When zext is EvaluatedInDifferentType, InstCombine
drops the dbg.value intrinsic. This patch tries to
preserve said DI, by inserting the zext's old DI in the
resulting instruction. (Only for integer type for now)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48331
llvm-svn: 336254
This is the last significant change suggested in PR37806:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37806#c5
...though there are several follow-ups noted in the code comments
in this patch to complete this transform.
It's possible that a binop feeding a select-shuffle has been eliminated
by earlier transforms (or the code was just written like this in the 1st
place), so we'll fail to match the patterns that have 2 binops from:
D48401,
D48678,
D48662,
D48485.
In that case, we can try to materialize identity constants for the remaining
binop to fill in the "ghost" lanes of the vector (where we just want to pass
through the original values of the source operand).
I added comments to ConstantExpr::getBinOpIdentity() to show planned follow-ups.
For now, we only handle the 5 commutative integer binops (add/mul/and/or/xor).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48830
llvm-svn: 336196
This patch changes order of transform in InstCombineCompares to avoid
performing transforms based on ranges which produce complex bit arithmetics
before more simple things (like folding with constants) are done. See PR37636
for the motivating example.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48584
Reviewed By: spatel, lebedev.ri
llvm-svn: 336172
This extends D48485 to allow another pair of binops (add/or) to be combined either
with or without a leading shuffle:
or X, C --> add X, C (when X and C have no common bits set)
Here, we need value tracking to determine that the 'or' can be reversed into an 'add',
and we've added general infrastructure to allow extending to other opcodes or moving
to where other passes could use that functionality.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48662
llvm-svn: 336128
This was discussed in D48401 as another improvement for:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37806
If we have 2 different variable values, then we shuffle (select) those lanes,
shuffle (select) the constants, and then perform the binop. This eliminates a binop.
The new shuffle uses the same shuffle mask as the existing shuffle, so there's no
danger of creating a difficult shuffle.
All of the earlier constraints still apply, but we also check for extra uses to
avoid creating more instructions than we'll remove.
Additionally, we're disallowing the fold for div/rem because that could expose a
UB hole.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48678
llvm-svn: 335974
There's no way to expose this difference currently,
but we should use the updated variable because the
original opcodes can go stale if we transform into
something new.
llvm-svn: 335920
This is an enhancement to D48401 that was discussed in:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37806
We can convert a shift-left-by-constant into a multiply (we canonicalize IR in the other
direction because that's generally better of course). This allows us to remove the shuffle
as we do in the regular opcodes-are-the-same cases.
This requires a small hack to make sure we don't introduce any extra poison:
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/ZGv
Other examples of opcodes where this would work are add+sub and fadd+fsub, but we already
canonicalize those subs into adds, so there's nothing to do for those cases AFAICT. There
are planned enhancements for opcode transforms such or -> add.
Note that there's a different fold needed if we've already managed to simplify away a binop
as seen in the test based on PR37806, but we manage to get that one case here because this
fold is positioned above the demanded elements fold currently.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48485
llvm-svn: 335888
I think the intrinsics named 'avx512.mask.' should refer to the previous behavior of taking a mask argument in the intrinsic instead of using a 'select' or 'and' instruction in IR to accomplish the masking. This is more consistent with the goal that eventually we will have no intrinsics that have masking builtin. When we reach that goal, we should have no intrinsics named "avx512.mask".
llvm-svn: 335744
This prevents InstCombine from creating mis-sized dbg.values when
replacing a sequence of casts with a simpler cast. For example, in:
(fptrunc (floor (fpext X))) -> (floorf X)
We no longer emit dbg.value(X) (with a 32-bit float operand) to describe
(fpext X) (which is a 64-bit float).
This was diagnosed by the debugify check added in r335682.
llvm-svn: 335696
Similar to other patches in this series:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL335512https://reviews.llvm.org/rL335527https://reviews.llvm.org/rL335597https://reviews.llvm.org/rL335616
...this is filling a gap in analysis that is exposed by an unrelated select-of-constants transform.
