label is an address the assembler fills in
447/// later, so any of those is work the move does not do. What is left is a mode that says to take
448/// what is in one register, and taking what is in one register is the move.
449///
450/// The width is not asked about, unlike the narrower move above. An address on this machine is
451/// sixty four bits wide whatever is at it, so an address computation that keeps its answer keeps all
452/// of it, and the move the description names beside it is the move of that width.
453fn copied_form(
454 func: &mir::Func,
455 short: &ShortInsts,
456 names: &Interner,
457 opcodes: &[(&'static str, mir::Opcode)],
458 inst: mir::Inst,
459) -> Option<mir::Opcode> {
460 let name = names.resolve(func[inst].opcode.name()).strip_prefix(short.prefix)?;
461 let into = short.copied(name)?;
462 let amode = func[inst].mem.map(|at| func[at])?;
463 if amode.base.is_none() || amode.index.is_some() || amode.disp != 0 {
464 return None;
465 }
466 if amode.symbol.is_some() || amode.block.is_some() || amode.segment.is_some() {
467 return None;
468 }
469 opcodes.iter().find(|&&(at, _)| at == into).map(|&(_, opcode)| opcode)
470}
471
472/// Rewrites the address computation into the move, which keeps the operands and drops the mode.
473///
474/// The operands are already the move's. An instruction with an addressing mode carries the registers
475/// that mode names in its operand vector, behind the ones it writes, so an address computation whose
476/// mode is one base is an instruction that writes one register and reads one register, in that
477/// order, which is the move's shape. What goes is the mode itself, since the move has none.
478///
479/// A description where those two are not the same shape is one [`Changes`] turns down, and this
480/// reports a rewrite it turned down as not taken, which is how an address computation with more in
481/// its operand vector than the mode accounted for is left alone rather than guessed at.
482fn copied(
483 func: &mut mir::Func,
484 counts: &mut changes::Reads,
485 machine: &MachineInsts,
486 names: &Interner,
487 inst: mir::Inst,
488 opcode: mir::Opcode,
489) -> bool {
490 let mut set = Changes::new();
491 set.rewrite(inst, Plan { opcode, amode: None, ..Plan::of(func, inst) });
492 set.commit(func, counts, names, machine).is_ok()
493}
494
495/// Rewrites the move into the exclusive or, which names the one register the move wrote in every
496/// operand it has.
497///
498/// The shapes come from the description rather than from the move, since the shorter instruction is
499/// not the shape the longer one was: the exclusive or writes a register it also reads, which on this
500/// machine is an operand constrained to the same place as one of the reads, and a plan whose
501/// operands do not say so is one [`Changes`] turns down. So each operand is built to what the
502/// description asks for and the register in it is the one the move wrote, which after allocation is
503/// a physical register and so is a register every operand can name without anything being arranged.
504/// The constant goes with the move, the shorter instruction being the one that carries none.
505///
506/// A description whose operands are not all of the register's class, or which writes more than the
507/// one register or none, is a description this does not fit, and the answer there is to leave the
508/// instruction alone rather than to guess.
509fn zeroed(
510 func: &mut mir::Func,
511 counts: &mut changes::Reads,
512 machine: &MachineInsts,
513 names: &Interner,
514 inst: mir::Inst,
515 opcode: mir::Opcode,
516) -> bool {
517 let written: Vec<mir::Operand> = func[func[inst].operands]
518 .iter()
519 .filter(|operand| operand.role != Role::Use)
520 .copied()
521 .collect();
522 let [def] = written[..] else { return false };
523 let bare = machine.bare(names.resolve(opcode.name()));
524 let Some(desc) = (machine.operands)(bare) else { return false };
525 if desc.iter().any(|want| want.class != def.class) {
526 return false;
527 }
528 if desc.iter().filter(|want| want.role != Role::Use).count() != 1 {
529 return false;
530 }
531 let operands = desc
532 .iter()
533 .map(|want| mir::Operand {
534 reg: def.reg,
535 class: want.class,
536 role: want.role,
537 constraint: want.constraint,
538 })
539 .collect();
540 let mut set = Changes::new();
541 set.rewrite(inst, Plan { opcode, operands, imm: None, ..Plan::of(func, inst) });
542 set.commit(func, counts, names, machine).is_ok()
543}
544
545/// The shorter addition this one has, when it has one and the number it carries is the number that
546/// shorter instruction is about.
547///
548/// Both halves again, and the second one is doing more work here than anywhere else in this pass.
549/// One addition has two shorter instructions, one for each of the two numbers a machine has an
550/// opcode for, and a subtraction has the same two the other way round, so the number is what says
551/// which of the two is meant rather than only whether either is.
