This broke the CodeGen/Hexagon/loop-idiom/pmpy-mod.ll test on a bunch of buildbots.
> This pulls shifts through a select+binop with a constant where the select conditionally executes the binop. We already do this for just the binop, but not with the select.
>
> This can allow us to get the select closer to other selects to enable removing one.
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39222
>
> git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@317510 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
llvm-svn: 317518
This pulls shifts through a select+binop with a constant where the select conditionally executes the binop. We already do this for just the binop, but not with the select.
This can allow us to get the select closer to other selects to enable removing one.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39222
llvm-svn: 317510
If a select instruction tests the returned flag of a cmpxchg instruction and
selects between the returned value of the cmpxchg instruction and its compare
operand, the result of the select will always be equal to its false value.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39383
llvm-svn: 316994
LLVM crashes when factoring out an out-of-bound index into preceding dimension
and the preceding dimension uses vector index. Simply bail out now when this
case happens.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38677
llvm-svn: 316824
Summary:
ValueTracking was recognizing not all variations of clamp. Swapping of
true value and false value of select was added to fix this problem. The
first patch was reverted because it caused miscompile in NVPTX target.
Added corresponding test cases.
Reviewers: spatel, majnemer, efriedma, reames
Subscribers: llvm-commits, jholewinski
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39240
llvm-svn: 316795
Summary:
Kill the thread if operand 0 == false.
llvm.amdgcn.wqm.vote can be applied to the operand.
Also allow kill in all shader stages.
Reviewers: arsenm, nhaehnle
Subscribers: kzhuravl, wdng, yaxunl, dstuttard, tpr, t-tye, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38544
llvm-svn: 316427
Summary:
It's unclear if this is the only thing we can do but at least this is consistent with the check
of address space agreement in `isBitCastable`.
The code is used at least in both instcombine and jumpthreading though
I could only find a way to trigger the invalid cast in instcombine.
Reviewers: loladiro, sanjoy, majnemer
Reviewed By: sanjoy
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34335
llvm-svn: 316302
Summary:
When we have the following case:
%cond = cmp iN %x, CmpConst
%tr = trunc iN %x to iK
%narrowsel = select i1 %cond, iK %t, iK C
We could possibly match only min/max pattern after looking through cast.
So it is more profitable if widened C constant will be equal CmpConst.
That is why just set widened C constant equal to CmpConst, because there
is a further check in this function that trunc CmpConst == C.
Also description for lookTroughCast function was added.
Reviewers: spatel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38536
Patch by: Artur Gainullin <artur.gainullin@intel.com>
llvm-svn: 316070
Summary:
ValueTracking was recognizing not all variations of clamp. Swapping of
true value and false value of select was added to fix this problem. This
change breaks the canonical form of cmp inside the matchMinMax function,
that is why additional checks for compare predicates is needed. Added
corresponding test cases.
Reviewers: spatel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38531
Patch by: Artur Gainullin <artur.gainullin@intel.com>
llvm-svn: 315992
Summary:
The following transformation for cmp instruction:
icmp smin(x, PositiveValue), 0 -> icmp x, 0
should only be done after checking for min/max to prevent infinite
looping caused by a reverse canonicalization. That is why this
transformation was moved to place after the mentioned check.
Reviewers: spatel, efriedma
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38934
Patch by: Artur Gainullin <artur.gainullin@intel.com>
llvm-svn: 315895
Eliminate inttype phi with inttoptr/ptrtoint.
This version fixed a bug in finding the matching
phi -- the order of the incoming blocks may be
different (triggered in self build on Windows).
A new test case is added.
llvm-svn: 315272
This appears to be miscompiling Clang, as shown on two Windows bootstrap
bots:
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-x86-windows-msvc2015/builds/7611http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-x64-ninja-win7/builds/6870
Nothing else is in the blame list. Both emit errors on this valid code
in the Windows ucrt headers:
C:\...\ucrt\malloc.h:95:32: error: invalid operands to binary expression ('char *' and 'int')
_Ptr = (char*)_Ptr + _ALLOCA_S_MARKER_SIZE;
~~~~~~~~~~~ ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am attempting to reproduce this now.
