The initial attempt (rG89633320) botched the logic by reversing
the source/dest types. Added x86 tests for additional coverage.
The vector tests show a potential improvement (fold vector load
instead of broadcasting), but that's a known/existing problem.
This fold is done in IR by instcombine, and we have a special
form of it already here in DAGCombiner, but we want the more
general transform too:
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/3jZm
Name: general
Pre: (C1 + zext(C2) < 64)
%s = lshr i64 %x, C1
%t = trunc i64 %s to i16
%r = lshr i16 %t, C2
=>
%s2 = lshr i64 %x, C1 + zext(C2)
%a = and i64 %s2, zext((1 << (16 - C2)) - 1)
%r = trunc %a to i16
Name: special
Pre: C1 == 48
%s = lshr i64 %x, C1
%t = trunc i64 %s to i16
%r = lshr i16 %t, C2
=>
%s2 = lshr i64 %x, C1 + zext(C2)
%r = trunc %s2 to i16
...because D58017 exposes a regression without this fold.
This fold is done in IR by instcombine, and we have a special
form of it already here in DAGCombiner, but we want the more
general transform too:
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/3jZm
Name: general
Pre: (C1 + zext(C2) < 64)
%s = lshr i64 %x, C1
%t = trunc i64 %s to i16
%r = lshr i16 %t, C2
=>
%s2 = lshr i64 %x, C1 + zext(C2)
%a = and i64 %s2, zext((1 << (16 - C2)) - 1)
%r = trunc %a to i16
Name: special
Pre: C1 == 48
%s = lshr i64 %x, C1
%t = trunc i64 %s to i16
%r = lshr i16 %t, C2
=>
%s2 = lshr i64 %x, C1 + zext(C2)
%r = trunc %s2 to i16
...because D58017 exposes a regression without this fold.
Summary:
This *might* be the last fold for `sink-addsub-of-const.ll`, but i'm not sure yet.
As far as i can tell, there are no regressions here (ignoring x86-32),
all changes are either good or neutral.
This, almost surprisingly to me, fixes the motivational tests (in `shift-amount-mod.ll`)
`@reg32_lshr_by_sub_from_negated` from [[ https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41952 | PR41952 ]].
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/vMd3
Reviewers: RKSimon, t.p.northover, craig.topper, spatel, efriedma
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Subscribers: sdardis, javed.absar, arichardson, kristof.beyls, jrtc27, atanasyan, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62774
llvm-svn: 362488
Summary:
Direct sibling of D62223 patch.
While i don't have a direct motivational pattern for this,
it would seem to make sense to handle both patterns (or none),
for symmetry?
The aarch64 changes look neutral;
sparc and systemz look like improvement (one less instruction each);
x86 changes - 32bit case improves, 64bit case shows that LEA no longer
gets constructed, which may be because that whole test is `-mattr=+slow-lea,+slow-3ops-lea`
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/ffh
This is a recommit, originally committed in rL361852, but reverted
to investigate test-suite compile-time hangs, and then reverted in
rL362109 to fix missing constant folds that were causing
endless combine loops.
Reviewers: RKSimon, craig.topper, spatel, t.p.northover
Reviewed By: t.p.northover
Subscribers: t.p.northover, jyknight, javed.absar, kristof.beyls, fedor.sergeev, jrtc27, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62252
llvm-svn: 362143
Summary:
The main motivation is shown by all these `neg` instructions that are now created.
In particular, the `@reg32_lshr_by_negated_unfolded_sub_b` test.
AArch64 test changes all look good (`neg` created), or neutral.
X86 changes look neutral (vectors), or good (`neg` / `xor eax, eax` created).
I'm not sure about `X86/ragreedy-hoist-spill.ll`, it looks like the spill
is now hoisted into preheader (which should still be good?),
2 4-byte reloads become 1 8-byte reload, and are elsewhere,
but i'm not sure how that affects that loop.
I'm unable to interpret AMDGPU change, looks neutral-ish?
This is hopefully a step towards solving [[ https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41952 | PR41952 ]].
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/pkdq (we are missing more patterns, i'll submit them later)
This is a recommit, originally committed in rL361852, but reverted
to investigate test-suite compile-time hangs, and then reverted in
rL362109 to fix missing constant folds that were causing
endless combine loops.
