We can support ashr similar to lshr, if we know that none of the shifted in bits are used. In that case SimplifyDemandedBits would normally convert it to lshr. But that conversion doesn't happen if the shift has additional users.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38521
llvm-svn: 314945
If this transformation succeeds, we're going to remove our dependency on the shift by rewriting the and. So it doesn't matter how many uses the shift has.
This distributes the one use check to other transforms in foldICmpAndConstConst that do need it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38206
llvm-svn: 314233
We already did (X & C2) > C1 --> (X & C2) != 0, if any bit set in (X & C2) will produce a result greater than C1. But there is an equivalent inverse condition with <= C1 (which will be canonicalized to < C1+1)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38065
llvm-svn: 313819
This patch adds splat support to transformZExtICmp. The test cases are vector versions of tests that failed when commenting out parts of the existing scalar code.
One test didn't vectorize optimize properly due to another bug so a TODO has been added.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37253
llvm-svn: 312023
I noticed this missed bswap optimization in the CGP memcmp() expansion,
and then I saw that we don't have the fold in InstCombine.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34763
llvm-svn: 306980
I think we only need to make sure the value fits in 64-bits not that bit width is 64-bit.
This helps places that use this for shift amounts since the shift amount needs to be the same bitwidth as the LHS, but can't be larger than the bit width.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34737
llvm-svn: 306577
This canonicalization was suggested in D33172 as a way to make InstCombine behavior more uniform.
We have this transform for icmp+br, so unless there's some reason that icmp+select should be
treated differently, we should do the same thing here.
The benefit comes from increasing the chances of creating identical instructions. This is shown in
the tests in logical-select.ll (PR32791). InstCombine doesn't fold those directly, but EarlyCSE
can simplify the identical cmps, and then InstCombine can fold the selects together.
The possible regression for the tests in select.ll raises questions about poison/undef:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-May/113261.html
...but that transform is just as likely to be triggered by this canonicalization as it is to be
missed, so we're just pointing out a commutation deficiency in the pattern matching:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL228409
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34242
llvm-svn: 306435
There's probably a lot more like this (see also comments in D33338 about responsibility),
but I suspect we don't usually get a visible manifestation.
Given the recent interest in improving InstCombine efficiency, another potential micro-opt
that could be repeated several times in this function: morph the existing icmp pred/operands
instead of creating a new instruction.
llvm-svn: 303860
The swapped operands in the first test is a manifestation of an
inefficiency for vectors that doesn't exist for scalars because
the IRBuilder checks for an all-ones mask for scalars, but not
vectors.
llvm-svn: 303818
If we had these tests, the bug caused by https://reviews.llvm.org/rL299851 would have been caught sooner.
There's also an assert in the code that should have caught that bug, but the assert line itself has a bug.
llvm-svn: 300201
The code comments didn't match the code logic, and we didn't actually distinguish the fake unary (not/neg/fneg)
operators from arguments. Adding another level to the weighting scheme provides more structure and can help
simplify the pattern matching in InstCombine and other places.
I fixed regressions that would have shown up from this change in:
rL290067
rL290127
But that doesn't mean there are no pattern-matching logic holes left; some combines may just be missing regression tests.
Should fix:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=28296
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27933
llvm-svn: 294049
Allows LLVM to optimize sequences like the following:
%add = add nuw i32 %x, 1
%cmp = icmp ugt i32 %add, %y
Into:
%cmp = icmp uge i32 %x, %y
Previously, only signed comparisons were being handled.
Decrements could also be handled, but 'sub nuw %x, 1' is currently canonicalized to
'add %x, -1' in InstCombineAddSub, losing the nuw flag. Removing that canonicalization
seems like it might have far-reaching ramifications so I kept this simple for now.
Patch by Matti Niemenmaa!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24700
llvm-svn: 291975
These 2 helper functions were already using APInt internally, so just
change the API and caller to allow folds for splats. The scalar
regression tests look quite thorough, so I just added a couple of
tests to prove that vectors are handled too.
These folds should be grouped with the other cmp+shift folds though.
That can be an NFC follow-up.
llvm-svn: 281663
This is a revert of r280676 which was a revert of r280637;
ie, this is r280637 again. It was speculatively reverted to
help debug buildbot failures.
llvm-svn: 280861
This is a partial enablement (move the ConstantInt guard down) because there are many
different folds here and one of the later ones will require reworking 'isSignBitCheck'.
llvm-svn: 279339
The intended transform is:
// Simplify icmp eq (or (ptrtoint P), (ptrtoint Q)), 0
// -> and (icmp eq P, null), (icmp eq Q, null).
P and Q are both pointer types, but may have different types. We need
two calls to getNullValue() to make the icmps.
llvm-svn: 279271
Of course, we really need to refactor and fix all of the cmp predicates,
but this one is interesting because without it, we later perform an
information-losing transform of icmp (shl 1, Y), C, and we can't recover
the better fold.
llvm-svn: 279263
Also, add a scalar test to demonstrate one of the intermediate folds that
is necessary to accomplish the existing, multi-step test. And simplify
the vector tests to only check the final piece of that multi-step transform.
llvm-svn: 278995
This reapplies commit r268521, that was reverted in r268530 due to a test failure in select-implied.ll
Modified the test case to reflect the new change.
llvm-svn: 268557
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=27105
We can check if all bits outside of a constant mask are set with a
single constant.
As noted in the bug report, although this form should be considered the
canonical IR, backends may want to transform this into an 'andn' / 'andc'
comparison against zero because that could be a single machine instruction.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18842
llvm-svn: 266362
This miscompile came about because we tried to use a transform which was
only appropriate for xor operators when addition was present.
This fixes PR26407.
llvm-svn: 259375
Allow LLVM to optimize the sequence like the following:
%inc = add nsw i32 %i, 1
%cmp = icmp slt %n, %inc
into:
%cmp = icmp sle i32 %n, %i
The case is not handled previously due to the complexity of compuation of %n.
Hence, LLVM cannot swap operands of icmp accordingly.
llvm-svn: 250746
The original checkin was buggy, this change has a fix.
Original commit message:
[InstCombine] Transform A & (L - 1) u< L --> L != 0
Summary:
This transform is never a pessimization at the IR level (since it
replaces an `icmp` with another), and has potentiall payoffs:
1. It may make the `icmp` fold away or become loop invariant.
2. It may make the `A & (L - 1)` computation dead.
This shows up in Java, in range checks generated by array accesses of
the form `a[i & (a.length - 1)]`.
Reviewers: reames, majnemer
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12210
llvm-svn: 245753
Craig Topper