v3i16 and v3f16 currently cannot be legalized and lowered so they should
not be emitted by inst combining.
Moved the check down to still allow extracting 1 or 2 elements via the dmask.
Fixes image intrinsics being combined to return v3x16.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84223
Fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46680.
Just like insertions through IRBuilder, InsertNewInstBefore()
should be using the deferred worklist mechanism, so that processing
of newly added instructions is prioritized.
There's one side-effect of the worklist order change which could be
classified as a regression. An add op gets pushed through a select
that at the time is not a umax. We could add a reverse transform
that tries to push adds in the reverse direction to restore a min/max,
but that seems like a sure way of getting infinite loops... Seems
like something that should best wait on min/max intrinsics.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84109
This is the one i'm seeing as missed optimization,
although there are likely other possibilities, as usual.
There are 4 variants of a general sdiv->udiv fold:
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/VS6
Name: v0
Pre: C0 >= 0 && C1 >= 0
%r = sdiv i8 C0, C1
=>
%r = udiv i8 C0, C1
Name: v1
Pre: C0 <= 0 && C1 >= 0
%r = sdiv i8 C0, C1
=>
%t0 = udiv i8 -C0, C1
%r = sub i8 0, %t0
Name: v2
Pre: C0 >= 0 && C1 <= 0
%r = sdiv i8 C0, C1
=>
%t0 = udiv i8 C0, -C1
%r = sub i8 0, %t0
Name: v3
Pre: C0 <= 0 && C1 <= 0
%r = sdiv i8 C0, C1
=>
%r = udiv i8 -C0, -C1
If we really don't like sdiv (more than udiv that is),
and are okay with increasing instruction count (2 new negations),
and we ensure that we don't undo the fold,
then we could just implement these..
An additional test that allows to check the correctness of handling the case of the same
branch labels in the dominator when trying to replace select with phi-node.
Patch By: Kirill Polushin
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84006
Reviewed By: mkazantsev
This patch adds simplification for pattern:
```
if (cond)
/ \
... ...
\ /
p = phi [true] [false]
...
br p, succ_1, succ_2
```
If we can prove that top block's branches dominate respective
inputs of a block that has a Phi with constant inputs, we can
use the branch condition (maybe inverted) instead of Phi.
This will make proofs of implication for further jump threading
more transparent.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81375
Reviewed By: xbolva00
This reverts most of the following patches due to reports of miscompiles.
I've left the added test cases with comments updated to be FIXMEs.
1cf6f210a2 [IR] Disable select ? C : undef -> C fold in ConstantFoldSelectInstruction unless we know C isn't poison.
469da663f2 [InstSimplify] Re-enable select ?, undef, X -> X transform when X is provably not poison
122b0640fc [InstSimplify] Don't fold vectors of partial undef in SimplifySelectInst if the non-undef element value might produce poison
ac0af12ed2 [InstSimplify] Add test cases for opportunities to fold select ?, X, undef -> X when we can prove X isn't poison
9b1e95329a [InstSimplify] Remove select ?, undef, X -> X and select ?, X, undef -> X transforms
I'm not sure if the test is truly minimal, but we need to
induce a situation where a value becomes a constant but is
not immediately folded before getting to the 'or' transform.
We need to specify legal integer widths to trigger PR46712,
so add those here. This doesn't appear to affect any existing
tests, and it's not clear why a datalayout would not include
any legal integer widths.
While here, change some variable names that include 'tmp' to
avoid warnings from the auto-generating script for CHECK lines.
Summary:
NOTE: There is a mailing list discussion on this: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-December/137632.html
Complemantary to the assumption outliner prototype in D71692, this patch
shows how we could simplify the code emitted for an alignemnt
assumption. The generated code is smaller, less fragile, and it makes it
easier to recognize the additional use as a "assumption use".
As mentioned in D71692 and on the mailing list, we could adopt this
scheme, and similar schemes for other patterns, without adopting the
assumption outlining.
Reviewers: hfinkel, xbolva00, lebedev.ri, nikic, rjmccall, spatel, jdoerfert, sstefan1
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Subscribers: thopre, yamauchi, kuter, fhahn, merge_guards_bot, hiraditya, bollu, rkruppe, cfe-commits, llvm-commits
Tags: #clang, #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71739
Currently, a transformation like pow(2.0, x) -> exp2(x) copies the pow
attribute list verbatim and applies it to exp2. This works out fine
when the attribute list is empty, but when it isn't clang may error due
due to the mismatch.
The source function and destination don't necessarily have anything
to do with one another, attribute-wise. So it makes sense to remove
the attribute lists (this is similar to what IPO does in this
situation).
This was discovered after implementing the `noundef` param attribute.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82820
This reverts commit 9649c2095f. See
discussion on the llvm-commits thread: if it's OK to preserve the
location when sinking a call, it's probably OK to always preserve the
location.