I didn't see a way to unify the sext cases because each div/rem opcode results in a different fold.
Note that in this case, the backend might want to convert the select into math:
Name: sext urem
%e = sext i1 %x to i32
%r = urem i32 %y, %e
=>
%c = icmp eq i32 %y, -1
%z = zext i1 %c to i32
%r = add i32 %z, %y
llvm-svn: 335622
Note: I didn't add a hasOneUse() check because the existing,
related fold doesn't have that check. I suspect that the
improved analysis and codegen make these some of the rare
canonicalization cases where we allow an increase in
instructions.
llvm-svn: 335597
Turn canonicalized subtraction back into (-1 - B) and combine it with (A + 1) into (A - B).
This is similar to the folding already done for (B ^ -1) + Const into (-1 + Const) - B.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48535
llvm-svn: 335579
This removes a "UDivFoldAction" in favor of a simple constant
matcher. In theory, the existing code could do more matching,
but I don't see any evidence or need for it. I've left a TODO
about using ValueTracking in case we see any regressions.
llvm-svn: 335545
With non-commutative binops, we could be using the same
variable value as operand 0 in 1 binop and operand 1 in
the other, so we have to check for that possibility and
bail out.
llvm-svn: 335312
This is the simplest case from PR37806:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37806
If we have a common variable operand used in a pair of binops with vector constants
that are vector selected together, then we can constant shuffle the constant vectors
to eliminate the shuffle instruction.
This has some tricky parts that are hopefully addressed in the tests and their
respective comments:
1. If the shuffle mask contains an undef element, then that lane of the result is
undef:
http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#shufflevector-instruction
Therefore, we can replace the constant in that lane with an undef value except
for div/rem. With div/rem, an undef in the divisor would cause the whole op to
be undef. So I'm using the same hack as in D47686 - replace the undefs with '1'.
2. Intersect the wrapping and FMF of the original binops for the new binop. There
should be no extra poison or fast-math potential in the new binop that wasn't
possible in the original code.
3. Disregard other uses. Given that we're eliminating uses (shortening the
dependency chain), I think that's always the right IR canonicalization. But
I purposely chose the udiv test to demonstrate the scenario where both
intermediate values have other uses because that seems likely worse for
codegen with an expensive math op. This seems like a very rare possibility to
me, so I don't think it requires a backend patch first.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48401
llvm-svn: 335283
The previous code worked with vectors, but it failed when the
vector constants contained undef elements.
The matchers handle those cases.
llvm-svn: 335262
This is outwardly NFC from what I can tell, but it should be more efficient
to simplify first (despite the name, SimplifyAssociativeOrCommutative does
not actually simplify as InstSimplify does - it creates/morphs instructions).
This should make it easier to refactor duplicated code that runs for all binops.
llvm-svn: 335258
Summary:
This also removes the need for atomic pseudo instructions, since
we select the correct encoding directly in SITargetLowering::lowerImage
for dimension-aware image intrinsics.
Mesa uses dimension-aware image intrinsics since
commit a9a7993441.
Change-Id: I7473d20009476a4ed6d919cae4e6dca9ff42e77a
Reviewers: arsenm, rampitec, mareko, tpr, b-sumner
Subscribers: kzhuravl, wdng, yaxunl, dstuttard, t-tye, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48167
llvm-svn: 335231
Summary:
Use the expanded features of the TableGen generic tables to avoid manually
adding the combinatorially exploded set of intrinsics. The
getAMDGPUImageDimIntrinsic lookup function is early-out,
i.e. non-AMDGPU intrinsics will never look at the underlying table.
Use a generic approach for getting the new intrinsic overload to keep the
code simple, and make the image dmask handling more generic:
- handle non-sampler image loads
- handle the case where the set of demanded elements is not a prefix
There is some overlap between this code and an optimization that happens
in the backend during code generation. They currently complement each other:
- only the codegen optimization can generate vec3 loads
- only the InstCombine optimization can handle D16
The InstCombine optimization also likely covers more cases since the
codegen optimization is fairly ad-hoc. Ideally, we'll remove the optimization
in codegen once the infrastructure for vec3 is in place (which will probably
take a long time).