This reverts r315044
llvm-svn: 315108
We were using an i1 type and then zero extending to a vector. Instead just create the 0/1 directly as a ConstantInt with the correct type. No need to ask ConstantExpr to zero extend for us.
This bug is a bit tricky to hit because it requires us to visit a zext of an icmp that would normally be simplified to true/false, but that icmp hasnt' been visited yet. In the test case this zext and icmp were created by visiting a udiv and due to worklist ordering we got to the zext first.
Fixes PR34841.
llvm-svn: 314971
We can support ashr similar to lshr, if we know that none of the shifted in bits are used. In that case SimplifyDemandedBits would normally convert it to lshr. But that conversion doesn't happen if the shift has additional users.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38521
llvm-svn: 314945
We can likely remove most of these as redundant in the near future,
but I'm trying to make sure I don't introduce any regressions with D38514.
llvm-svn: 314907
Surprisingly, we have zero coverage for these patterns.
Many of these are handled in InstSimplify, but it's not obvious
what the rule for folding each case should be, so I've just
stamped out everything.
It should be possible to fold every case, but currently, we
miss these:
int ashr_slt(int x) {
return (x >> 1) < 1;
}
int ashr_sgt(int x) {
return (x >> 1) > 0;
}
https://godbolt.org/g/aB2hLE
llvm-svn: 314837
And follow-up r314585.
Leads to segfaults. I'll forward reproduction instructions to the patch
author.
Also, for a recommit, still add the original patch description.
Otherwise, it becomes really tedious to find out what a patch actually
does. The fact that it is a recommit with a fix is somewhat secondary.
llvm-svn: 314622
This patch will eliminate redundant intptr/ptrtoint that pessimizes
analyses such as SCEV, AA and will make optimization passes such
as auto-vectorization more powerful.
Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D37832
llvm-svn: 314561
These changes faciliate positive behavior for arithmetic based select
expressions that match its translation criteria, keeping code size gated to
neutral or improved scenarios.
Patch by Michael Berg <michael_c_berg@apple.com>!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38263
llvm-svn: 314320
If this transformation succeeds, we're going to remove our dependency on the shift by rewriting the and. So it doesn't matter how many uses the shift has.
This distributes the one use check to other transforms in foldICmpAndConstConst that do need it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38206
llvm-svn: 314233
Usually the frontend communicates the size of wchar_t via metadata and
we can optimize wcslen (and possibly other calls in the future). In
cases without the wchar_size metadata we would previously try to guess
the correct size based on the target triple; however this is fragile to
keep up to date and may miss users manually changing the size via flags.
Better be safe and stop guessing and optimizing if the frontend didn't
communicate the size.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38106
llvm-svn: 314185
The 1st attempt at this:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL314117
was reverted at:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL314118
because of bot fails for clang tests that were checking optimized IR. That should be fixed with:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL314144
...so try again.
Original commit message:
The transform to convert an extract-of-a-select-of-vectors was added at:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL194013
And a question about the validity of this transform was raised in the review:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D1539:
...but not answered AFAICT>
Most of the motivating cases in that patch are now handled by other combines. These are the tests that were added with
the original commit, but they are not regressing even after we remove the transform in this patch.
The diffs we see after removing this transform cause us to avoid increasing the instruction count, so we don't want to do
those transforms as canonicalizations.
The motivation for not turning a vector-select-of-vectors into a scalar operation is shown in PR33301:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33301
...in those cases, we'll get vector ops with this patch rather than the vector/scalar mix that we currently see.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38006
llvm-svn: 314147
The transform to convert an extract-of-a-select-of-vectors was added at:
rL194013
And a question about the validity of this transform was raised in the review:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D1539:
...but not answered AFAICT>
Most of the motivating cases in that patch are now handled by other combines. These are the tests that were added with
the original commit, but they are not regressing even after we remove the transform in this patch.
The diffs we see after removing this transform cause us to avoid increasing the instruction count, so we don't want to do
those transforms as canonicalizations.
