[ARM backend] SMLAL issue

Hi Tim/James,
In the following code, MUL, ADDS, ADC are combined to SMLAL only if 'b' and 'c' are promoted to long long type during multiplication. Shouldn't they be allowed to be combined to SMLAL
even in the code as is without promoting b and c to long long type?

I found the reason for not combining to SMAL to be this, ADDS operand 0 has opcode not set as ISD::SMUL_LOHI even though operand 0 ie., R2 is a result of SMULBB as seen in the assembly.

long long
foo (long long a, int b, int c)
{
       return a + b * c; ===> return a + (long long)b * (long long)c;

}
ldrb r2, [r2]
ldrb r3, [r3]
smulbb r2, r3, r2
adds r0, r2, r0
adc r1, r1, #0
bx lr

I have already checked in combine function in DAG combiner and visitADDC, ADDS node operand0 's opcode is not set to ISD::SMUL_LOHI. Only when b and c are typecasted to long long, operand0 opcode is set to ISD::SMUL_LOHI
Is this a likely bug, if not is there a specific reason for designing it this way ?

Regards,
Jyoti Allur

Hi Jyoti,

The first version doesn’t need a SMUL_LOHI, as it’s only doing a 32-bit multiply. The results of that 32-bit multiply are fed into the 64-bit ADD.

The second one is doing a 64-bit multiply. This is expanded to a SMUL_LOHI, and is peepholed by ISelLowering.

It looks simply like whoever wrote this peephole only considered that one version and didn’t consider the more canonical pattern (with a 32-bit multiply).

The place to fix seems to be ARMISelLowering::7949 (AddCombineTo64BitMLAL) - adding a new pattern for that to detect.

Cheers,

James