We can try to replace select with a Phi not in its parent block alone,
but also in blocks of its arguments. We benefit from it when select's
argument is a Phi.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83284
Reviewed By: nikic
Similar to rG40fcc42:
The base case only worked because we were relying on a
poison-unsafe select transform; if that is fixed, we
would regress on patterns like this.
The extra use tests show that the select transform can't
be applied consistently. So it may be a regression to have
an extra instruction on 1 test, but that result was not
created safely and does not happen reliably.
We can happen to have a situation with many stores eligible for transform,
but due to our visitation order (top to bottom), when we have processed
the first eligible instruction, we would not try to reprocess the previous
instructions that are now also eligible.
So after we've successfully merged a store that was second-to-last instruction
into successor, if the now-second-to-last instruction is also a such store
that is eligible, add it to worklist to be revisited.
Fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46661
Assume bundle can have more than one entry with the same name,
but at least AlignmentFromAssumptionsPass::extractAlignmentInfo() uses
getOperandBundle("align"), which internally assumes that it isn't the
case, and happily crashes otherwise.
Minimal reduced reproducer: run `opt -alignment-from-assumptions` on
target datalayout = "e-m:e-p270:32:32-p271:32:32-p272:64:64-i64:64-f80:128-n8:16:32:64-S128"
target triple = "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu"
%0 = type { i64, %1*, i8*, i64, %2, i32, %3*, i8* }
%1 = type opaque
%2 = type { i8, i8, i16 }
%3 = type { i32, i32, i32, i32 }
; Function Attrs: nounwind
define i32 @f(%0* noalias nocapture readonly %arg, %0* noalias %arg1) local_unnamed_addr #0 {
bb:
call void @llvm.assume(i1 true) [ "align"(%0* %arg, i64 8), "align"(%0* %arg1, i64 8) ]
ret i32 0
}
; Function Attrs: nounwind willreturn
declare void @llvm.assume(i1) #1
attributes #0 = { nounwind "reciprocal-estimates"="none" }
attributes #1 = { nounwind willreturn }
This is what we'd have with -mllvm -enable-knowledge-retention
This reverts commit c95ffadb24.
As noted in PR46561:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46561
...it takes something beyond a minimal IR example to trigger
this bug because it relies on matching non-canonical IR.
There are no tests that show the need for matching this
pattern, so I'm just deleting it to fix the miscompile.
Summary:
The actual transform i was going after was:
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/Tp9H
```
Name: zz
Pre: isPowerOf2(C0) && isPowerOf2(C1) && C1 == C0
%t0 = and i8 %x, C0
%r = icmp eq i8 %t0, C1
=>
%t = icmp eq i8 %t0, 0
%r = xor i1 %t, -1
Name: zz
Pre: isPowerOf2(C0)
%t0 = and i8 %x, C0
%r = icmp ne i8 %t0, 0
=>
%t = icmp eq i8 %t0, 0
%r = xor i1 %t, -1
```
but as it can be seen from the current tests, we already canonicalize most of it,
and we are only missing handling multi-use non-canonical icmp predicates.
If we have both `!=0` and `==0`, even though we can CSE them,
we end up being stuck with them. We should canonicalize to the `==0`.
I believe this is one of the cleanup steps i'll need after `-scalarizer`
if i end up proceeding with my WIP alloca promotion helper pass.
Reviewers: spatel, jdoerfert, nikic
Reviewed By: nikic
Subscribers: zzheng, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83139
The use of 'tmp' can trigger warnings from the update_test_checks.py
script. That's evidence of a flaw in the script's logic, but we
can always do better than naming variables 'tmp' in LLVM too.
The phi test file should be updated with auto-generated regex CHECK
lines, so it isn't affected by cosmetic diffs, but I don't have
time to do that right now.
Narrowing an input expression of a truncate to a type larger than the
result of the truncate won't allow removing the truncate, but it may
enable further optimizations, e.g. allowing for larger vectorization
factors.
For now this is intentionally limited to integer types only, to avoid
producing new vector ops that might not be suitable for the target.
If we know that the only user is a trunc, we can also be allow more
cases, e.g. also shortening expressions with some additional shifts.
I would appreciate feedback on the best place to do such a narrowing.
This fixes PR43580.
Reviewers: spatel, RKSimon, lebedev.ri, xbolva00
Reviewed By: lebedev.ri
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82973
The base case only works because we are relying on a
poison-unsafe select transform; if that is fixed, we
would regress on patterns like this.
The extra use tests show that the select transform can't
be applied consistently. So it may be a regression to have
an extra instruction on 1 test, but that result was not
created safely and does not happen reliably.
Currently canEvaluateTruncated can only attempt to truncate shifts if they are scalar/uniform constant amounts that are in range.
This patch replaces the constant extraction code with KnownBits handling, using the KnownBits::getMaxValue to check that the amounts are inrange.
This enables support for nonuniform constant cases, and also variable shift amounts that have been masked somehow. Annoyingly, this still won't work for vectors with (demanded) undefs as KnownBits returns nothing in those cases, but its a definite improvement on what we currently have.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83127
Sebastian Neubauer