The motivation for not turning a vector-select-of-vectors into a scalar operation is shown in PR33301:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33301
...in those cases, we'll get vector ops with this patch rather than the vector/scalar mix that we currently see.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38006
llvm-svn: 314117
We already did (X & C2) > C1 --> (X & C2) != 0, if any bit set in (X & C2) will produce a result greater than C1. But there is an equivalent inverse condition with <= C1 (which will be canonicalized to < C1+1)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38065
llvm-svn: 313819
In these cases, two selects have constant selectable operands for
both the true and false components and have the same conditional
expression.
We then create two arithmetic operations of the same type and feed a
final select operation using the result of the true arithmetic for the true
operand and the result of the false arithmetic for the false operand and reuse
the original conditionl expression.
The arithmetic operations are naturally folded as a consequence, leaving
only the newly formed select to replace the old arithmetic operation.
Patch by: Michael Berg <michael_c_berg@apple.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37019
llvm-svn: 313774
I've moved the test cases from the InstCombine optimizations to the backend to keep the coverage we had there. It covered every possible immediate so I've preserved the resulting shuffle mask for each of those immediates.
llvm-svn: 313450
As Eli pointed out (and I got wrong in the first place), langref says: "The
getelementptr returns a vector of pointers, instead of a single address, when one
or more of its arguments is a vector. In such cases, all vector arguments should
have the same number of elements, and every scalar argument will be effectively
broadcast into a vector during address calculation."
Costantfold for gep doesn't really take in account this paragraph, returning a
pointer instead of a vector of pointer which triggers an assertion in RAUW,
as we're trying to replace values with mistmatching types.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37928
llvm-svn: 313394
This should bring signed div/rem analysis up to the same level as unsigned.
We use icmp simplification to determine when the divisor is known greater than the dividend.
Each positive test is followed by a negative test to show that we're not overstepping the boundaries of the known bits.
There are extra tests for the signed-min-value special cases.
Alive proofs:
http://rise4fun.com/Alive/WI5
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37713
llvm-svn: 313264
Summary:
This should improve optimized debug info for address-taken variables at
the cost of inaccurate debug info in some situations.
We patched this into clang and deployed this change to Chromium
developers, and this significantly improved debuggability of optimized
code. The long-term solution to PR34136 seems more and more like it's
going to take a while, so I would like to commit this change under a
flag so that it can be used as a stop-gap measure.
This flag should really help so for C++ aggregates like std::string and
std::vector, which are typically address-taken, even after inlining, and
cannot be SROA-ed.
Reviewers: aprantl, dblaikie, probinson, dberlin
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36596
llvm-svn: 313108
It now knows the tricks of both functions.
Also, fix a bug that considered allocas of non-zero address space to be always non null
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37628
llvm-svn: 312869
This is a preliminary step towards solving the remaining part of PR27145 - IR for isfinite():
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27145
In order to solve that one more generally, we need to add matching for and/or of fcmp ord/uno
with a constant operand.
But while looking at those patterns, I realized we were missing a canonicalization for nonzero
constants. Rather than limiting to just folds for constants, we're adding a general value
tracking method for this based on an existing DAG helper.
By transforming everything to 0.0, we can simplify the existing code in foldLogicOfFCmps()
and pick up missing vector folds.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37427
llvm-svn: 312591
This is possible if C1 and C2 are both powers of 2. Or if binop is 'and' then ~C2 needs to be a power of 2.
We already support this for 'or', but we should be able to support 'and' and 'xor'. This will be enhanced by D37274.
llvm-svn: 312519
This patch teaches decomposeBitTestICmp to look through truncate instructions on the input to the compare. If a truncate is found it will now return the pre-truncated Value and appropriately extend the APInt mask.
This allows some code to be removed from InstSimplify that was doing this functionality.
This allows InstCombine's bit test combining code to match a pre-truncate Value with the same Value appear with an 'and' on another icmp. Or it allows us to combine a truncate to i16 and a truncate to i8. This also required removing the type check from the beginning of getMaskedTypeForICmpPair, but I believe that's ok because we still have to find two values from the input to each icmp that are equal before we'll do any transformation. So the type check was really just serving as an early out.
