Patch showing the effect of enabling bool vector oversimplification.
Non-VLX builds can simplify a kshift shuffle, but VLX builds simplify:
insert_subvector v8i zeroinitializer, v2i --> insert_subvector v8i undef, v2i
Preventing the removal of the AND to clear the upper bits of result
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53022
llvm-svn: 369780
The patch introduces MakeLibCallOptions struct as suggested by @efriedma on D65497.
The struct contain argument flags which will pass to makeLibCall function.
The patch should not has any functionality changes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65795
llvm-svn: 369622
Summary:
The general fold is only valid for positive divisors.
Which effectively means, it is invalid for `INT_MIN` divisors,
and we currently bailout if we see them.
But that is too strict, we can just fix-up the results.
For that, let's do a second computation 'in parallel':
```
Name: srem -> and
Pre: isPowerOf2(C)
%o = srem i8 %X, C
%r = icmp eq %o, 0
=>
%n = and i8 %X, C-1
%r = icmp eq %n, 0
```
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/Sup
And then just blend results: if the divisor was `INT_MIN`,
pick the value we got via bit-test,
else pick the value from general fold.
There's interesting observation - `ISD::ROTR` is set to
`LegalizeAction::Expand` before AVX512, so we should not
treat `INT_MIN` divisor as even; and as it can be seen
while `@test_srem_odd_even_one` improves on all run-lines,
`@test_srem_odd_even_INT_MIN` only improves for AVX512.
Reviewers: RKSimon, craig.topper, spatel
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66300
llvm-svn: 369268
Summary:
This clang-tidy check is looking for unsigned integer variables whose initializer
starts with an implicit cast from llvm::Register and changes the type of the
variable to llvm::Register (dropping the llvm:: where possible).
Partial reverts in:
X86FrameLowering.cpp - Some functions return unsigned and arguably should be MCRegister
X86FixupLEAs.cpp - Some functions return unsigned and arguably should be MCRegister
X86FrameLowering.cpp - Some functions return unsigned and arguably should be MCRegister
HexagonBitSimplify.cpp - Function takes BitTracker::RegisterRef which appears to be unsigned&
MachineVerifier.cpp - Ambiguous operator==() given MCRegister and const Register
PPCFastISel.cpp - No Register::operator-=()
PeepholeOptimizer.cpp - TargetInstrInfo::optimizeLoadInstr() takes an unsigned&
MachineTraceMetrics.cpp - MachineTraceMetrics lacks a suitable constructor
Manual fixups in:
ARMFastISel.cpp - ARMEmitLoad() now takes a Register& instead of unsigned&
HexagonSplitDouble.cpp - Ternary operator was ambiguous between unsigned/Register
HexagonConstExtenders.cpp - Has a local class named Register, used llvm::Register instead of Register.
PPCFastISel.cpp - PPCEmitLoad() now takes a Register& instead of unsigned&
Depends on D65919
Reviewers: arsenm, bogner, craig.topper, RKSimon
Reviewed By: arsenm
Subscribers: RKSimon, craig.topper, lenary, aemerson, wuzish, jholewinski, MatzeB, qcolombet, dschuff, jyknight, dylanmckay, sdardis, nemanjai, jvesely, wdng, nhaehnle, sbc100, jgravelle-google, kristof.beyls, hiraditya, aheejin, kbarton, fedor.sergeev, javed.absar, asb, rbar, johnrusso, simoncook, apazos, sabuasal, niosHD, jrtc27, MaskRay, zzheng, edward-jones, atanasyan, rogfer01, MartinMosbeck, brucehoult, the_o, tpr, PkmX, jocewei, jsji, Petar.Avramovic, asbirlea, Jim, s.egerton, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65962
llvm-svn: 369041
Summary:
This implements an optimization described in Hacker's Delight 10-17:
when `C` is constant, the result of `X % C == 0` can be computed
more cheaply without actually calculating the remainder.
The motivation is discussed here: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35479.
One huge caveat: this signed case is only valid for positive divisors.
While we can freely negate negative divisors, we can't negate `INT_MIN`,
so for now if `INT_MIN` is encountered, we bailout.
As a follow-up, it should be possible to handle that more gracefully
via extra `and`+`setcc`+`select`.
This passes llvm's test-suite, and from cursory(!) cross-examination
the folds (the assembly) match those of GCC, and manual checking via alive
did not reveal any issues (other than the `INT_MIN` case)
Reviewers: RKSimon, spatel, hermord, craig.topper, xbolva00
Reviewed By: RKSimon, xbolva00
Subscribers: xbolva00, thakis, javed.absar, hiraditya, dexonsmith, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65366
llvm-svn: 368702
The comment initially matched the code, but the code was incorrect
and was fixed after the initial revert back back when it was introduced,
but the comment was never updated.
llvm-svn: 368701
This introduced a false positive MemorySanitizer warning about use of
uninitialized memory in a vectorized crc function in Chromium. That suggests
maybe something is not right with this transformation. See
https://crbug.com/992853#c7 for a reproducer.