552fn stepped_form(
553 func: &mir::Func,
554 short: &ShortInsts,
555 names: &Interner,
556 opcodes: &[(&'static str, mir::Opcode)],
557 inst: mir::Inst,
558) -> Option<mir::Opcode> {
559 let name = names.resolve(func[inst].opcode.name()).strip_prefix(short.prefix)?;
560 let into = short.stepped(name, func[func[inst].imm?].0)?;
561 opcodes.iter().find(|&&(at, _)| at == into).map(|&(_, opcode)| opcode)
562}
563
564/// Rewrites the addition into the one that carries its number in its opcode.
565///
566/// The operands are the ones it had, for the reason [`tested`] keeps them: both instructions write
567/// one register and read that same register, and what changes is the number, which the shorter one
568/// does not carry. So the constant goes and nothing else does.
569fn stepped(
570 func: &mut mir::Func,
571 counts: &mut changes::Reads,
572 machine: &MachineInsts,
573 names: &Interner,
574 inst: mir::Inst,
575 opcode: mir::Opcode,
576) -> bool {
577 let mut set = Changes::new();
578 set.rewrite(inst, Plan { opcode, imm: None, ..Plan::of(func, inst) });
579 set.commit(func, counts, names, machine).is_ok()
580}
581
582/// The name this target knows an instruction by, for an instruction that is one of this target's.
583///
584/// The opcode in machine IR carries the target's prefix, because a function in the middle of being
585/// compiled holds instructions of one machine and the prefix is what says which. Anything without
586/// it is not something this description covers, and the walk treats that as knowing nothing rather
587/// than as knowing it is safe.
588fn opcode<'a>(
589 func: &mir::Func,
590 flags: &FlagInsts,
591 names: &'a Interner,
592 inst: mir::Inst,
593) -> Option<&'a str> {
594 names.resolve(func[inst].opcode.name()).strip_prefix(flags.prefix)
595}
596
597#[cfg(test)]
598mod tests {
599 use rucc_target::x86_64::{FLAGS, GPR, MACHINE, SHORT};
600
601 use super::*;
602
603 /// A function with one block, and the names it was built with.
604 fn empty() -> (Interner, mir::Func, mir::Block) {
605 let mut names = Interner::new();
606 let mut func = mir::Func::new(names.intern("f"));
607 let block = func.create_block();
608 (names, func, block)
609 }
610
611 /// The opcode of that name on this target.
612 fn op(names: &mut Interner, name: &str) -> mir::Opcode {
613 mir::Opcode::new(names.intern(&format!("{}{name}", SHORT.prefix)))
614 }
615
616 /// The pass, over the machine this crate has a backend for, at a level that wanted fast code.
617 fn takes(func: &mut mir::Func, names: &mut Interner) -> usize {
618 shorter(func, &SHORT, &FLAGS, &MACHINE, names, Goal::Speed)
619 }
620
621 /// The same pass at a level that wanted small code, which is the only one that steps.
622 fn small(func: &mut mir::Func, names: &mut Interner) -> usize {
623 shorter(func, &SHORT, &FLAGS, &MACHINE, names, Goal::Size)
624 }
625
626 /// What every instruction in a block came to, as opcodes with the target's prefix taken off.
627 fn shape(func: &mir::Func, names: &Interner, block: mir::Block) -> Vec<String> {
628 func.insts(block)
629 .map(|inst| {
630 names
631 .resolve(func[inst].opcode.name())
632 .strip_prefix(SHORT.prefix)
633 .unwrap_or("")
634 .to_owned()
635 })
636 .collect()
637 }
638
639 /// The destination of a two-address instruction, which the description constrains to the same
640 /// register as the first source. The builder's own `def` leaves the constraint off, and the
641 /// change framework holds a rewrite to the shape the target asks for, so a test that built one
642 /// without it would be a test of a function the allocator could not have produced.
643 fn reuse(reg: mir::Reg) -> mir::Operand {
644 mir::Operand {
645 reg,
646 class: GPR,
647 role: Role::Def,
648 constraint: rucc_mir::Constraint::Reuse(1),
649 }
650 }
651
652 /// The registers an instruction names, in the order its operands do.
653 fn regs(func: &mir::Func, inst: mir::Inst) -> Vec<mir::Reg> {
654 func[func[inst].operands].iter().map(|operand| operand.reg).collect()
655 }
656
657 /// The number an instruction carries, for an instruction that carries one.