There was one user of decomposeBitTestICmp that didn't want to look through truncates, so I've added a flag to prevent that behavior when necessary.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37158
llvm-svn: 312382
Recurse instead of returning on the first found optimization. Also, return early in the caller
instead of continuing because that allows another round of simplification before we might
potentially lose undef information from a shuffle mask by eliminating the shuffle.
As noted in the review, we could probably do better and be more efficient by moving all of
demanded elements into a separate pass, but this is yet another quick fix to instcombine.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37236
llvm-svn: 312248
See D37236 for discussion. It seems unlikely that we actually want/need
to do this kind of folding in InstCombine in the long run, but moving
everything will be a bigger follow-up step.
llvm-svn: 312172
Summary:
If the first insertelement instruction has multiple users and inserts at
position 0, we can re-use this instruction when folding a chain of
insertelement instructions. As we need to generate the first
insertelement instruction anyways, this should be a strict improvement.
We could get rid of the restriction of inserting at position 0 by
creating a different shufflemask, but it is probably worth to keep the
first insertelement instruction with position 0, as this is easier to do
efficiently than at other positions I think.
Reviewers: grosser, mkuper, fpetrogalli, efriedma
Reviewed By: fpetrogalli
Subscribers: gareevroman, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37064
llvm-svn: 312110
This patch adds splat support to transformZExtICmp. The test cases are vector versions of tests that failed when commenting out parts of the existing scalar code.
One test didn't vectorize optimize properly due to another bug so a TODO has been added.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37253
llvm-svn: 312023
This was pretty close to working already. While I was here I went ahead and passed the ICmpInst pointer from the caller instead of doing a dyn_cast that can never fail.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37237
llvm-svn: 311960
We were handling some vectors in foldSelectIntoOp, but not if the operand of the bin op was any kind of vector constant. This patch fixes it to treat vector splats the same as scalars.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37232
llvm-svn: 311940
There are cases where AShr have better chance to be optimized than LShr, especially when the demanded bits are not known to be Zero, and also known to be similar to the sign bit.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36936
llvm-svn: 311773
There are 3 small independent changes here:
1. Account for multiple uses in the pattern matching: avoid the transform if it increases the instruction count.
2. Add a missing fold for the case where the numerator is the constant: http://rise4fun.com/Alive/E2p
3. Enable all folds for vector types.
There's still one more potential change - use "shouldChangeType()" to keep from transforming to an illegal integer type.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36988
llvm-svn: 311726
Summary:
Most DIExpressions are empty or very simple. When they are complex, they
tend to be unique, so checking them inline is reasonable.
This also avoids the need for CodeGen passes to append to the
llvm.dbg.mir named md node.
See also PR22780, for making DIExpression not be an MDNode.
Reviewers: aprantl, dexonsmith, dblaikie
Subscribers: qcolombet, javed.absar, eraman, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37075
llvm-svn: 311594
InstCombine folds instructions with irrelevant conditions to undef.
This, as Nuno confirmed is a bug.
(see https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33409#c1 )
Given the original motivation for the change is that of removing an
USE, we now fold to false instead (which reaches the same goal
without undesired side effects).
Fixes PR33409.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36975
llvm-svn: 311540
Looks like for 'and' and 'or' we end up performing at least some of the transformations this is bocking in a round about way anyway.
For 'and sext(cmp1), sext(cmp2) we end up later turning it into 'select cmp1, sext(cmp2), 0'. Then we optimize that back to sext (and cmp1, cmp2). This is the same result we would have gotten if shouldOptimizeCast hadn't blocked it. We do something analogous for 'or'.
With this patch we allow that transformation to happen directly in foldCastedBitwiseLogic. And we now support the same thing for 'xor'. This is definitely opening up many other cases, but since we already went around it for some cases hopefully it's ok.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36213
llvm-svn: 311508
The 1st try was reverted because it could inf-loop by creating a dead instruction.
Fixed that to not happen and added a test case to verify.