This also reverts the follow-up commits r368307 and r368308 which
depended on this.
> This patch attempts to peek through vectors based on the demanded bits/elt of a particular ISD::EXTRACT_VECTOR_ELT node, allowing us to avoid dependencies on ops that have no impact on the extract.
>
> In particular this helps remove some unnecessary scalar->vector->scalar patterns.
>
> The wasm shift patterns are annoying - @tlively has indicated that the wasm vector shift codegen are to be refactored in the near-term and isn't considered a major issue.
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65887
llvm-svn: 368660
This patch attempts to peek through vectors based on the demanded bits/elt of a particular ISD::EXTRACT_VECTOR_ELT node, allowing us to avoid dependencies on ops that have no impact on the extract.
In particular this helps remove some unnecessary scalar->vector->scalar patterns.
The wasm shift patterns are annoying - @tlively has indicated that the wasm vector shift codegen are to be refactored in the near-term and isn't considered a major issue.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65887
llvm-svn: 368276
In particular this helps the SSE vector shift cvttps2dq+add+shl pattern by avoiding the need for zeros in shuffle style extensions to vXi32 types as we'll be shifting out those bits anyway
llvm-svn: 368155
https://reviews.llvm.org/D65698
This adds a KnownBits analysis pass for GISel. This was done as a
pass (compared to static functions) so that we can add other features
such as caching queries(within a pass and across passes) in the future.
This patch only adds the basic pass boiler plate, and implements a lazy
non caching knownbits implementation (ported from SelectionDAG). I've
also hooked up the AArch64PreLegalizerCombiner pass to use this - there
should be no compile time regression as the analysis is lazy.
llvm-svn: 368065
Summary:
The SimplifyDemandedVectorElts function can replace with undef
when no elements are demanded, but due to how it interacts with
TargetLoweringOpts, it can only do this when the node has
no other users.
Remove a now unneeded DAG combine from the X86 backend.
Reviewers: RKSimon, spatel
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65713
llvm-svn: 367788
This allows us to peek through BITCASTs, attempt to simplify the source operand, and then bitcast back.
This reapplies rL367091 which was reverted at rL367118 - we were inconsistently peeking through the bitcasts to the source value.
Fixes PR42777
llvm-svn: 367174
If anything called the recursive isKnownNeverNaN/computeKnownBits/ComputeNumSignBits/SimplifyDemandedBits/SimplifyMultipleUseDemandedBits with an incorrect depth then we could continue to recurse if we'd already exceeded the depth limit.
This replaces the limit check (Depth == 6) with a (Depth >= 6) to make sure that we don't circumvent it.
This causes a couple of regressions as a mixture of calls (SimplifyMultipleUseDemandedBits + combineX86ShufflesRecursively) were calling with depths that were already over the limit. I've fixed SimplifyMultipleUseDemandedBits to not do this. combineX86ShufflesRecursively is trickier as we get a lot of regressions if we reduce its own limit from 8 to 6 (it also starts at Depth == 1 instead of Depth == 0 like the others....) - I'll see what I can do in future patches.
llvm-svn: 367171
We're getting reports of massive compile time increases because SimplifyMultipleUseDemandedBits was losing track of the depth and not earlying-out. No repro yet, but consider this a pre-emptive commit.
llvm-svn: 367169
Summary:
This was originally reported in D62818.
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/oPH
InstCombine does the opposite fold, in hope that `C l>>/<< Y` expression
will be hoisted out of a loop if `Y` is invariant and `X` is not.
But as it is seen from the diffs here, if it didn't get hoisted,
the produced assembly is almost universally worse.
Much like with my recent "hoist add/sub by/from const" patches,
we should get almost universal win if we hoist constant,
there is almost always an "and/test by imm" instruction,
but "shift of imm" not so much, so we may avoid having to
materialize the immediate, and thus need one less register.
And since we now shift not by constant, but by something else,
the live-range of that something else may reduce.
Special care needs to be applied not to disturb x86 `BT` / hexagon `tstbit`
instruction pattern. And to not get into endless combine loop.
Reviewers: RKSimon, efriedma, t.p.northover, craig.topper, spatel, arsenm
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: hiraditya, MaskRay, wuzish, xbolva00, nikic, nemanjai, jvesely, wdng, nhaehnle, javed.absar, tpr, kristof.beyls, jsji, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62871
llvm-svn: 366955
If all the demanded elts are from one operand and are inline, then we can use the operand directly.