658 fn imm(func: &mir::Func, inst: mir::Inst) -> Option<i64> {
659 func[inst].imm.map(|at| func[at].0)
660 }
661
662 /// The shape the pass is for: a move of zero with nothing reading the condition state after it
663 /// becomes the exclusive or, which names the register it writes in all three of its operands and
664 /// carries no constant.
665 #[test]
666 fn a_move_of_zero_becomes_an_exclusive_or() {
667 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
668 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
669 let zero = op(&mut names, "mov_ri_32");
670 let inst = func.build(block, zero).def(into, GPR).imm(0).finish();
671
672 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 1);
673 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["xor_rr_32"]);
674 assert_eq!(regs(&func, inst), [into, into, into]);
675 assert!(func[inst].imm.is_none());
676 }
677
678 /// Sixty-four bits is the same rewrite and the biggest one, since the long way of writing a zero
679 /// there is seven bytes. The instruction it becomes is the thirty-two bit one, which clears the
680 /// half of the register it does not write and so leaves the same sixty-four bit zero in one
681 /// byte less.
682 #[test]
683 fn sixty_four_bits_is_the_same_rewrite_at_half_the_width() {
684 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
685 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
686 let zero = op(&mut names, "mov_ri_64");
687 func.build(block, zero).def(into, GPR).imm(0).finish();
688
689 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 1);
690 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["xor_rr_32"]);
691 }
692
693 /// The other rewrite. A number that is not zero has nothing shorter than a move, and the move
694 /// that writes half the register is shorter than the one that writes all of it.
695 #[test]
696 fn a_number_a_narrower_move_holds_is_written_by_the_narrower_move() {
697 for value in [1, 7, 0x7fff_ffff, 0x8000_0000, 0xffff_ffff] {
698 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
699 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
700 let wide = op(&mut names, "mov_ri_64");
701 let inst = func.build(block, wide).def(into, GPR).imm(value).finish();
702
703 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 1, "{value}");
704 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["mov_ri_32"], "{value}");
705 assert_eq!(imm(&func, inst), Some(value), "{value}");
706 assert_eq!(regs(&func, inst), [into], "{value}");
707 }
708 }
709
710 /// A number the narrower move does not hold, which is everything above what fits in the bits it
711 /// writes and every negative number, since what it does to the rest of the register is clear it
712 /// rather than fill it with the sign.
713 #[test]
714 fn a_number_the_narrower_move_does_not_hold_stays_wide() {
715 for value in [-1, -7, 0x1_0000_0000, i64::MIN, i64::MAX] {
716 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
717 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
718 let wide = op(&mut names, "mov_ri_64");
719 func.build(block, wide).def(into, GPR).imm(value).finish();
720
721 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 0, "{value}");
722 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["mov_ri_64"], "{value}");
723 }
724 }
725
726 /// A zero the condition state is not free for, which the first rewrite has to leave alone. The
727 /// second one has nothing to do with the state and takes it, so the instruction that stays is
728 /// five bytes rather than seven.
729 #[test]
730 fn a_zero_the_state_is_not_free_for_is_narrowed_instead() {
731 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
732 let left = func.new_vreg(GPR);
733 let right = func.new_vreg(GPR);
734 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
735 let byte = func.new_vreg(GPR);
736 let cmp = op(&mut names, "cmp_rr_32");
737 let zero = op(&mut names, "mov_ri_64");
738 let set = op(&mut names, "set_e");
739 func.build(block, cmp).uses(left, GPR).uses(right, GPR).finish();
740 let inst = func.build(block, zero).def(into, GPR).imm(0).finish();
741 func.build(block, set).def(byte, GPR).finish();
742
743 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 1);
744 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["cmp_rr_32", "mov_ri_32", "set_e"]);
745 assert_eq!(imm(&func, inst), Some(0));
746 }
747
748 /// A function the state carried across an edge turns down, which is the first rewrite's rule
749 /// and not the second one's. The narrower move writes no state and reads none, so a function
750 /// that rule turns down still gets it.
751 #[test]
752 fn a_function_the_carried_state_turns_down_is_still_narrowed() {
753 let (mut names, mut func, first) = empty();
754 let second = func.create_block();
755 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
756 let byte = func.new_vreg(GPR);
757 let wide = op(&mut names, "mov_ri_64");
758 let set = op(&mut names, "set_e");
759 func.build(first, wide).def(into, GPR).imm(7).finish();
760 func.build(second, set).def(byte, GPR).finish();
761
762 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 1);
763 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, first), ["mov_ri_32"]);
764 }
765
766 /// A move of anything else. The shorter instruction writes zero, so it says the same thing only
767 /// where the longer one said zero.
