This cleans up all LoadInst creation in LLVM to explicitly pass the
value type rather than deriving it from the pointer's element-type.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57172
llvm-svn: 352911
This cleans up all CallInst creation in LLVM to explicitly pass a
function type rather than deriving it from the pointer's element-type.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57170
llvm-svn: 352909
As suggested on PR40318, this patch uses PSLLDQ/PSRLDQ to lower shuffles to zero out the ends of a vector, leaving a sequential inner section.
For pre-SSSE3 we do this for shuffles with zeros at either end (requiring up to 3 shifts), but once PSHUFB is available I've limited this to shuffles with a single zeroable end (2 shifts).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56784
llvm-svn: 352883
Enable peeking through one use bitcasts to the subvector shuffle.
This still depends on the subvector being the same scalar-size but D57514 has already helped with the more tricky patterns
llvm-svn: 352879
Summary:
I'm unable to find this number in the "AMD SOG for family 15h".
llvm-exegesis measures the latencies of these instructions as `2`,
which matches the latencies specified in "AMD SOG for family 15h".
However if we look at Agner, Microarchitecture, "AMD Bulldozer, Piledriver,
Steamroller and Excavator pipeline", "Data delay between different execution
domains", the int->ivec transfer is listed as `8`..`10`cy of additional latency.
Also, Agner's "Instruction tables", for Piledriver, lists their latencies as `12`,
which is consistent with `2cy` from exegesis / AMD SOG + `10cy` transfer delay.
Additional data point comes from the fact that Agner's "Instruction tables",
for Jaguar, lists their latencies as `8`; and "AMD SOG for family 16h" does
state the `+6cy` int->ivec delay, which is consistent with instr latency of `1` or `2`.
Reviewers: andreadb, RKSimon, craig.topper
Reviewed By: andreadb
Subscribers: gbedwell, courbet, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57300
llvm-svn: 352861
Recommit r352791 after tweaking DerivedTypes.h slightly, so that gcc
doesn't choke on it, hopefully.
Original Message:
The FunctionCallee type is effectively a {FunctionType*,Value*} pair,
and is a useful convenience to enable code to continue passing the
result of getOrInsertFunction() through to EmitCall, even once pointer
types lose their pointee-type.
Then:
- update the CallInst/InvokeInst instruction creation functions to
take a Callee,
- modify getOrInsertFunction to return FunctionCallee, and
- update all callers appropriately.
One area of particular note is the change to the sanitizer
code. Previously, they had been casting the result of
`getOrInsertFunction` to a `Function*` via
`checkSanitizerInterfaceFunction`, and storing that. That would report
an error if someone had already inserted a function declaraction with
a mismatching signature.
However, in general, LLVM allows for such mismatches, as
`getOrInsertFunction` will automatically insert a bitcast if
needed. As part of this cleanup, cause the sanitizer code to do the
same. (It will call its functions using the expected signature,
however they may have been declared.)
Finally, in a small number of locations, callers of
`getOrInsertFunction` actually were expecting/requiring that a brand
new function was being created. In such cases, I've switched them to
Function::Create instead.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57315
llvm-svn: 352827
This reverts commit f47d6b38c7 (r352791).
Seems to run into compilation failures with GCC (but not clang, where
I tested it). Reverting while I investigate.
llvm-svn: 352800
The FunctionCallee type is effectively a {FunctionType*,Value*} pair,
and is a useful convenience to enable code to continue passing the
result of getOrInsertFunction() through to EmitCall, even once pointer
types lose their pointee-type.
Then:
- update the CallInst/InvokeInst instruction creation functions to
take a Callee,
- modify getOrInsertFunction to return FunctionCallee, and
- update all callers appropriately.
One area of particular note is the change to the sanitizer
code. Previously, they had been casting the result of
`getOrInsertFunction` to a `Function*` via
`checkSanitizerInterfaceFunction`, and storing that. That would report
an error if someone had already inserted a function declaraction with
a mismatching signature.