Original commit message:
Try to fold:
memcmp(X, C, ConstantLength) == 0 --> load X == *C
Without this change, we're unnecessarily checking the alignment of the constant data,
so we miss the transform in the first 2 tests in the patch.
I noted this shortcoming of LibCallSimpifier in one of the recent CGP memcmp expansion
patches. This doesn't help the example in:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34032#c13
...directly, but it's worth short-circuiting more of these simple cases since we're
already trying to do that.
The benefit of transforming to load+cmp is that existing IR analysis/transforms may
further simplify that code. For example, if the load of the variable is common to
multiple memcmp calls, CSE can remove the duplicate instructions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36922
llvm-svn: 311366
This is similar to what was already done in foldSelectICmpAndOr. Ultimately I'd like to see if we can call foldSelectICmpAnd from foldSelectIntoOp if we detect a power of 2 constant. This would allow us to remove foldSelectICmpAndOr entirely.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36498
llvm-svn: 311362
This is the baseline (current) version of the tests that would
have been added with the transform in r311333 (reverted at
r311340 due to inf-looping).
Adding these now to aid in testing and minimize the patch if/when
it is reinstated.
llvm-svn: 311350
Summary:
If the bitsToClear from the LHS of an 'and' comes back non-zero, but all of those bits are known zero on the RHS, we can reset bitsToClear.
Without this, the 'or' in the modified test case blocks the transform because it has non-zero bits in its RHS in those bits.
Reviewers: spatel, majnemer, davide
Reviewed By: davide
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36944
llvm-svn: 311343
Try to fold:
memcmp(X, C, ConstantLength) == 0 --> load X == *C
Without this change, we're unnecessarily checking the alignment of the constant data,
so we miss the transform in the first 2 tests in the patch.
I noted this shortcoming of LibCallSimpifier in one of the recent CGP memcmp expansion
patches. This doesn't help the example in:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34032#c13
...directly, but it's worth short-circuiting more of these simple cases since we're
already trying to do that.
The benefit of transforming to load+cmp is that existing IR analysis/transforms may
further simplify that code. For example, if the load of the variable is common to
multiple memcmp calls, CSE can remove the duplicate instructions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36922
llvm-svn: 311333
We were only allowing ConstantInt before. This patch allows splat of ConstantInt too.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36763
llvm-svn: 310970
Narrow ops are better for bit-tracking, and in the case of vectors,
may enable better codegen.
As the trunc test shows, this can allow follow-on simplifications.
There's a block of code in visitTrunc that deals with shifted ops
with FIXME comments. It may be possible to remove some of that now,
but I want to make sure there are no problems with this step first.
http://rise4fun.com/Alive/Y3a
Name: hoist_ashr_ahead_of_sext_1
%s = sext i8 %x to i32
%r = ashr i32 %s, 3 ; shift value is < than source bit width
=>
%a = ashr i8 %x, 3
%r = sext i8 %a to i32
Name: hoist_ashr_ahead_of_sext_2
%s = sext i8 %x to i32
%r = ashr i32 %s, 8 ; shift value is >= than source bit width
=>
%a = ashr i8 %x, 7 ; so clamp this shift value
%r = sext i8 %a to i32
Name: junc_the_trunc
%a = sext i16 %v to i32
%s = ashr i32 %a, 18
%t = trunc i32 %s to i16
=>
%t = ashr i16 %v, 15
llvm-svn: 310942
This also corrects the description to match what was actually implemented. The old comment said X^(C1|C2), but it implemented X^((C1|C2)&~(C1&C2)). I believe ((C1|C2)&~(C1&C2)) is equivalent to (C1^C2).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36505
llvm-svn: 310658
We used to try to truncate the constant vector to vXi1, but if it's already i1 this would fail. Instead we now use IRBuilder::getZExtOrTrunc which should check the type and only create a trunc if needed. I believe this should trigger constant folding in the IRBuilder and ultimately do the same thing just with the additional type check.
llvm-svn: 310639
Current behavior is to transform these independently of the datalayout.