Reviewers: craig.topper, RKSimon, spatel, arsenm
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Subscribers: bjope, qcolombet, kzhuravl, jvesely, wdng, nhaehnle, yaxunl, javed.absar, dstuttard, tpr, t-tye, kristof.beyls, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62223
llvm-svn: 362142
I was looking into an endless combine loop the uncommitted follow-up patch
was causing, and it appears even these patches can exibit such an
endless loop. The root cause is that we try to hoist one binop (add/sub) with
constant operand, and if we get two such binops both of which are
eligible for this hoisting, we get stuck.
Some cases may highlight missing constant-folds.
Reverts r361871,r361872,r361873,r361874.
llvm-svn: 362109
Summary:
Direct sibling of D62223 patch.
While i don't have a direct motivational pattern for this,
it would seem to make sense to handle both patterns (or none),
for symmetry?
The aarch64 changes look neutral;
sparc and systemz look like improvement (one less instruction each);
x86 changes - 32bit case improves, 64bit case shows that LEA no longer
gets constructed, which may be because that whole test is `-mattr=+slow-lea,+slow-3ops-lea`
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/ffh
This is a recommit, originally committed in rL361853, but reverted
to investigate test-suite compile-time hangs.
Reviewers: RKSimon, craig.topper, spatel, t.p.northover
Reviewed By: t.p.northover
Subscribers: t.p.northover, jyknight, javed.absar, kristof.beyls, fedor.sergeev, jrtc27, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62252
llvm-svn: 361872
Summary:
The main motivation is shown by all these `neg` instructions that are now created.
In particular, the `@reg32_lshr_by_negated_unfolded_sub_b` test.
AArch64 test changes all look good (`neg` created), or neutral.
X86 changes look neutral (vectors), or good (`neg` / `xor eax, eax` created).
I'm not sure about `X86/ragreedy-hoist-spill.ll`, it looks like the spill
is now hoisted into preheader (which should still be good?),
2 4-byte reloads become 1 8-byte reload, and are elsewhere,
but i'm not sure how that affects that loop.
I'm unable to interpret AMDGPU change, looks neutral-ish?
This is hopefully a step towards solving [[ https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41952 | PR41952 ]].
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/pkdq (we are missing more patterns, i'll submit them later)
This is a recommit, originally committed in rL361852, but reverted
to investigate test-suite compile-time hangs.
Reviewers: craig.topper, RKSimon, spatel, arsenm
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Subscribers: bjope, qcolombet, kzhuravl, jvesely, wdng, nhaehnle, yaxunl, javed.absar, dstuttard, tpr, t-tye, kristof.beyls, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62223
llvm-svn: 361871
Summary:
Direct sibling of D62223 patch.
While i don't have a direct motivational pattern for this,
it would seem to make sense to handle both patterns (or none),
for symmetry?
The aarch64 changes look neutral;
sparc and systemz look like improvement (one less instruction each);
x86 changes - 32bit case improves, 64bit case shows that LEA no longer
gets constructed, which may be because that whole test is `-mattr=+slow-lea,+slow-3ops-lea`
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/ffh
Reviewers: RKSimon, craig.topper, spatel, t.p.northover
Reviewed By: t.p.northover
Subscribers: t.p.northover, jyknight, javed.absar, kristof.beyls, fedor.sergeev, jrtc27, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62252
llvm-svn: 361853
Summary:
The main motivation is shown by all these `neg` instructions that are now created.
In particular, the `@reg32_lshr_by_negated_unfolded_sub_b` test.
AArch64 test changes all look good (`neg` created), or neutral.
X86 changes look neutral (vectors), or good (`neg` / `xor eax, eax` created).
I'm not sure about `X86/ragreedy-hoist-spill.ll`, it looks like the spill
is now hoisted into preheader (which should still be good?),
2 4-byte reloads become 1 8-byte reload, and are elsewhere,
but i'm not sure how that affects that loop.
I'm unable to interpret AMDGPU change, looks neutral-ish?
This is hopefully a step towards solving [[ https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41952 | PR41952 ]].
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/pkdq (we are missing more patterns, i'll submit them later)
Reviewers: craig.topper, RKSimon, spatel, arsenm
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Subscribers: bjope, qcolombet, kzhuravl, jvesely, wdng, nhaehnle, yaxunl, javed.absar, dstuttard, tpr, t-tye, kristof.beyls, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62223
llvm-svn: 361852
Meaning if we were to produce 'neg' in dagcombine, we will get an
endless cycle; some inverse transform would need to be guarded somehow.
Also, the 'and (sub 0, x), 31' variant is sticky,
doesn't get optimized in any way.
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41952
llvm-svn: 361254
Jay Foad