Now that SimplifyDemandedBits/SimplifyDemandedVectorElts is simplifying vector elements, we're seeing more constant BUILD_VECTOR containing undefs.
This patch provides opt-in support for UNDEF elements in matchBinaryPredicate, passing NULL instead of the result ConstantSDNode* argument.
I've updated the (or (and X, c1), c2) -> (and (or X, c2), c1|c2) fold to demonstrate its use, which I believe is safe for undef cases.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55822
llvm-svn: 349629
Now that SimplifyDemandedBits/SimplifyDemandedVectorElts is simplifying vector elements, we're seeing more constant BUILD_VECTOR containing undefs.
This patch provides opt-in support for UNDEF elements in matchBinaryPredicate, passing NULL instead of the result ConstantSDNode* argument.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55822
llvm-svn: 349628
As described on PR40091, we have several places where zext (and zext_vector_inreg) fold an undef input into an undef output. For zero extensions this is incorrect as the output should guarantee to least have the new upper bits set to zero.
SimplifyDemandedVectorElts is the worst offender (and its the most likely to cause new undefs to appear) but DAGCombiner's tryToFoldExtendOfConstant has a similar issue.
Thanks to @dmgreen for catching this.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55883
llvm-svn: 349625
Now that SimplifyDemandedBits/SimplifyDemandedVectorElts are simplifying vector elements, we're seeing more constant BUILD_VECTOR containing UNDEFs.
This patch provides opt-in handling of UNDEF elements in matchUnaryPredicate, passing NULL instead of the ConstantSDNode* argument.
I've updated SelectionDAG::simplifyShift to demonstrate its use.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55819
llvm-svn: 349616
SelectionDAG currently changes these intrinsics to function calls, but that won't work
for other ISel's. Also we want to eventually support nonlazybind and weak linkage coming
from the front-end which we can't do in SelectionDAG.
llvm-svn: 349552
For opcodes not covered by SimplifyDemandedVectorElts, SimplifyDemandedBits might be able to help now that it supports demanded elts as well.
llvm-svn: 349466
The assertion type is always supposed to be a scalar type. So if the result VT of the assertion is a vector, we need to get the scalar VT before we can compare them.
Similarly for the assert above it.
I don't have a test case because I don't know of any place we violate this today. A coworker found this while trying to use r347287 on the 6.0 branch without also having r336868
llvm-svn: 349390
This is an initial patch to add the necessary support for a DemandedElts argument to SimplifyDemandedBits, more closely matching computeKnownBits and to help improve vector codegen.
I've added only a small amount of the changes necessary to get at least one test to update - a lot more can be done but I'd like to add these methodically with proper test coverage, at the same time the hope is to slowly move some/all of SimplifyDemandedVectorElts into SimplifyDemandedBits as well.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55768
llvm-svn: 349374
We keep a few iterators into the basic block we're selecting while
performing FastISel. Usually this is fine, but occasionally code wants
to remove already-emitted instructions. When this happens we have to be
careful to update those iterators so they're not pointint at dangling
memory.
llvm-svn: 349365
The transform performs a bitwise logic op in a wider type followed by
truncate when both inputs are truncated from the same source type:
logic_op (truncate x), (truncate y) --> truncate (logic_op x, y)
There are a bunch of other checks that should prevent doing this when
it might be harmful.
We already do this transform for scalars in this spot. The vector
limitation was shared with a check for the case when the operands are
extended. I'm not sure if that limit is needed either, but that would
be a separate patch.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55448
llvm-svn: 349303
Also exposes an issue in DAGCombiner::visitFunnelShift where we were assuming the shift amount had the result type (after legalization it'll have the targets shift amount type).
llvm-svn: 349298
Summary:
If the setcc already has the target desired type we can reach the getSetCC/getSExtOrTrunc after the MatchingVecType check with the exact same types as the nodes we started with. This causes those causes VsetCC to be CSEd to N0 and the getSExtOrTrunc will CSE to N. When we return N, the caller will think that meant we called CombineTo and did our own worklist management. But that's not what happened. This prevents target hooks from being called for the node.
To fix this, I've now returned SDValue if the setcc is already the desired type. But to avoid some regressions in X86 I've had to disable one of the target combines that wasn't being reached before in the case of a (sext (setcc)). If we get vector widening legalization enabled that entire function will be deleted anyway so hopefully this is only for the short term.
Reviewers: RKSimon, spatel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55459
llvm-svn: 349137
This isn't quite NFC, but I don't know how to expose
any outward diffs from these changes. Mostly, this
was confusing because it used 'VT' to refer to the
operand type rather the usual type of the input node.
There's also a large block at the end that is dedicated
solely to matching loads, but that wasn't obvious. This
could probably be split up into separate functions to
make it easier to see.