768 #[test]
769 fn a_move_of_a_number_that_is_not_zero_stays() {
770 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
771 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
772 let one = op(&mut names, "mov_ri_32");
773 func.build(block, one).def(into, GPR).imm(1).finish();
774
775 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 0);
776 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["mov_ri_32"]);
777 }
778
779 /// Eight bits, where both spellings are two bytes. The target's table leaves it out and the pass
780 /// has nothing to look up, so the move stays and the condition state stays with it.
781 #[test]
782 fn eight_bits_buys_nothing_and_is_left_alone() {
783 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
784 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
785 let zero = op(&mut names, "mov_ri_8");
786 func.build(block, zero).def(into, GPR).imm(0).finish();
787
788 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 0);
789 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["mov_ri_8"]);
790 }
791
792 /// The cost of the rewrite, which is the zero going into a register in front of something that
793 /// reads a comparison of something else. The exclusive or would write over the answer the byte
794 /// is about, so the move stays.
795 #[test]
796 fn a_move_a_condition_reads_the_state_after_stays() {
797 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
798 let left = func.new_vreg(GPR);
799 let right = func.new_vreg(GPR);
800 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
801 let byte = func.new_vreg(GPR);
802 let cmp = op(&mut names, "cmp_rr_32");
803 let zero = op(&mut names, "mov_ri_32");
804 let set = op(&mut names, "set_e");
805 func.build(block, cmp).uses(left, GPR).uses(right, GPR).finish();
806 func.build(block, zero).def(into, GPR).imm(0).finish();
807 func.build(block, set).def(byte, GPR).finish();
808
809 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 0);
810 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["cmp_rr_32", "mov_ri_32", "set_e"]);
811 }
812
813 /// The same three instructions with something writing the condition state in between. What the
814 /// byte reads is what the addition left, so the state the move would write is one nothing was
815 /// going to read and the rewrite is back on.
816 #[test]
817 fn a_state_something_else_writes_first_lets_the_rewrite_back_in() {
818 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
819 let left = func.new_vreg(GPR);
820 let right = func.new_vreg(GPR);
821 let sum = func.new_vreg(GPR);
822 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
823 let byte = func.new_vreg(GPR);
824 let zero = op(&mut names, "mov_ri_32");
825 let add = op(&mut names, "add_rr_32");
826 let set = op(&mut names, "set_e");
827 func.build(block, zero).def(into, GPR).imm(0).finish();
828 func.build(block, add).def(sum, GPR).uses(left, GPR).uses(right, GPR).finish();
829 func.build(block, set).def(byte, GPR).finish();
830
831 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 1);
832 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["xor_rr_32", "add_rr_32", "set_e"]);
833 }
834
835 /// A function where a block reads the condition state before it writes one, which is what a
836 /// state carried across an edge looks like from here. The passes in front say that does not
837 /// happen and this is where that is held to rather than believed, so the whole function is
838 /// turned down and the move in the other block stays as well.
839 #[test]
840 fn a_state_carried_into_a_block_turns_the_whole_function_down() {
841 let (mut names, mut func, first) = empty();
842 let second = func.create_block();
843 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
844 let byte = func.new_vreg(GPR);
845 let zero = op(&mut names, "mov_ri_32");
846 let set = op(&mut names, "set_e");
847 func.build(first, zero).def(into, GPR).imm(0).finish();
848 func.build(second, set).def(byte, GPR).finish();
849
850 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 0);
851 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, first), ["mov_ri_32"]);
852 }
853
854 /// The third rewrite. A comparison of a register against zero asks whether the register is
855 /// zero, and so does a test of the register against itself, which says it without a number on
856 /// the instruction.
857 #[test]
858 fn a_comparison_against_zero_becomes_a_test_of_the_register_against_itself() {
859 for (wide, narrow) in [
860 ("cmp_ri_8", "test_rr_8"),
861 ("cmp_ri_16", "test_rr_16"),
862 ("cmp_ri_32", "test_rr_32"),
863 ("cmp_ri_64", "test_rr_64"),
864 ] {
865 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
866 let value = func.new_vreg(GPR);
867 let byte = func.new_vreg(GPR);
868 let cmp = op(&mut names, wide);
869 let set = op(&mut names, "set_e");
870 let inst = func.build(block, cmp).uses(value, GPR).imm(0).finish();
871 func.build(block, set).def(byte, GPR).finish();
872
873 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 1, "{wide}");
874 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), [narrow, "set_e"], "{wide}");
875 assert_eq!(regs(&func, inst), [value], "{wide}");
876 assert_eq!(imm(&func, inst), None, "{wide}");
877 }
878 }
879
880 /// A comparison against anything else, which the test cannot ask. What a test leaves is the
881 /// bits of the register it was given, so it answers one question and the question is zero.