Modify the test cases to use dimension-aware intrinsics. This makes it
easier to see that the test coverage for the new intrinsics is equivalent,
and the old style intrinsics will be removed in a follow-up commit anyway.
Change-Id: I4b91ea661413d13004956fe4ef7d13d41b8ce3ad
Reviewers: arsenm, rampitec, majnemer
Subscribers: kzhuravl, wdng, mgorny, yaxunl, dstuttard, tpr, t-tye, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48165
llvm-svn: 335230
The purpose of this utility is to make it easier for optimizations to
insert replacement dbg.values for instructions they are deleting. This
is useful in situations where salvageDebugInfo is inapplicable, say,
because the new dbg.value cannot refer to an operand of the dying value.
The utility is called insertReplacementDbgValues.
It assumes that the instruction 'From' is going to be deleted, and
inserts replacement dbg.values for each debug user of 'From'. The
newly-inserted dbg.values refer to 'To' instead of 'From'. Each
replacement dbg.value has the same location and variable as the debug
user it replaces, has a DIExpression determined by the result of
'RewriteExpr' applied to an old debug user of 'From', and is placed
before 'InsertBefore'.
This should simplify future patches, like D48331.
llvm-svn: 335144
Summary:
Related to https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37793, https://reviews.llvm.org/D46760#1127287
We'd like to do this canonicalization https://rise4fun.com/Alive/Gmc
But it is currently restricted by rL155136 / rL155362, which says:
```
// This is a constant shift of a constant shift. Be careful about hiding
// shl instructions behind bit masks. They are used to represent multiplies
// by a constant, and it is important that simple arithmetic expressions
// are still recognizable by scalar evolution.
//
// The transforms applied to shl are very similar to the transforms applied
// to mul by constant. We can be more aggressive about optimizing right
// shifts.
//
// Combinations of right and left shifts will still be optimized in
// DAGCombine where scalar evolution no longer applies.
```
I think these tests show that for *constants*, SCEV has no issues with that canonicalization.
Reviewers: mkazantsev, spatel, efriedma, sanjoy
Reviewed By: mkazantsev
Subscribers: sanjoy, javed.absar, llvm-commits, stoklund, bixia
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48229
llvm-svn: 335101
This patch introduces two helpers to make it easier to ignore debug
intrinsics:
- Instruction::getNextNonDebugInstruction()
This is just like Instruction::getNextNode(), except that it skips debug
info.
- skipDebugInfo(BasicBlock::iterator)
A free function which advances a BasicBlock iterator past any debug
info. This is a no-op when the iterator already points to a non-debug
instruction.
Part of: llvm.org/PR37728
Related to: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47874
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48305
llvm-svn: 335083
This patch replaces calls to X86-specific intrinsics with floor-ceil semantics
with calls to target-independent @llvm.floor.* and @llvm.ceil.* intrinsics. This
doesn't affect the resulting machine code, as those intrinsics are lowered to
the same instructions, but exposes these specific rounding cases to generic
optimizations.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48067
llvm-svn: 335039
Summary:
When iterating users of a multiply in processUMulZExtIdiom, the
call to setOperand in the truncation case may replace the use
being visited; make sure the iterator has been advanced before
doing that replacement.
Reviewers: majnemer, davide
Reviewed By: davide
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48192
llvm-svn: 334844
Summary:
We already do it for splat constants, but not just values.
Also, undef cases are mostly non-functional.
The original commit was reverted because
it broke tests for amdgpu backend, which i didn't check.
Now, the backed was updated to recognize these new
patterns, so we are good.