There's a proposal to change this in D35035:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D35035
llvm-svn: 310611
I couldn't find any smaller folds to help the cases in:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34046
after:
rL310141
The truncated rotate-by-variable patterns elude all of the existing transforms because
of multiple uses and knowledge about demanded bits and knownbits that doesn't exist
without the whole pattern. So we need an unfortunately large pattern match. But by
simplifying this pattern in IR, the backend is already able to generate
rolb/rolw/rorb/rorw for x86 using its existing rotate matching logic (although
there is a likely extraneous 'and' of the rotate amount).
Note that rotate-by-constant doesn't have this problem - smaller folds should already
produce the narrow IR ops.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36395
llvm-svn: 310509
We already support pulling through an add with constant RHS. We can do the same for subtract.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36443
llvm-svn: 310407
Note the original code I deleted incorrectly listed this as (X | C1) & C2 --> (X & C2^(C1&C2)) | C1 Which is only valid if C1 is a subset of C2. This relied on SimplifyDemandedBits to remove any extra bits from C1 before we got to that code.
My new implementation avoids relying on that behavior so that it can be naively verified with alive.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36384
llvm-svn: 310272
Unfortunately, it looks like there's some other missed optimizations in the generated code for some of these cases. I'll try to look at some of those next.
llvm-svn: 310184
Previously we were always trying to emit the zext or truncate before any shift. This meant if the 'and' mask was larger than the size of the truncate we would skip the transformation.
Now we shift the result of the and right first leaving the bit within the range of the truncate.
This matches what we are doing in foldSelectICmpAndOr for the same problem.
llvm-svn: 310159
Summary:
The (not (sext)) case is really (xor (sext), -1) which should have been simplified to (sext (xor, 1)) before we got here. So we shouldn't need to handle it.
With that taken care of we only need to two cases so don't need the swap anymore. This makes us in sync with the equivalent code in visitOr so inline this to match.
Reviewers: spatel, eli.friedman, majnemer
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36240
llvm-svn: 310063
Name: narrow_shift
Pre: C1 < 8
%zx = zext i8 %x to i32
%l = lshr i32 %zx, C1
=>
%narrowC = trunc i32 C1 to i8
%ns = lshr i8 %x, %narrowC
%l = zext i8 %ns to i32
http://rise4fun.com/Alive/jIV
This isn't directly applicable to PR34046 as written, but we
need to have more narrowing folds like this to be sure that
rotate patterns are recognized.
llvm-svn: 310060
Summary:
This commit allows matchSelectPattern to recognize clamp of float
arguments in the presence of FMF the same way as already done for
integers.
This case is a little different though. With integers, given the
min/max pattern is recognized, DAGBuilder starts selecting MIN/MAX
"automatically". That is not the case for float, because for them only
full FMINNAN/FMINNUM/FMAXNAN/FMAXNUM ISD nodes exist and they do care
about NaNs. On the other hand, some backends (e.g. X86) have only
FMIN/FMAX nodes that do not care about NaNS and the former NAN/NUM
nodes are illegal thus selection is not happening. So I decided to do
such kind of transformation in IR (InstCombiner) instead of
complicating the logic in the backend.
Reviewers: spatel, jmolloy, majnemer, efriedma, craig.topper
Reviewed By: efriedma
Subscribers: hiraditya, javed.absar, n.bozhenov, llvm-commits
Patch by Andrei Elovikov <andrei.elovikov@intel.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33186
llvm-svn: 310054
Summary:
- add more tests
- pr27236.ll: rename %tmpN -> %N because otherwise a FileCheck
variable for newly appeared unnamed value would use the same name as
tmpN (as generated by update_test_checks.py)
- run update_test_checks.py
Reviewers: efriedma
Reviewed By: efriedma
Subscribers: n.bozhenov, llvm-commits
Patch by Andrei Elovikov <andrei.elovikov@intel.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35002
llvm-svn: 310053
This adds support for sext in foldLogicCastConstant. This is a prerequisite for D36214.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36234
llvm-svn: 309880
When the 'and' test was originally added it was intended to make sure we didn't change it to a sext of and of cmp. But since then the test was changed to expect it to be turned into 'select cmp1, sext cmp2, 0'. Then another optimization was added to turn the select into 'sext (and cmp1, cmp2)' which is exactly the transformation that was being blocked when the test case started.