However, in general, LLVM allows for such mismatches, as
`getOrInsertFunction` will automatically insert a bitcast if
needed. As part of this cleanup, cause the sanitizer code to do the
same. (It will call its functions using the expected signature,
however they may have been declared.)
Finally, in a small number of locations, callers of
`getOrInsertFunction` actually were expecting/requiring that a brand
new function was being created. In such cases, I've switched them to
Function::Create instead.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57315
llvm-svn: 352791
Similar to what we already do in DAGCombiner, but this version also handles bitcasts from types with different scalar sizes, which x86 is better at handling.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57514
llvm-svn: 352773
Enables 32/64-bit scalar load broadcasts on AVX1 targets
The extractelement-load.ll regression will be fixed shortly in a followup commit.
llvm-svn: 352743
If we're not inserting the broadcast into the lowest subvector then we can avoid the insertion by just performing a larger broadcast.
Avoids a regression when we enable AVX1 broadcasts in shuffle combining
llvm-svn: 352742
And instead just generate a libcall. My motivating example on ARM was a simple:
shl i64 %A, %B
for which the code bloat is quite significant. For other targets that also
accept __int128/i128 such as AArch64 and X86, it is also beneficial for these
cases to generate a libcall when optimising for minsize. On these 64-bit targets,
the 64-bits shifts are of course unaffected because the SHIFT/SHIFT_PARTS
lowering operation action is not set to custom/expand.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57386
llvm-svn: 352736
I believe this was there to handle avx512bw intrinsics that returned i64 type in 32-bit mode. But all those intrinsics have since been changed to v64i1 results or replaced with generic IR.
llvm-svn: 352698
This fixes the test case in PR35982 by preventing MMX instructions that read MM0-7 from being moved below EMMS/FEMMS by the post RA scheduler.
Though as discussed in bugzilla, this is not a complete fix. There is still the possibility of reordering in IR or by the pre-RA scheduler.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57298
llvm-svn: 352660
There were checks to ensure some tables were sorted, but those tables aren't used by this function. The same tables are checked in the function that does use them. Maybe this was copy/pasted?
llvm-svn: 352609
As far as I can tell we already won't emit these aliases due to an operand count check in the tablegen code. Removing these because I couldn't make sense of the inconsistency between fadd and fmul from reading the code.
I checked the AsmMatcher and AsmWriter files before and after this change and there were no differences.
llvm-svn: 352608
Account for bypass delays when computing the latency of scalar int-to-float
conversions.
On Jaguar we need to account for an extra 6cy latency (see AMD fam16h SOG).
This patch also fixes the number of micropcodes for the register-memory variants
of scalar int-to-float conversions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57148
llvm-svn: 352518
Without the fix we get the following (with -Werror):
../lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp:14181:58: error: suggest braces around initialization of subobject [-Werror,-Wmissing-braces]
SmallVector<std::array<int, 2>, 2> LaneSrcs(NumLanes, {-1, -1});
^~~~~~
{ }
1 error generated.
llvm-svn: 352455
This did not cause the buildbot failure it was previously reverted for.
Original commit message:
I'm not sure why we were using SEXTLOAD. EXTLOAD seems more appropriate since we don't care about the upper bits.
This patch changes this and then modifies the X86 post legalization combine to emit a extending shuffle instead of a sign_extend_vector_inreg. Could maybe use an any_extend_vector_inre
On AVX512 targets I think we might be able to use a masked vpmovzx and not have to expand this at all.
llvm-svn: 352433
Followup to D56636, this time handling the UADDSAT case by expanding
uadd.sat(a, b) to umin(a, ~b) + b.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56869
llvm-svn: 352409
First step towards adding support for 64-bit unary "sublane" handling (a bit like lowerShuffleAsRepeatedMaskAndLanePermute).