882 #[test]
883 fn a_comparison_against_a_number_that_is_not_zero_is_left_alone() {
884 for value in [1, -1, 7, 255, i64::from(i32::MIN)] {
885 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
886 let held = func.new_vreg(GPR);
887 let byte = func.new_vreg(GPR);
888 let cmp = op(&mut names, "cmp_ri_32");
889 let set = op(&mut names, "set_e");
890 let inst = func.build(block, cmp).uses(held, GPR).imm(value).finish();
891 func.build(block, set).def(byte, GPR).finish();
892
893 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 0, "{value}");
894 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["cmp_ri_32", "set_e"], "{value}");
895 assert_eq!(imm(&func, inst), Some(value), "{value}");
896 }
897 }
898
899 /// The condition state is not a question this rewrite asks. The comparison writes the state and
900 /// the test writes the same state, so a comparison whose answer something reads right behind it
901 /// is rewritten exactly as one whose answer nothing wants is, and a function the carried state
902 /// rule turns down gets it too.
903 #[test]
904 fn a_comparison_is_tested_whatever_the_condition_state_is_doing() {
905 let (mut names, mut func, first) = empty();
906 let second = func.create_block();
907 let value = func.new_vreg(GPR);
908 let byte = func.new_vreg(GPR);
909 let cmp = op(&mut names, "cmp_ri_32");
910 let set = op(&mut names, "set_e");
911 func.build(first, cmp).uses(value, GPR).imm(0).finish();
912 // A block that reads the state before writing it, which is what `carried` turns a function
913 // down for and what the first rewrite is the only one to need.
914 func.build(second, set).def(byte, GPR).finish();
915
916 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 1);
917 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, first), ["test_rr_32"]);
918 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, second), ["set_e"]);
919 }
920
921 /// The fourth rewrite, at every width and in both directions. An addition of one and a
922 /// subtraction of minus one are the instruction that adds one, and the other two are the one
923 /// that takes one away. The register is the one it had and the number is gone, the shorter
924 /// instruction being the one that carries the number in its opcode.
925 #[test]
926 fn adding_or_taking_away_one_becomes_the_instruction_that_says_so_in_its_opcode() {
927 for (name, by, into) in [
928 ("add_ri_8", 1, "inc_r_8"),
929 ("add_ri_16", 1, "inc_r_16"),
930 ("add_ri_32", 1, "inc_r_32"),
931 ("add_ri_64", 1, "inc_r_64"),
932 ("add_ri_8", -1, "dec_r_8"),
933 ("add_ri_16", -1, "dec_r_16"),
934 ("add_ri_32", -1, "dec_r_32"),
935 ("add_ri_64", -1, "dec_r_64"),
936 ("sub_ri_8", 1, "dec_r_8"),
937 ("sub_ri_16", 1, "dec_r_16"),
938 ("sub_ri_32", 1, "dec_r_32"),
939 ("sub_ri_64", 1, "dec_r_64"),
940 ("sub_ri_8", -1, "inc_r_8"),
941 ("sub_ri_16", -1, "inc_r_16"),
942 ("sub_ri_32", -1, "inc_r_32"),
943 ("sub_ri_64", -1, "inc_r_64"),
944 ] {
945 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
946 let value = func.new_vreg(GPR);
947 let add = op(&mut names, name);
948 let inst =
949 func.build(block, add).operand(reuse(value)).uses(value, GPR).imm(by).finish();
950
951 assert_eq!(small(&mut func, &mut names), 1, "{name} {by}");
952 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), [into], "{name} {by}");
953 assert_eq!(regs(&func, inst), [value, value], "{name} {by}");
954 assert_eq!(imm(&func, inst), None, "{name} {by}");
955 }
956 }
957
958 /// The same function at a level that asked for fast code, which is the goal doing its job. This
959 /// is the only rewrite in the pass that asks it, and it is the only one that is a trade.
960 #[test]
961 fn a_level_that_wanted_fast_code_keeps_the_addition() {
962 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
963 let value = func.new_vreg(GPR);
964 let add = op(&mut names, "add_ri_32");
965 let inst = func.build(block, add).operand(reuse(value)).uses(value, GPR).imm(1).finish();
966
967 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 0);
968 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["add_ri_32"]);
969 assert_eq!(imm(&func, inst), Some(1));
970 }
971
972 /// Any other number. The machine has an opcode that means one and none that means anything
973 /// else, so the constant is written out either way and the addition is already as short as it
974 /// gets.