It's still not clear to me when we make certain transforms
because the legality and constant conditions are
intertwined in a way that might be improved.
llvm-svn: 349095
This is a retry of rL349051 (reverted at rL349056). I changed the check for dead-ness from
number of uses to an opcode test for DELETED_NODE based on existing similar code.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55655
llvm-svn: 349058
Move existing rotation expansion code into TargetLowering and set it up for vectors as well.
Ideally this would share more of the funnel shift expansion, but we handle the shift amount modulo quite differently at the moment.
Begun removing x86 vector rotate custom lowering to use the expansion.
llvm-svn: 349025
Summary:
All targets either just return false here or properly model `Fast`, so I
don't think there is any reason to prevent CodeGen from doing the right
thing here.
Subscribers: nemanjai, javed.absar, eraman, jsji, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55365
llvm-svn: 349016
This patch introduces a generic function to determine whether a given vector type is known to be a splat value for the specified demanded elements, recursing up the DAG looking for BUILD_VECTOR or VECTOR_SHUFFLE splat patterns.
It also keeps track of the elements that are known to be UNDEF - it returns true if all the demanded elements are UNDEF (as this may be useful under some circumstances), so this needs to be handled by the caller.
A wrapper variant is also provided that doesn't take the DemandedElts or UndefElts arguments for cases where we just want to know if the SDValue is a splat or not (with/without UNDEFS).
I had hoped to completely remove the X86 local version of this function, but I'm seeing some regressions in shift/rotate codegen that will take a little longer to fix and I hope to get this in sooner so I can continue work on PR38243 which needs more capable splat detection.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55426
llvm-svn: 348953
If either of the operand elements are zero then we know the result element is going to be zero (even if the other element is undef).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55558
llvm-svn: 348926
Add an intrinsic that takes 2 signed integers with the scale of them provided
as the third argument and performs fixed point multiplication on them.
This is a part of implementing fixed point arithmetic in clang where some of
the more complex operations will be implemented as intrinsics.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54719
llvm-svn: 348912
Summary:
All targets either just return false here or properly model `Fast`, so I
don't think there is any reason to prevent CodeGen from doing the right
thing here.
Subscribers: nemanjai, javed.absar, eraman, jsji, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55365
llvm-svn: 348843
If all the demanded elements of the SimplifyDemandedVectorElts are known to be UNDEF, we can simplify to an ISD::UNDEF node.
Zero constant folding will be handled in a future patch - its a little trickier as we often have bitcasted zero values.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55511
llvm-svn: 348784
As discussed on D55511, this caused an issue if the inner node deletes a node that the outer node depends upon. As it doesn't affect any lit-tests and I've only been able to expose this with the D55511 change I'm committing this now.
llvm-svn: 348781
This triggers an assert when combining concat_vectors of a bitcast of
merge_values.
With asserts disabled, it fails to select:
fatal error: error in backend: Cannot select: 0x7ff19d000e90: i32 = any_extend 0x7ff19d000ae8
0x7ff19d000ae8: f64,ch = CopyFromReg 0x7ff19d000c20:1, Register:f64 %1
0x7ff19d000b50: f64 = Register %1
In function: d
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55507
llvm-svn: 348759
Currently, dbg.value's of "nullptr" are dropped when entering a SelectionDAG --
apparently just because of an oversight when recognising Values that are
constant (see PR39787). This patch adds ConstantPointerNull to the list of
constants that can be turned into DBG_VALUEs.
The matter of what bit-value a null pointer constant in LLVM has was raised
in this mailing list thread:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-December/128234.html
Where it transpires LLVM relies on (IR) null pointers being zero valued,
thus I've baked this assumption into the patch.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55227
llvm-svn: 348753
This is a fix for PR39896, where dbg.value's of SDNodes that have been
optimised out do not lead to "DBG_VALUE undef" instructions being created.
Such undef instructions are necessary to terminate earlier variable
ranges, otherwise variable values leak past the point where they're valid.
The "invalidated" flag of SDDbgValue is currently being abused to mean two
things:
* The corresponding SDNode is now invalid
* This SDDbgValue should not be emitted
Of which there are several legitimate combinations of meaning:
* The SDNode has been invalidated and we should emit "DBG_VALUE undef"
* The SDNode has been invalidated but the debug data was salvaged, don't
emit anything for this SDDbgValue
* This SDDbgValue has been emitted
This patch introduces distinct "Emitted" and "Invalidated" fields to the
SDDbgValue class, updates users accordingly, and generates "undef"
DBG_VALUEs for invalidated records. Awkwardly, there are circumstances
where we emit SDDbgValue's twice, specifically DebugInfo/X86/dbg-addr-dse.ll
which I've preserved.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55372
llvm-svn: 348751
This is effectively re-committing the changes from:
rL347917 (D54640)
rL348195 (D55126)
...which were effectively reverted here:
rL348604
...because the code had a bug that could induce infinite looping
or eventual out-of-memory compilation.