This allows us to add lowerV64I8Shuffle handling.
llvm-svn: 352389
This is tricky to make optimal: sometimes we're better off using
a single wider op, but other times it makes more sense to combine
a narrow ops to achieve the same result.
This solves the case from:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40434
There's potentially a similar change for vectors with 64-bit elements,
but it needs adjustments similar to rL352333 to avoid creating infinite
loops.
llvm-svn: 352380
This transform was added with rL351346, and we had
an escape for shufps, but we also want one for
unpckps vs. vpermps because vpermps doesn't take
an immediate shuffle index operand.
llvm-svn: 352333
Although this is longer code, this is no-functional-change-intended.
The goal is to untangle the conditions under which we bail out, so
that's easier to adjust.
llvm-svn: 352320
The add+and sequence followed by a branch can
happen e.g. when looping over the set bits of an integer:
```
while (x != 0) {
func(x & ~x);
x &= x - 1;
}
```
Reviewed By: ctopper
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57296
llvm-svn: 352306
def32 here means the producing instruction zeroed bits 63:32. We already do this for zext, but it looks like we can get an and+anyext sometimes.
Spotted in the diffs from D33587.
llvm-svn: 352303
Fix issue noted in D57281 that only tested the one use for the SDValue (the result flag), not the entire SUB.
I've added the getNode() to make it clearer what is intended than just the -> redirection.
llvm-svn: 352291
As discussed on PR24545, we should try to commute X86::COND_A 'icmp ugt' cases to X86::COND_B 'icmp ult' to more optimally bind the carry flag output to a SBB instruction.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57281
llvm-svn: 352289
We often generate X86ISD::SBB(X, 0) for carry flag arithmetic.
I had tried to create test cases for the ADC equivalent (which often uses the same pattern) but haven't managed to find anything yet.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57169
llvm-svn: 352288
This reduces a bit of duplication between the combining and
lowering places that use it, but the primary motivation is
to make it easier to rearrange the lowering logic and solve
PR40434:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40434
llvm-svn: 352280
Summary: We have isel patterns for this, but we're missing some load patterns and all broadcast patterns. A DAG combine seems like a better fit for this.
Reviewers: RKSimon, spatel
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56971
llvm-svn: 352260
Summary:
I'm not sure why we were using SEXTLOAD. EXTLOAD seems more appropriate since we don't care about the upper bits.
This patch changes this and then modifies the X86 post legalization combine to emit a extending shuffle instead of a sign_extend_vector_inreg. Could maybe use an any_extend_vector_inreg, but I just did what we already do in LowerLoad. I think we can actually get rid of this code entirely if we switch to -x86-experimental-vector-widening-legalization.
On AVX512 targets I think we might be able to use a masked vpmovzx and not have to expand this at all.
Reviewers: RKSimon, spatel
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57186
llvm-svn: 352255
Summary:
Currently, if an instruction with a memory operand has no debug information,
X86DiscriminateMemOps will generate one based on the first line of the
enclosing function, or the last seen debug info.
This may cause confusion in certain debugging scenarios. The long term
approach would be to use the line number '0' in such cases, however, that
brings in challenges: the base discriminator value range is limited
(4096 values).
For the short term, adding an opt-in flag for this feature.
See bug 40319 (https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40319)
Reviewers: dblaikie, jmorse, gbedwell
Reviewed By: dblaikie
Subscribers: aprantl, eraman, hiraditya
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57257
llvm-svn: 352246
We also need to combine to masked truncating with saturation stores, but I'm leaving that for a future patch.
This does regress some tests that used truncate wtih saturation followed by a masked store. Those now use a truncating store and use min/max to saturate.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57218
llvm-svn: 352230
This seems unnecessarily complicated because we gave names to
opposite polarity bools and have code comments that don't really
line up with the logic.
Step 1: remove UndefUpper and assert that it is the opposite of
UndefLower after the initial early exit.
llvm-svn: 352217
James Y Knight