The changes are mainly from SSE41 targets which has blendvpd but not cmpgtq, allowing the v2i64 comparison to be simplified as we only need the signbit from alternate v4i32 elements.
llvm-svn: 366817
This patch introduces the DAG version of SimplifyMultipleUseDemandedBits, which attempts to peek through ops (mainly and/or/xor so far) that don't contribute to the demandedbits/elts of a node - which means we can do this even in cases where we have multiple uses of an op, which normally requires us to demanded all bits/elts. The intention is to remove a similar instruction - SelectionDAG::GetDemandedBits - once SimplifyMultipleUseDemandedBits has matured.
The InstCombine version of SimplifyMultipleUseDemandedBits can constant fold which I haven't added here yet, and so far I've only wired this up to some basic binops (and/or/xor/add/sub/mul) to demonstrate its use.
We do see a couple of regressions that need to be addressed:
AMDGPU unsigned dot product codegen retains an AND mask (for ZERO_EXTEND) that it previously removed (but otherwise the dotproduct codegen is a lot better).
X86/AVX2 has poor handling of vector ANY_EXTEND/ANY_EXTEND_VECTOR_INREG - it prematurely gets converted to ZERO_EXTEND_VECTOR_INREG.
The code owners have confirmed its ok for these cases to fixed up in future patches.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63281
llvm-svn: 366799
Summary:
Four things here:
1. Generalize the fold to handle non-splat divisors. Reasonably trivial.
2. Unban power-of-two divisors. I don't see any reason why they should
be illegal.
* There is no ban in Hacker's Delight
* I think the ban came from the same bug that caused the miscompile
in the base patch - in `floor((2^W - 1) / D)` we were dividing by
`D0` instead of `D`, and we **were** ensuring that `D0` is not `1`,
which made sense.
3. Unban `1` divisors. I no longer believe Hacker's Delight actually says
that the fold is invalid for `D = 0`. Further considerations:
* We know that
* `(X u% 1) == 0` can be constant-folded to `1`,
* `(X u% 1) != 0` can be constant-folded to `0`,
* Also, we know that
* `X u<= -1` can be constant-folded to `1`,
* `X u> -1` can be constant-folded to `0`,
* https://godbolt.org/z/7jnZJXhttps://rise4fun.com/Alive/oF6p
* We know will end up with the following:
`(setule/setugt (rotr (mul N, P), K), Q)`
* Therefore, for given new DAG nodes and comparison predicates
(`ule`/`ugt`), we will still produce the correct answer if:
`Q` is a all-ones constant; and both `P` and `K` are *anything*
other than `undef`.
* The fold will indeed produce `Q = all-ones`.
4. Try to re-splat the `P` and `K` vectors - we don't care about
their values for the lanes where divisor was `1`.
Reviewers: RKSimon, hermord, craig.topper, spatel, xbolva00
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Subscribers: hiraditya, javed.absar, dexonsmith, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63963
llvm-svn: 366637
If we have:
R = sub X, Y
P = cmp Y, X
...then flipping the operands in the compare instruction can allow using a subtract that sets compare flags.
Motivated by diffs in D58875 - not sure if this changes anything there,
but this seems like a good thing independent of that.
There's a more involved version of this transform already in IR (in instcombine
although that seems misplaced to me) - see "swapMayExposeCSEOpportunities()".
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63958
llvm-svn: 365711
Don't do this locally, computeKnownBits does this better (and can handle non-constant cases as well).
A next step would be to actually simplify non-constant elements - building on what we already do in SimplifyDemandedVectorElts.
llvm-svn: 365309
The SDAGBuilder behavior stems from the days when we didn't have fast
math flags available in SDAG. We do now and doing the transformation in
the legalizer has the advantage that it also works for vector types.
llvm-svn: 364743
Summary:
I'm submitting a new revision since i don't understand how to reclaim/reopen/take over the existing one, D50222.
There is no such action in "Add Action" menu...
This implements an optimization described in Hacker's Delight 10-17: when `C` is constant,
the result of `X % C == 0` can be computed more cheaply without actually calculating the remainder.
The motivation is discussed here: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35479.
This is a recommit, the original commit rL364563 was reverted in rL364568
because test-suite detected miscompile - the new comparison constant 'Q'
was being computed incorrectly (we divided by `D0` instead of `D`).
Original patch D50222 by @hermord (Dmytro Shynkevych)
Notes:
- In principle, it's possible to also handle the `X % C1 == C2` case, as discussed on bugzilla.
This seems to require an extra branch on overflow, so I refrained from implementing this for now.
