Enable this in CS for PowerPC; disable it for all other machines.
PowerPC has no remainder instruction; the back end uses division to
compute remainder. If CS finds both a / b and a % b, then CS now
rewrites a % b as a - b * (a / b) and computes a / b only once. This
removes an extra division in the PowerPC code, so it saves both time
and space.
I have not considered whether to enable this optimization for other
machines. It might be less useful in machines with a remainder
instruction. Also, if a % b occurs before a / b, the EM code gets a
DUP. PowerPC ncg handles this DUP well; other back ends might not.
In ego, the CS phase may convert a LAR/SAR to AAR LOI/STI so it can
optimize multiple occurrences of AAR of the same array element. This
conversion should not happen if it would LOI/STI a large or unknown
size.
cs_profit.c okay_lines() checked the size of each occurrence of AAR
except the first. If the first AAR was the implicit AAR in a LAR/SAR,
then the conversion happened without checking the size. For unknown
size, this made a bad LOI -1 or STI -1. Fix by checking the size
earlier: if a LAR/SAR has a bad size, then don't enter it as an AAR.
This Modula-2 code showed the bug. Given M.def:
DEFINITION MODULE M;
TYPE S = SET OF [0..95];
PROCEDURE F(a: ARRAY OF S; i, j: INTEGER);
END M.
and M.mod:
(*$R-*) IMPLEMENTATION MODULE M;
FROM SYSTEM IMPORT ADDRESS, ADR;
PROCEDURE G(s: S; p, q: ADDRESS; t: S); BEGIN
s := s; p := p; q := q; t := t;
END G;
PROCEDURE F(a: ARRAY OF S; i, j: INTEGER); BEGIN
G(a[i + j], ADR(a[i + j]), ADR(a[i + j]), a[i + j])
END F;
END M.
then the bug caused an error:
$ ack -mlinuxppc -O3 -c.e M.mod
/tmp/Ack_b357d.g, line 57: Argument range error
The bug had put LOI -1 in the code, then em_decode got an error
because -1 is out of range for LOI.
Procedure F has 4 occurrences of `a[i + j]`. The size of `a[i + j]`
is 96 bits, or 12 bytes, but the EM code hides the size in an array
descriptor, so the size is unknown to CS. The pragma `(*$R-*)`
disables a range check on `i + j` so CS can work. EM uses AAR for the
2 `ADR(a[i + j])` and LAR for the other 2 `a[i + j]`. EM pushes the
arguments to G in reverse order, so the last `a[i + j]` in Modula-2 is
the first LAR in EM.
CS found 4 occurrences of AAR. The first AAR was an implicit AAR in
LAR. Because of the bug, CS converted this LAR 4 to AAR 4 LOI -1.
This uncovers a problem in il/il_aux.c: it passes 3 arguments to
getlines(), but the function expects 4 arguments. I add FALSE as the
4th argument. TRUE would fill in the list of mesregs. IL uses
mesregs during phase 1, but this call to getlines() is in phase 2.
TRUE would leak memory unless I added a call to Ldeleteset(mesregs).
So I pass FALSE.
Functions passed to go() now have a `void *` parameter because
no_action() now takes a `void *`.