975 #[test]
976 fn adding_anything_but_one_stays_an_addition() {
977 for by in [0, 2, -2, 7, 255, i64::from(i32::MIN)] {
978 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
979 let value = func.new_vreg(GPR);
980 let add = op(&mut names, "add_ri_32");
981 func.build(block, add).operand(reuse(value)).uses(value, GPR).imm(by).finish();
982
983 assert_eq!(small(&mut func, &mut names), 0, "{by}");
984 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["add_ri_32"], "{by}");
985 }
986 }
987
988 /// What the rewrite is really conditional on. Something behind it reading where the value sits
989 /// as an unsigned number is something reading the carry, and the carry is the one part of the
990 /// condition state the shorter instruction does not write.
991 #[test]
992 fn an_addition_whose_carry_something_reads_stays_an_addition() {
993 for reader in ["set_b", "set_be", "set_a", "set_ae", "adc_ri_32"] {
994 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
995 let value = func.new_vreg(GPR);
996 let byte = func.new_vreg(GPR);
997 let add = op(&mut names, "add_ri_32");
998 let reads = op(&mut names, reader);
999 func.build(block, add).operand(reuse(value)).uses(value, GPR).imm(1).finish();
1000 func.build(block, reads).def(byte, GPR).finish();
1001
1002 assert_eq!(small(&mut func, &mut names), 0, "{reader}");
1003 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["add_ri_32", reader], "{reader}");
1004 }
1005 }
1006
1007 /// A reader of any other part of the state, which the shorter instruction writes exactly as the
1008 /// addition did. So the rewrite is not about whether the state is read, it is about which part.
1009 #[test]
1010 fn an_addition_whose_zero_or_sign_something_reads_still_steps() {
1011 for reader in ["set_e", "set_ne", "set_l", "set_le", "set_g", "set_ge"] {
1012 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
1013 let value = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1014 let byte = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1015 let add = op(&mut names, "add_ri_32");
1016 let reads = op(&mut names, reader);
1017 func.build(block, add).operand(reuse(value)).uses(value, GPR).imm(1).finish();
1018 func.build(block, reads).def(byte, GPR).finish();
1019
1020 assert_eq!(small(&mut func, &mut names), 1, "{reader}");
1021 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["inc_r_32", reader], "{reader}");
1022 }
1023 }
1024
1025 /// The carry read behind an instruction that writes the rest of the state, which is what the
1026 /// walk asking the description rather than the flag is for. The addition in front of the
1027 /// comparison stays, because the comparison writes the carry the reader wants and the addition
1028 /// would not have to, and the addition behind it goes, because nothing reads a carry after it.
1029 #[test]
1030 fn a_write_of_the_state_ends_the_life_of_the_carry_and_a_step_does_not() {
1031 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
1032 let value = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1033 let byte = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1034 let add = op(&mut names, "add_ri_32");
1035 let cmp = op(&mut names, "cmp_rr_32");
1036 let below = op(&mut names, "set_b");
1037 let first = func.build(block, add).operand(reuse(value)).uses(value, GPR).imm(1).finish();
1038 func.build(block, cmp).uses(value, GPR).uses(value, GPR).finish();
1039 func.build(block, below).def(byte, GPR).finish();
1040
1041 assert_eq!(small(&mut func, &mut names), 1);
1042 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["inc_r_32", "cmp_rr_32", "set_b"]);
1043 assert_eq!(imm(&func, first), None);
1044 }
1045
1046 /// An instruction that leaves the carry alone is not a write of the condition state as far as
1047 /// the walk is concerned, which is what stops one of them from hiding a carry read behind it.
1048 /// The increment here is one a program wrote in a template rather than one this put there, and
1049 /// the addition in front of it is the only thing that sets the carry the reader wants, so the
1050 /// addition stays.
1051 #[test]
1052 fn a_step_does_not_hide_the_carry_read_behind_it() {
1053 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
1054 let value = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1055 let byte = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1056 let add = op(&mut names, "add_ri_32");
1057 let step = op(&mut names, "inc_r_32");
1058 let below = op(&mut names, "set_b");
1059 let first = func.build(block, add).operand(reuse(value)).uses(value, GPR).imm(1).finish();
1060 func.build(block, step).operand(reuse(value)).uses(value, GPR).finish();
1061 func.build(block, below).def(byte, GPR).finish();
1062
1063 assert_eq!(small(&mut func, &mut names), 0);
1064 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["add_ri_32", "inc_r_32", "set_b"]);
1065 assert_eq!(imm(&func, first), Some(1));
1066 }
1067
1068 /// Two additions in a row with a carry read behind them. The second one sets the carry the
1069 /// reader wants and stays, and the first one goes, because whatever the first leaves the second
1070 /// writes over. That is the same walk as the test above arriving at the other answer, and it is
1071 /// what says the rule is about the carry rather than about the addition.
