2019-07-23 06:08:45 +08:00
|
|
|
; NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_test_checks.py
|
|
|
|
|
; RUN: opt %s -instcombine -S | FileCheck %s
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
; Fold
|
|
|
|
|
; (-1 u/ %x) u>= %y
|
|
|
|
|
; to
|
|
|
|
|
; @llvm.umul.with.overflow(%x, %y) + extractvalue + not
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
define i1 @t0_basic(i8 %x, i8 %y) {
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-LABEL: @t0_basic(
|
[InstCombine] Fold '(-1 u/ %x) u< %y' to '@llvm.umul.with.overflow' + overflow bit extraction
Summary:
`(-1 u/ %x) u< %y` is one of (3?) common ways to check that
some unsigned multiplication (will not) overflow.
Currently, we don't catch it. We could:
```
----------------------------------------
Name: no overflow
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp ult i4 %o0, %y
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%r = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
----------------------------------------
Name: no overflow, swapped
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp ugt i4 %y, %o0
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%r = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
----------------------------------------
Name: overflow
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp uge i4 %o0, %y
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%n1 = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
%r = xor %n1, -1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
----------------------------------------
Name: overflow
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp ule i4 %y, %o0
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%n1 = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
%r = xor %n1, -1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
```
As it can be observed from tests, while simply forming the `@llvm.umul.with.overflow`
is easy, if we were looking for the inverted answer, then more work needs to be done
to cleanup the now-pointless control-flow that was guarding against division-by-zero.
This is being addressed in follow-up patches.
Reviewers: nikic, spatel, efriedma, xbolva00, RKSimon
Reviewed By: nikic, xbolva00
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65143
llvm-svn: 370347
2019-08-29 20:47:08 +08:00
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[UMUL:%.*]] = call { i8, i1 } @llvm.umul.with.overflow.i8(i8 [[X:%.*]], i8 [[Y:%.*]])
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[UMUL_OV:%.*]] = extractvalue { i8, i1 } [[UMUL]], 1
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[UMUL_NOT_OV:%.*]] = xor i1 [[UMUL_OV]], true
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: ret i1 [[UMUL_NOT_OV]]
|
2019-07-23 06:08:45 +08:00
|
|
|
;
|
|
|
|
|
%t0 = udiv i8 -1, %x
|
|
|
|
|
%r = icmp uge i8 %t0, %y
|
|
|
|
|
ret i1 %r
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
define <2 x i1> @t1_vec(<2 x i8> %x, <2 x i8> %y) {
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-LABEL: @t1_vec(
|
[InstCombine] Fold '(-1 u/ %x) u< %y' to '@llvm.umul.with.overflow' + overflow bit extraction
Summary:
`(-1 u/ %x) u< %y` is one of (3?) common ways to check that
some unsigned multiplication (will not) overflow.
Currently, we don't catch it. We could:
```
----------------------------------------
Name: no overflow
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp ult i4 %o0, %y
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%r = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
----------------------------------------
Name: no overflow, swapped
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp ugt i4 %y, %o0
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%r = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
----------------------------------------
Name: overflow
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp uge i4 %o0, %y
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%n1 = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
%r = xor %n1, -1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
----------------------------------------
Name: overflow
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp ule i4 %y, %o0
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%n1 = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
%r = xor %n1, -1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
```
As it can be observed from tests, while simply forming the `@llvm.umul.with.overflow`
is easy, if we were looking for the inverted answer, then more work needs to be done
to cleanup the now-pointless control-flow that was guarding against division-by-zero.
This is being addressed in follow-up patches.