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37603https://rise4fun.com/Alive/cplX
Reviewers: spatel, craig.topper, mareko, bogner, rampitec, nhaehnle, arsenm
Reviewed By: spatel, rampitec, nhaehnle
Subscribers: wdng, nhaehnle, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47980
llvm-svn: 334818
The bug report:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36036
...requests a DAG change for this, but an IR canonicalization
probably handles most cases. If we still want to match this
pattern in the backend, there's a proposal for that too:
D47831
Alive proofs including nsw/nuw cases that were first noted in:
D46988
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/Kmp
This patch is largely copied from the existing code that was
initially added with:
D40984
...but I didn't see much gain from trying to share code.
llvm-svn: 334137
Summary:
This is [[ https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37603 | PR37603 ]].
https://godbolt.org/g/VCMNpShttps://rise4fun.com/Alive/idM
When doing bit manipulations, it is quite common to calculate some bit mask,
and apply it to some value via `and`.
The typical C code looks like:
```
int mask_signed_add(int nbits) {
return (1 << nbits) - 1;
}
```
which is translated into (with `-O3`)
```
define dso_local i32 @mask_signed_add(int)(i32) local_unnamed_addr #0 {
%2 = shl i32 1, %0
%3 = add nsw i32 %2, -1
ret i32 %3
}
```
But there is a second, less readable variant:
```
int mask_signed_xor(int nbits) {
return ~(-(1 << nbits));
}
```
which is translated into (with `-O3`)
```
define dso_local i32 @mask_signed_xor(int)(i32) local_unnamed_addr #0 {
%2 = shl i32 -1, %0
%3 = xor i32 %2, -1
ret i32 %3
}
```
Since we created such a mask, it is quite likely that we will use it in `and` next.
And then we may get rid of `not` op by folding into `andn`.
But now that i have actually looked:
https://godbolt.org/g/VTUDmU
_some_ backend changes will be needed too.
We clearly loose `bzhi` recognition.
Reviewers: spatel, craig.topper, RKSimon
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47428
llvm-svn: 334127
We should never get different CodeGen based on whether the code is being
compiled in debug mode so we must skip over @llvm.dbg.value (and similar)
calls.
Should fix at least the worst part of PR37690.
llvm-svn: 334090
When adjusting a cmp in order to canonicalize an abs/nabs select pattern we need
to use the type of the existing operand when creating a new operand not the
type of a select operand, as the two may be different.
This fixes PR37686.
llvm-svn: 334019
As noted in rL333782, we can be both better for optimization and
safer with this transform:
BinOp (shuffle V1, Mask), C --> shuffle (BinOp V1, NewC), Mask
The only potentially unsafe-to-speculate binops are integer div/rem.
All other binops are always safe (although I don't see a way to
assert that in code here).
For opcodes like shifts that can produce poison, it can't matter
here because we know the lanes with undef are dropped by the
subsequent shuffle.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47686
llvm-svn: 333962
Review feedback from r328165. Split out just the one function from the
file that's used by Analysis. (As chandlerc pointed out, the original
change only moved the header and not the implementation anyway - which
was fine for the one function that was used (since it's a
template/inlined in the header) but not in general)
llvm-svn: 333954
When we optimize select basing on fact that div by 0 is undef
we should not traverse the instruction which are not guaranteed to
transfer execution to next instruction. Guard intrinsic is an example.
Reviewers: spatel, craig.topper
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47576
llvm-svn: 333864
There's a patchwork of existing transforms trying to handle
these cases, but as seen in the changed test, we weren't
catching them all.
llvm-svn: 333845
As noted in the review thread for rL333782, we could have
made a bug harder to hit if we were simplifying instructions
before trying other folds.
The shuffle transform in question isn't ever a simplification;
it's just a canonicalization. So I've renamed that to make that
clearer.
This is NFCI at this point, but I've regenerated the test file
to show the cosmetic value naming difference of using
instcombine's RAUW vs. the builder.
Possible follow-ups:
1. Move reassociation folds after simplifies too.
2. Refactor common code; we shouldn't have so much repetition.
llvm-svn: 333820
This bug:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37648
...was created with the enhancement to this transform with rL332479.
The urem test shows the disaster potential: any undef divisor lane makes
the whole op undef.
The test diffs show that vector demanded elements turns some of the potential,
but not all, unused binop operands back into undef already.
llvm-svn: 333782
Anastasis Grammenos