- An explicit check for when the `REM` can be reduced to just its LHS is included:
the `X % C` == 0 optimization breaks `test1` in `test/CodeGen/X86/jump_sign.ll` otherwise.
I hadn't managed to find a better way to not generate worse output in this case.
- The `test/CodeGen/X86/jump_sign.ll` regresses, and is being fixed by a followup patch D63390.
Reviewers: RKSimon, craig.topper, spatel, hermord, xbolva00
Reviewed By: RKSimon, xbolva00
Subscribers: dexonsmith, kristina, xbolva00, javed.absar, llvm-commits, hermord
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63391
llvm-svn: 364600
Summary:
I'm submitting a new revision since i don't understand how to reclaim/reopen/take over the existing one, D50222.
There is no such action in "Add Action" menu...
Original patch D50222 by @hermord (Dmytro Shynkevych)
This implements an optimization described in Hacker's Delight 10-17: when `C` is constant,
the result of `X % C == 0` can be computed more cheaply without actually calculating the remainder.
The motivation is discussed here: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35479.
Original patch author: @hermord (Dmytro Shynkevych)!
Notes:
- In principle, it's possible to also handle the `X % C1 == C2` case, as discussed on bugzilla.
This seems to require an extra branch on overflow, so I refrained from implementing this for now.
- An explicit check for when the `REM` can be reduced to just its LHS is included:
the `X % C` == 0 optimization breaks `test1` in `test/CodeGen/X86/jump_sign.ll` otherwise.
I hadn't managed to find a better way to not generate worse output in this case.
- The `test/CodeGen/X86/jump_sign.ll` regresses, and is being fixed by a followup patch D63390.
Reviewers: RKSimon, craig.topper, spatel, hermord, xbolva00
Reviewed By: RKSimon, xbolva00
Subscribers: xbolva00, javed.absar, llvm-commits, hermord
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63391
llvm-svn: 364563
Change the generic ctpop expansion to more efficiently handle a
check for not-a-power-of-two value:
(ctpop x) != 1 --> (x == 0) || ((x & x-1) != 0)
This is the inverted predicate sibling pattern that was added with:
D63004
This should have been done before I changed IR canonicalization to
favor this form with:
rL364246
...so if this requires revert/changing, the earlier commit may also
need to modified.
llvm-svn: 364319
Simplify ZERO_EXTEND_VECTOR_INREG if the extended bits are not required.
Matches what we already do for ZERO_EXTEND.
Reapplies rL363850 but now with legality checks added at rL364290
llvm-svn: 364303
This should not cause any visible change in output, but it's
more efficient because we were producing non-canonical 'sub x, 1'
and 'setcc ugt x, 0'. As mentioned in the TODO, we should also
be handling the inverse predicate.
llvm-svn: 364302
Simplify SIGN_EXTEND_VECTOR_INREG if the extended bits are not required/known zero.
Matches what we already do for SIGN_EXTEND.
Reapplies rL363802 but now with legality checks added at rL364290
llvm-svn: 364299
As part of the fix for rL364264 + rL364272 - limit the *_EXTEND conversion to !TLO.LegalOperations || isOperationLegal cases.
We'll improve X86 legality in future commits.
llvm-svn: 364290
Summary:
This addresses the regression that is being exposed by D50222 in `test/CodeGen/X86/jump_sign.ll`
The missing fold, at least partially, looks trivial:
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/Zsln
i.e. if we are comparing with zero, and comparing the `urem`-by-non-power-of-two,
and the `urem` is of something that may at most have a single bit set (or no bits set at all),
the `urem` is not needed.
Reviewers: RKSimon, craig.topper, xbolva00, spatel
Reviewed By: xbolva00, spatel
Subscribers: xbolva00, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63390
llvm-svn: 364286
This reverts the following patches.
"[TargetLowering] SimplifyDemandedBits SIGN_EXTEND_VECTOR_INREG -> ANY/ZERO_EXTEND_VECTOR_INREG"
"[TargetLowering] SimplifyDemandedBits ZERO_EXTEND_VECTOR_INREG -> ANY_EXTEND_VECTOR_INREG"
"[TargetLowering] SimplifyDemandedBits - add ANY_EXTEND_VECTOR_INREG support"
We can end up with an any_extend_vector_inreg with a 256 bit result type
and a 128 bit result type. This is allowed by the ISD opcode, but the
generic operation legalizer is only able to expand cases where the
total vector width is the same.
The X86 backend creates these mismatched cases for zext_vec_inreg/sext_vec_inreg.
The SimplifyDemandedBits changes are allowing those nodes to become
aext_vec_inreg. For the zext/sext cases, the X86 backend has Custom
handling and never lets them get to the generic legalizer. We need to do the same
for aext_vec_inreg.
llvm-svn: 364264
Craig Topper