Reviewers: nikic, spatel, efriedma, xbolva00, RKSimon
Reviewed By: nikic, xbolva00
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65143
llvm-svn: 370347
2019-08-29 20:47:08 +08:00
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[UMUL:%.*]] = call { <2 x i8>, <2 x i1> } @llvm.umul.with.overflow.v2i8(<2 x i8> [[X:%.*]], <2 x i8> [[Y:%.*]])
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[UMUL_OV:%.*]] = extractvalue { <2 x i8>, <2 x i1> } [[UMUL]], 1
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[UMUL_NOT_OV:%.*]] = xor <2 x i1> [[UMUL_OV]], <i1 true, i1 true>
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: ret <2 x i1> [[UMUL_NOT_OV]]
|
2019-07-23 06:08:45 +08:00
|
|
|
;
|
|
|
|
|
%t0 = udiv <2 x i8> <i8 -1, i8 -1>, %x
|
|
|
|
|
%r = icmp uge <2 x i8> %t0, %y
|
|
|
|
|
ret <2 x i1> %r
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
define <3 x i1> @t2_vec_undef(<3 x i8> %x, <3 x i8> %y) {
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-LABEL: @t2_vec_undef(
|
[InstCombine] Fold '(-1 u/ %x) u< %y' to '@llvm.umul.with.overflow' + overflow bit extraction
Summary:
`(-1 u/ %x) u< %y` is one of (3?) common ways to check that
some unsigned multiplication (will not) overflow.
Currently, we don't catch it. We could:
```
----------------------------------------
Name: no overflow
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp ult i4 %o0, %y
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%r = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
----------------------------------------
Name: no overflow, swapped
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp ugt i4 %y, %o0
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%r = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
----------------------------------------
Name: overflow
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp uge i4 %o0, %y
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%n1 = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
%r = xor %n1, -1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
----------------------------------------
Name: overflow
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp ule i4 %y, %o0
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%n1 = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
%r = xor %n1, -1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
```
As it can be observed from tests, while simply forming the `@llvm.umul.with.overflow`
is easy, if we were looking for the inverted answer, then more work needs to be done
to cleanup the now-pointless control-flow that was guarding against division-by-zero.
This is being addressed in follow-up patches.
Reviewers: nikic, spatel, efriedma, xbolva00, RKSimon
Reviewed By: nikic, xbolva00
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65143
llvm-svn: 370347
2019-08-29 20:47:08 +08:00
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[UMUL:%.*]] = call { <3 x i8>, <3 x i1> } @llvm.umul.with.overflow.v3i8(<3 x i8> [[X:%.*]], <3 x i8> [[Y:%.*]])
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[UMUL_OV:%.*]] = extractvalue { <3 x i8>, <3 x i1> } [[UMUL]], 1
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[UMUL_NOT_OV:%.*]] = xor <3 x i1> [[UMUL_OV]], <i1 true, i1 true, i1 true>
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: ret <3 x i1> [[UMUL_NOT_OV]]
|
2019-07-23 06:08:45 +08:00
|
|
|
;
|
|
|
|
|
%t0 = udiv <3 x i8> <i8 -1, i8 undef, i8 -1>, %x
|
|
|
|
|
%r = icmp uge <3 x i8> %t0, %y
|
|
|
|
|
ret <3 x i1> %r
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
declare i8 @gen8()
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
define i1 @t3_commutative(i8 %x) {
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-LABEL: @t3_commutative(
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[Y:%.*]] = call i8 @gen8()
|
[InstCombine] Fold '(-1 u/ %x) u< %y' to '@llvm.umul.with.overflow' + overflow bit extraction
Summary:
`(-1 u/ %x) u< %y` is one of (3?) common ways to check that
some unsigned multiplication (will not) overflow.
Currently, we don't catch it. We could:
```
----------------------------------------
Name: no overflow
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp ult i4 %o0, %y
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%r = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
----------------------------------------
Name: no overflow, swapped
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp ugt i4 %y, %o0
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%r = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
----------------------------------------
Name: overflow
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp uge i4 %o0, %y
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%n1 = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
%r = xor %n1, -1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
----------------------------------------
Name: overflow
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%r = icmp ule i4 %y, %o0
=>
%o0 = udiv i4 -1, %x
%n0 = umul_overflow i4 %x, %y
%n1 = extractvalue {i4, i1} %n0, 1
%r = xor %n1, -1
Done: 1
Optimization is correct!