1072 #[test]
1073 fn an_addition_the_next_addition_writes_over_still_steps() {
1074 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
1075 let value = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1076 let byte = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1077 let add = op(&mut names, "add_ri_32");
1078 let below = op(&mut names, "set_b");
1079 func.build(block, add).operand(reuse(value)).uses(value, GPR).imm(1).finish();
1080 let second = func.build(block, add).operand(reuse(value)).uses(value, GPR).imm(1).finish();
1081 func.build(block, below).def(byte, GPR).finish();
1082
1083 assert_eq!(small(&mut func, &mut names), 1);
1084 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["inc_r_32", "add_ri_32", "set_b"]);
1085 assert_eq!(imm(&func, second), Some(1));
1086 }
1087
1088 /// The instruction the whole function check used to stop at. A comparison that keeps a byte
1089 /// reads the condition state and the state it reads is the one it wrote itself a moment
1090 /// earlier, so a block opening with one is not a block reading what a predecessor left, and the
1091 /// move in the other block is rewritten.
1092 #[test]
1093 fn a_block_opening_with_a_comparison_that_keeps_a_byte_is_not_a_carried_state() {
1094 let (mut names, mut func, first) = empty();
1095 let second = func.create_block();
1096 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1097 let byte = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1098 let value = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1099 let zero = op(&mut names, "mov_ri_32");
1100 let fused = op(&mut names, "cmp_set_e_32");
1101 func.build(first, zero).def(into, GPR).imm(0).finish();
1102 func.build(second, fused).def(byte, GPR).uses(value, GPR).uses(value, GPR).finish();
1103
1104 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 1);
1105 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, first), ["xor_rr_32"]);
1106 }
1107
1108 /// The same sentence inside a block. What the comparison reads is what it wrote, so what it was
1109 /// handed is written over before anything looks at it, and the move in front of it may spend a
1110 /// state nothing wants.
1111 #[test]
1112 fn a_comparison_that_keeps_a_byte_ends_the_life_of_the_state() {
1113 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
1114 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1115 let byte = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1116 let value = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1117 let zero = op(&mut names, "mov_ri_32");
1118 let fused = op(&mut names, "cmp_set_e_32");
1119 func.build(block, zero).def(into, GPR).imm(0).finish();
1120 func.build(block, fused).def(byte, GPR).uses(value, GPR).uses(value, GPR).finish();
1121
1122 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 1);
1123 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["xor_rr_32", "cmp_set_e_32"]);
1124 }
1125
1126 /// And the carry with it. A comparison that keeps a byte and asks where a value sits as an
1127 /// unsigned number reads the carry, and it is the carry it set itself, so the addition in front
1128 /// of it is free to become the instruction that leaves the carry alone.
1129 #[test]
1130 fn a_comparison_that_keeps_a_byte_does_not_keep_the_carry_alive() {
1131 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
1132 let value = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1133 let byte = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1134 let add = op(&mut names, "add_ri_32");
1135 let fused = op(&mut names, "cmp_set_b_32");
1136 func.build(block, add).operand(reuse(value)).uses(value, GPR).imm(1).finish();
1137 func.build(block, fused).def(byte, GPR).uses(value, GPR).uses(value, GPR).finish();
1138
1139 assert_eq!(small(&mut func, &mut names), 1);
1140 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["inc_r_32", "cmp_set_b_32"]);
1141 }
1142
1143 /// The other kind of read, which is the one this must go on stopping at. An add with carry is
1144 /// reading the bit the instruction in front of it left rather than one it wrote itself, and it
1145 /// makes no comparison, which is how the description tells the two apart.
1146 #[test]
1147 fn an_add_with_carry_opening_a_block_is_still_a_carried_state() {
1148 let (mut names, mut func, first) = empty();
1149 let second = func.create_block();
1150 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1151 let value = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1152 let zero = op(&mut names, "mov_ri_32");
1153 let adc = op(&mut names, "adc_ri_32");
1154 func.build(first, zero).def(into, GPR).imm(0).finish();
1155 func.build(second, adc).operand(reuse(value)).uses(value, GPR).imm(1).finish();
1156
1157 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 0);
1158 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, first), ["mov_ri_32"]);
1159 }
1160
1161 /// A name the description does not cover, which is anything without this target's prefix. It
1162 /// may read the condition state and it may write one, and the answer that is wrong about
1163 /// nothing is that it read it, so the move in front of it stays.
