This patch fixes a bug in method InstCombiner::FoldCmpCstShrCst where we
wrongly computed the distance between the highest bits set of two negative
values.
This fixes PR21222.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5700
llvm-svn: 219406
The icmp-select-icmp optimization targets select-icmp.eq
only. This is now ensured by testing the branch predicate
explictly. This commit also includes the test case for pr21199.
llvm-svn: 219282
Takes care of the assert that caused build fails.
Rather than asserting the code checks now that the definition
and use are in the same block, and does not attempt
to optimize when that is not the case.
llvm-svn: 219175
The icmp-select-icmp optimization made the implicit assumption
that the select-icmp instructions are in the same block and asserted on it.
The fix explicitly checks for that condition and conservatively suppresses
the optimization when it is violated.
llvm-svn: 218735
In special cases select instructions can be eliminated by
replacing them with a cheaper bitwise operation even when the
select result is used outside its home block. The instances implemented
are patterns like
%x=icmp.eq
%y=select %x,%r, null
%z=icmp.eq|neq %y, null
br %z,true, false
==> %x=icmp.ne
%y=icmp.eq %r,null
%z=or %x,%y
br %z,true,false
The optimization is integrated into the instruction
combiner and performed only when all uses of the select result can
be replaced by the select operand proper. For this dominator information
is used and dominance is now a required analysis pass in the combiner.
The optimization itself is iterative. The critical step is to replace the
select result with the non-constant select operand. So the select becomes
local and the combiner iteratively works out simpler code pattern and
eventually eliminates the select.
rdar://17853760
llvm-svn: 218721
Example:
define i1 @foo(i32 %a) {
%shr = ashr i32 -9, %a
%cmp = icmp ne i32 %shr, -5
ret i1 %cmp
}
Before this fix, the instruction combiner wrongly thought that %shr
could have never been equal to -5. Therefore, %cmp was always folded to 'true'.
However, when %a is equal to 1, then %cmp evaluates to 'false'. Therefore,
in this example, it is not valid to fold %cmp to 'true'.
The problem was only affecting the case where the comparison was between
negative quantities where one of the quantities was obtained from arithmetic
shift of a negative constant.
This patch fixes the problem with the wrong folding (fixes PR20945).
With this patch, the 'icmp' from the example is now simplified to a
comparison between %a and 1. This still allows us to get rid of the arithmetic
shift (%shr).
llvm-svn: 217950
This change, which allows @llvm.assume to be used from within computeKnownBits
(and other associated functions in ValueTracking), adds some (optional)
parameters to computeKnownBits and friends. These functions now (optionally)
take a "context" instruction pointer, an AssumptionTracker pointer, and also a
DomTree pointer, and most of the changes are just to pass this new information
when it is easily available from InstSimplify, InstCombine, etc.
As explained below, the significant conceptual change is that known properties
of a value might depend on the control-flow location of the use (because we
care that the @llvm.assume dominates the use because assumptions have
control-flow dependencies). This means that, when we ask if bits are known in a
value, we might get different answers for different uses.
The significant changes are all in ValueTracking. Two main changes: First, as
with the rest of the code, new parameters need to be passed around. To make
this easier, I grouped them into a structure, and I made internal static
versions of the relevant functions that take this structure as a parameter. The
new code does as you might expect, it looks for @llvm.assume calls that make
use of the value we're trying to learn something about (often indirectly),
attempts to pattern match that expression, and uses the result if successful.
By making use of the AssumptionTracker, the process of finding @llvm.assume
calls is not expensive.
Part of the structure being passed around inside ValueTracking is a set of
already-considered @llvm.assume calls. This is to prevent a query using, for
example, the assume(a == b), to recurse on itself. The context and DT params
are used to find applicable assumptions. An assumption needs to dominate the
context instruction, or come after it deterministically. In this latter case we
only handle the specific case where both the assumption and the context
instruction are in the same block, and we need to exclude assumptions from
being used to simplify their own ephemeral values (those which contribute only
to the assumption) because otherwise the assumption would prove its feeding
comparison trivial and would be removed.
This commit adds the plumbing and the logic for a simple masked-bit propagation
(just enough to write a regression test). Future commits add more patterns
(and, correspondingly, more regression tests).
llvm-svn: 217342
InstSimplify already handles icmp (X+Y), X (and things like it)
appropriately. The first thing that InstCombine does is run
InstSimplify on the instruction.
llvm-svn: 216659
Several combines involving icmp (shl C2, %X) C1 can be simplified
without introducing any new instructions. Move them to InstSimplify;
while we are at it, make them more powerful.
llvm-svn: 216642
CFE, with -03, would turn:
bool f(unsigned x) {
bool a = x & 1;
bool b = x & 2;
return a | b;
}
into:
%1 = lshr i32 %x, 1
%2 = or i32 %1, %x
%3 = and i32 %2, 1
%4 = icmp ne i32 %3, 0
This sort of thing exposes a nasty pathology in GCC, ICC and LLVM.
Instead, we would rather want:
%1 = and i32 %x, 3
%2 = icmp ne i32 %1, 0
Things get a bit more interesting in the following case:
%1 = lshr i32 %x, %y
%2 = or i32 %1, %x
%3 = and i32 %2, 1
%4 = icmp ne i32 %3, 0
Replacing it with the following sequence is better:
%1 = shl nuw i32 1, %y
%2 = or i32 %1, 1
%3 = and i32 %2, %x
%4 = icmp ne i32 %3, 0
This sequence is preferable because %1 doesn't involve %x and could
potentially be hoisted out of loops if it is invariant; only perform
this transform in the non-constant case if we know we won't increase
register pressure.
llvm-svn: 216343
It handles the errors which were seen in PR19958 where wrong code was being emitted due to earlier patch.
