Loop inversion

This article may need to be rewritten to comply with Wikipedia's quality standards. You can help. The talk page may contain suggestions. (February 2025)

In

void pre_inversion() {
  while (/* condition */) {
    /* loop body */
  }
}

void post_inversion() {
  if (/* condition */) {
    do {
      /* loop body */
    } while (/* condition */);
  }
}

No change in performance occurs for initial and non-final iterations through the loop, including when the loop is not entered because the condition is false. However, the final iteration has 2 fewer jump instructions when the loop is entered because the do-while loop does not need to jump to the start of the while loop to evaluate the loop condition.[1]

This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (September 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

  int i, a[100];
  i = 0;
  while (i < 100) {
    a[i] = 0;
    i++;
  }

is equivalent to:

  int i, a[100];
  i = 0;
  if (i < 100) {
    do {
      a[i] = 0;
      i++;
    } while (i < 100);
  }

Despite the seemingly greater complexity of the second example, it may actually run faster on modern

Additionally, loop inversion allows safe loop-invariant code motion.^{[citation needed][clarification needed]}

This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (September 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

^{[clarification needed]}

      i := 0
 L1:  if i >= 100 goto L2
      a[i] := 0
      i := i + 1
      goto L1
 L2:  

If i had been initialized at 100, the instructions executed at runtime would have been:

  if i >= 100
  goto L2

Let us assume that i had been initialized to some value less than 100. Now let us look at the instructions executed at the moment after i has been incremented to 99 in the loop:

  goto L1
  if i < 100
  a[i] := 0
  i := i + 1
  goto L1
  if i >= 100
  goto L2
  <<at L2>>

Now, let's look at the optimized version:

      i := 0
      if i >= 100 goto L2
 L1:  a[i] := 0
      i := i + 1
      if i < 100 goto L1
 L2:

Again, let's look at the instructions executed if i is initialized to 100:

  if i >= 100
  goto L2

We didn't waste any cycles compared to the original version. Now consider the case where i has been incremented to 99:

  if i < 100
  goto L1
  a[i] := 0
  i := i + 1
  if i < 100
  <<at L2>>

As you can see, two gotos (and thus, two pipeline stalls) have been eliminated in the execution.