```
As it can be observed from tests, while simply forming the `@llvm.umul.with.overflow`
is easy, if we were looking for the inverted answer, then more work needs to be done
to cleanup the now-pointless control-flow that was guarding against division-by-zero.
This is being addressed in follow-up patches.
Reviewers: nikic, spatel, efriedma, xbolva00, RKSimon
Reviewed By: nikic, xbolva00
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65143
llvm-svn: 370347
2019-08-29 20:47:08 +08:00
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[UMUL:%.*]] = call { i8, i1 } @llvm.umul.with.overflow.i8(i8 [[X:%.*]], i8 [[Y]])
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[UMUL_OV:%.*]] = extractvalue { i8, i1 } [[UMUL]], 1
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[UMUL_NOT_OV:%.*]] = xor i1 [[UMUL_OV]], true
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: ret i1 [[UMUL_NOT_OV]]
|
2019-07-23 06:08:45 +08:00
|
|
|
;
|
|
|
|
|
%t0 = udiv i8 -1, %x
|
|
|
|
|
%y = call i8 @gen8()
|
2019-07-23 20:42:57 +08:00
|
|
|
%r = icmp ule i8 %y, %t0 ; swapped
|
2019-07-23 06:08:45 +08:00
|
|
|
ret i1 %r
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
; Negative tests
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
declare void @use8(i8)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
define i1 @n4_extrause(i8 %x, i8 %y) {
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-LABEL: @n4_extrause(
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[T0:%.*]] = udiv i8 -1, [[X:%.*]]
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: call void @use8(i8 [[T0]])
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[R:%.*]] = icmp uge i8 [[T0]], [[Y:%.*]]
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: ret i1 [[R]]
|
|
|
|
|
;
|
|
|
|
|
%t0 = udiv i8 -1, %x
|
|
|
|
|
call void @use8(i8 %t0)
|
|
|
|
|
%r = icmp uge i8 %t0, %y
|
|
|
|
|
ret i1 %r
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
define i1 @n5_not_negone(i8 %x, i8 %y) {
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-LABEL: @n5_not_negone(
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[T0:%.*]] = udiv i8 -2, [[X:%.*]]
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[R:%.*]] = icmp uge i8 [[T0]], [[Y:%.*]]
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: ret i1 [[R]]
|
|
|
|
|
;
|
|
|
|
|
%t0 = udiv i8 -2, %x ; not -1
|
|
|
|
|
%r = icmp uge i8 %t0, %y
|
|
|
|
|
ret i1 %r
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
define i1 @n6_wrong_pred0(i8 %x, i8 %y) {
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-LABEL: @n6_wrong_pred0(
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[T0:%.*]] = udiv i8 -1, [[X:%.*]]
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[R:%.*]] = icmp ule i8 [[T0]], [[Y:%.*]]
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: ret i1 [[R]]
|
|
|
|
|
;
|
|
|
|
|
%t0 = udiv i8 -1, %x
|
2019-07-23 20:42:57 +08:00
|
|
|
%r = icmp ule i8 %t0, %y ; not uge
|
2019-07-23 06:08:45 +08:00
|
|
|
ret i1 %r
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-07-23 20:42:57 +08:00
|
|
|
define i1 @n6_wrong_pred1(i8 %x, i8 %y) {
|
2019-07-23 06:08:45 +08:00
|
|
|
; CHECK-LABEL: @n6_wrong_pred1(
|
|
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[T0:%.*]] = udiv i8 -1, [[X:%.*]]
|
2019-07-23 20:42:57 +08:00
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: [[R:%.*]] = icmp ugt i8 [[T0]], [[Y:%.*]]
|
2019-07-23 06:08:45 +08:00
|
|
|
; CHECK-NEXT: ret i1 [[R]]
|
|
|
|
|
;
|
|
|
|
|
%t0 = udiv i8 -1, %x
|
2019-07-23 20:42:57 +08:00
|
|
|
%r = icmp ugt i8 %t0, %y ; not uge
|
2019-07-23 06:08:45 +08:00
|
|
|
ret i1 %r
|
|
|
|
|
}
|