1164 #[test]
1165 fn a_name_this_target_does_not_know_stops_the_walk() {
1166 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
1167 let left = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1168 let right = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1169 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1170 let cmp = op(&mut names, "cmp_rr_32");
1171 let zero = op(&mut names, "mov_ri_32");
1172 let strange = mir::Opcode::new(names.intern("nowhere.thing"));
1173 func.build(block, cmp).uses(left, GPR).uses(right, GPR).finish();
1174 func.build(block, zero).def(into, GPR).imm(0).finish();
1175 func.build(block, strange).finish();
1176
1177 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 0);
1178 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["cmp_rr_32", "mov_ri_32", ""]);
1179 }
1180
1181 /// The fifth rewrite. An address that is a base register and nothing else is that register, so
1182 /// the instruction that works it out and keeps it is the move, which keeps both registers in the
1183 /// order it had them and drops the addressing mode it no longer has a place for.
1184 #[test]
1185 fn an_address_that_is_a_register_becomes_a_move() {
1186 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
1187 let base = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1188 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1189 let lea = op(&mut names, "lea_64");
1190 let mem = mir::Mem::at(mir::Operand::read(base, GPR));
1191 let inst = func.build(block, lea).def(into, GPR).mem(mem).finish();
1192
1193 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 1);
1194 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["mov_rr_64"]);
1195 assert_eq!(regs(&func, inst), [into, base]);
1196 assert!(func[inst].mem.is_none());
1197 }
1198
1199 /// A constant added to the address, which is the shape most address computations have. The move
1200 /// adds nothing, so there is nothing here for it to say.
1201 #[test]
1202 fn an_address_with_a_constant_added_stays() {
1203 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
1204 let base = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1205 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1206 let lea = op(&mut names, "lea_64");
1207 let mem = mir::Mem { disp: 8, ..mir::Mem::at(mir::Operand::read(base, GPR)) };
1208 func.build(block, lea).def(into, GPR).mem(mem).finish();
1209
1210 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 0);
1211 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["lea_64"]);
1212 }
1213
1214 /// An index, which is the other half of what an address computation is for. It is a
1215 /// multiplication and an addition and the move is neither.
1216 #[test]
1217 fn an_address_with_an_index_stays() {
1218 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
1219 let base = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1220 let index = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1221 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1222 let lea = op(&mut names, "lea_64");
1223 let mem = mir::Mem {
1224 index: Some(mir::Operand::read(index, GPR)),
1225 scale: 4,
1226 ..mir::Mem::at(mir::Operand::read(base, GPR))
1227 };
1228 func.build(block, lea).def(into, GPR).mem(mem).finish();
1229
1230 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 0);
1231 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["lea_64"]);
1232 }
1233
1234 /// The address of a global, which names no register at all. What it works out is a number the
1235 /// assembler fills in rather than a number that is already somewhere, so there is nothing for a
1236 /// move to move.
1237 #[test]
1238 fn an_address_of_a_symbol_stays() {
1239 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
1240 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1241 let lea = op(&mut names, "lea_64");
1242 let mem = mir::Mem::of(names.intern("table"));
1243 func.build(block, lea).def(into, GPR).mem(mem).finish();
1244
1245 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 0);
1246 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["lea_64"]);
1247 }
1248
1249 /// And it does not wait on the condition state. Neither the address computation nor the move
1250 /// writes any, so a byte reading a comparison from in front of it reads the same comparison
1251 /// afterwards, and the rewrite is taken in the one function the first rewrite has to turn down.
1252 #[test]
1253 fn an_address_is_copied_whatever_the_state_behind_it_is() {
1254 let (mut names, mut func, block) = empty();
1255 let left = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1256 let right = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1257 let base = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1258 let into = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1259 let byte = func.new_vreg(GPR);
1260 let cmp = op(&mut names, "cmp_rr_32");
1261 let lea = op(&mut names, "lea_64");
1262 let set = op(&mut names, "set_e");
1263 let mem = mir::Mem::at(mir::Operand::read(base, GPR));
1264 func.build(block, cmp).uses(left, GPR).uses(right, GPR).finish();
1265 func.build(block, lea).def(into, GPR).mem(mem).finish();
1266 func.build(block, set).def(byte, GPR).finish();
1267
1268 assert_eq!(takes(&mut func, &mut names), 1);
1269 assert_eq!(shape(&func, &names, block), ["cmp_rr_32", "mov_rr_64", "set_e"]);
1270 }
1271}