The bug was that this code did not guard against transforming
opaque constants. More details are in the post-commit mailing
list thread for r347917. A reduced test for that is included
in the x86 bool-math.ll file. (I wasn't able to reduce a PPC
backend test for this, but it was almost the same pattern.)
Original commit message for r347917:
The motivating case for this is shown in:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32023
and the corresponding rot16.ll regression tests.
Because x86 scalar shift amounts are i8 values, we can end up with trunc-binop-trunc
sequences that don't get folded in IR.
As the TODO comments suggest, there will be regressions if we extend this (for x86,
we mostly seem to be missing LEA opportunities, but there are likely vector folds
missing too). I think those should be considered existing bugs because this is the
same transform that we do as an IR canonicalization in instcombine. We just need
more tests to make those visible independent of this patch.
llvm-svn: 348706
These nodes should have two results. A real VT and a Glue. But this code would have returned Undef which would only be a single result. But we're in the single result version of getNode so these opcodes should never be seen by this function anyway.
llvm-svn: 348670
As discussed in the post-commit thread of r347917, this
transform is fighting with an existing transform causing
an infinite loop or out-of-memory, so this is effectively
reverting r347917 and its follow-up r348195 while we
investigate the bug.
llvm-svn: 348604
If this is not a valid way to assign an SDLoc, then we get this
wrong all over SDAG.
I don't know enough about the SDAG to explain this. IIUC, theoretically,
debug info is not supposed to affect codegen. But here it has clearly
affected 3 different targets, and the x86 change is an actual improvement.
llvm-svn: 348552
We shouldn't care about the debug location for a node that
we're creating, but attaching the root of the pattern should
be the best effort. (If this is not true, then we are doing
it wrong all over the SDAG).
This is no-functional-change-intended, and there are no
regression test diffs...and that's what I expected. But
there's a similar line above this diff, where those
assumptions apparently do not hold.
llvm-svn: 348550
This was probably organized as it was because bswap is a unary op.
But that's where the similarity to the other opcodes ends. We should
not limit this transform to scalars, and we should not try it if
either input has other uses. This is another step towards trying to
clean this whole function up to prevent it from causing infinite loops
and memory explosions.
Earlier commits in this series:
rL348501
rL348508
rL348518
llvm-svn: 348534
Unlike some of the folds in hoistLogicOpWithSameOpcodeHands()
above this shuffle transform, this has the expected hasOneUse()
checks in place.
llvm-svn: 348523
This patch introduces a new DAGCombiner rule to simplify concat_vectors nodes:
concat_vectors( bitcast (scalar_to_vector %A), UNDEF)
--> bitcast (scalar_to_vector %A)
This patch only partially addresses PR39257. In particular, it is enough to fix
one of the two problematic cases mentioned in PR39257. However, it is not enough
to fix the original test case posted by Craig; that particular case would
probably require a more complicated approach (and knowledge about used bits).
Before this patch, we used to generate the following code for function PR39257
(-mtriple=x86_64 , -mattr=+avx):
vmovsd (%rdi), %xmm0 # xmm0 = mem[0],zero
vxorps %xmm1, %xmm1, %xmm1
vblendps $3, %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm0 # xmm0 = xmm0[0,1],xmm1[2,3]
vmovaps %ymm0, (%rsi)
vzeroupper
retq
Now we generate this:
vmovsd (%rdi), %xmm0 # xmm0 = mem[0],zero
vmovaps %ymm0, (%rsi)
vzeroupper
retq
As a side note: that VZEROUPPER is completely redundant...
I guess the vzeroupper insertion pass doesn't realize that the definition of
%xmm0 from vmovsd is already zeroing the upper half of %ymm0. Note that on
%-mcpu=btver2, we don't get that vzeroupper because pass vzeroupper insertion
%pass is disabled.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55274
llvm-svn: 348522
The PPC test with 2 extra uses seems clearly better by avoiding this transform.
With 1 extra use, we also prevent an extra register move (although that might
be an RA problem). The general rule should be to only make a change here if
it is always profitable. The x86 diffs are all neutral.
llvm-svn: 348518
The AVX512 diffs are neutral, but the bswap test shows a clear overreach in
hoistLogicOpWithSameOpcodeHands(). If we don't check for other uses, we can
increase the instruction count.
This could also fight with transforms trying to go in the opposite direction
and possibly blow up/infinite loop. This might be enough to solve the bug
noted here:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20181203/608593.html
I did not add the hasOneUse() checks to all opcodes because I see a perf
regression for at least one opcode. We may decide that's irrelevant in the
face of potential compiler crashing, but I'll see if I can salvage that first.
llvm-svn: 348508
Simon Pilgrim