Added code for lshr as well as non-exact right shifts.
It implements :
(icmp eq/ne (ashr/lshr const2, A), const1)" ->
(icmp eq/ne A, Log2(const2/const1)) ->
(icmp eq/ne A, Log2(const2) - Log2(const1))
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4068
llvm-svn: 213678
The messages were
"PR19753: Optimize comparisons with "ashr exact" of a constanst."
"Added support to optimize comparisons with "lshr exact" of a constant."
They were not correctly handling signed/unsigned operation differences,
causing pr19958.
llvm-svn: 210393
Summary:
This gets rid of a sub instruction by moving the negation to the
constant when valid.
Reviewers: nicholas
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D3773
llvm-svn: 208827
definition below all of the header #include lines, lib/Transforms/...
edition.
This one is tricky for two reasons. We again have a couple of passes
that define something else before the includes as well. I've sunk their
name macros with the DEBUG_TYPE.
Also, InstCombine contains headers that need DEBUG_TYPE, so now those
headers #define and #undef DEBUG_TYPE around their code, leaving them
well formed modular headers. Fixing these headers was a large motivation
for all of these changes, as "leaky" macros of this form are hard on the
modules implementation.
llvm-svn: 206844
header files and into the cpp files.
These files will require more touches as the header files actually use
DEBUG(). Eventually, I'll have to introduce a matched #define and #undef
of DEBUG_TYPE for the header files, but that comes as step N of many to
clean all of this up.
llvm-svn: 206777
If multiplication involves zero-extended arguments and the result is
compared as in the patterns:
%mul32 = trunc i64 %mul64 to i32
%zext = zext i32 %mul32 to i64
%overflow = icmp ne i64 %mul64, %zext
or
%overflow = icmp ugt i64 %mul64 , 0xffffffff
then the multiplication may be replaced by call to umul.with.overflow.
This change fixes PR4917 and PR4918.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2814
llvm-svn: 206137
This reverts commit r204912, and follow-up commit r204948.
This introduced a performance regression, and the fix is not completely
clear yet.
llvm-svn: 205010
Fixes a miscompile introduced in r204912. It would miscompile code like
(unsigned)(a + -49) <= 5U. The transform would turn this into
(unsigned)a < 55U, which would return true for values in [0, 49], when
it should not.
llvm-svn: 204948
This requires a number of steps.
1) Move value_use_iterator into the Value class as an implementation
detail
2) Change it to actually be a *Use* iterator rather than a *User*
iterator.
3) Add an adaptor which is a User iterator that always looks through the
Use to the User.
4) Wrap these in Value::use_iterator and Value::user_iterator typedefs.
5) Add the range adaptors as Value::uses() and Value::users().
6) Update *all* of the callers to correctly distinguish between whether
they wanted a use_iterator (and to explicitly dig out the User when
needed), or a user_iterator which makes the Use itself totally
opaque.
Because #6 requires churning essentially everything that walked the
Use-Def chains, I went ahead and added all of the range adaptors and
switched them to range-based loops where appropriate. Also because the
renaming requires at least churning every line of code, it didn't make
any sense to split these up into multiple commits -- all of which would
touch all of the same lies of code.
The result is still not quite optimal. The Value::use_iterator is a nice
regular iterator, but Value::user_iterator is an iterator over User*s
rather than over the User objects themselves. As a consequence, it fits
a bit awkwardly into the range-based world and it has the weird
extra-dereferencing 'operator->' that so many of our iterators have.
I think this could be fixed by providing something which transforms
a range of T&s into a range of T*s, but that *can* be separated into
another patch, and it isn't yet 100% clear whether this is the right
move.
However, this change gets us most of the benefit and cleans up
a substantial amount of code around Use and User. =]
llvm-svn: 203364
a bit surprising, as the class is almost entirely abstracted away from
any particular IR, however it encodes the comparsion predicates which
mutate ranges as ICmp predicate codes. This is reasonable as they're
used for both instructions and constants. Thus, it belongs in the IR
library with instructions and constants.
llvm-svn: 202838
name might indicate, it is an iterator over the types in an instruction
in the IR.... You see where this is going.
Another step of modularizing the support library.
llvm-svn: 202815
I am really sorry for the noise, but the current state where some parts of the
code use TD (from the old name: TargetData) and other parts use DL makes it
hard to write a patch that changes where those variables come from and how
they are passed along.
llvm-svn: 201827
logical operations on the i1's driving them. This is a bad idea for every
target I can think of (confirmed with micro tests on all of: x86-64, ARM,
AArch64, Mips, and PowerPC) because it forces the i1 to be materialized into
a general purpose register, whereas consuming it directly into a select generally
allows it to exist only transiently in a predicate or flags register.
Chandler ran a set of performance tests with this change, and reported no
measurable change on x86-64.
llvm-svn: 201275
This change fixes the case of arithmetic shift right - do not attempt to fold that case.
This change also relaxes the conditions when attempting to fold the logical shift right and shift left cases.
No additional IR-level test cases included at this time. See http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=17827 for proofs that these are correct transformations.
llvm-svn: 197705
Andrea Di Biagio