Looks like 'or' gets optimized in a similar way, but not 'xor'.
llvm-svn: 309793
This intrinsic clears the upper bits starting at a specified index. If the index is a constant we can do some simplifications.
This could be in InstSimplify, but we don't handle any target specific intrinsics there today.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36069
llvm-svn: 309604
This patch adds simplification support for the BEXTR/BEXTRI intrinsics to match gcc. This only supports cases that fold to 0 or can be fully constant folded. Theoretically we could support converting to AND if the shift part is unused or to only a shift if the mask doesn't modify any bits after an equivalent shl. gcc doesn't do these transformations either.
I put this in InstCombine, but it could be done in InstSimplify. It would be the first target specific intrinsic in InstSimplify.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36063
llvm-svn: 309603
There is no situation where this rarely-used argument cannot be
substituted with a DIExpression and removing it allows us to simplify
the DWARF backend. Note that this patch does not yet remove any of
the newly dead code.
rdar://problem/33580047
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35951
llvm-svn: 309426
Summary:
Pointer difference simplifications currently happen only if input GEPs don't have other uses or their indexes are all constants, to avoid duplicating indexing arithmetic.
This patch enables cases with exactly one non-constant index among input GEPs to happen where there is no duplicated arithmetic or code size increase even if input GEPs have other uses.
For example, this patch allows "(&A[42][i]-&A[42][0])" --> "i", which didn't happen previously, if the input GEP(s) have other uses.
Reviewers: sanjoy, bkramer
Reviewed By: sanjoy
Subscribers: mcrosier, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35499
llvm-svn: 309304
Summary:
Add canary tests to verify that InstCombine currently does nothing with the element atomic memory intrinsics for memmove and memset.
Placeholder tests that will fail once element atomic @llvm.mem[move|set] instrinsics have been added to the MemIntrinsic class hierarchy. These will act as a reminder to verify that inst combine handles these intrinsics properly once they have been added to that class hierarchy.
Reviewers: reames
Reviewed By: reames
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35502
llvm-svn: 308247
Summary:
If one side simplifies to the identity value for inner opcode, we can replace the value with just the operation that can't be simplified.
I've removed a couple now unneeded special cases in visitAnd and visitOr. There are probably other cases I missed.
Reviewers: spatel, majnemer, hfinkel, dberlin
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: grandinj, llvm-commits, spatel
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35451
llvm-svn: 308111
This fold hit the trifecta:
1. It was untested.
2. It oversteps (multiuse is not checked, so increases instruction count).
3. It is incomplete (doesn't work for vectors).
llvm-svn: 308102
OpenCL 2.0 introduces the notion of memory scopes in atomic operations to
global and local memory. These scopes restrict how synchronization is
achieved, which can result in improved performance.
This change extends existing notion of synchronization scopes in LLVM to
support arbitrary scopes expressed as target-specific strings, in addition to
the already defined scopes (single thread, system).
The LLVM IR and MIR syntax for expressing synchronization scopes has changed
to use *syncscope("<scope>")*, where <scope> can be "singlethread" (this
replaces *singlethread* keyword), or a target-specific name. As before, if
the scope is not specified, it defaults to CrossThread/System scope.
Implementation details:
- Mapping from synchronization scope name/string to synchronization scope id
is stored in LLVM context;
- CrossThread/System and SingleThread scopes are pre-defined to efficiently
check for known scopes without comparing strings;
- Synchronization scope names are stored in SYNC_SCOPE_NAMES_BLOCK in
the bitcode.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D21723
llvm-svn: 307722
Prior to this commit both of the added test cases were passing. However, in the
latter case (test7) we were doing a lot more work to arrive at the same answer
(i.e., we were using isImpliedCondMatchingOperands() to determine the
implication.).
llvm-svn: 307400
This patch adds support for handling some forms of ands and ors in
ValueTracking's isImpliedCondition API.
PR33611
https://reviews.llvm.org/D34901
llvm-svn: 307304
Bswap isn't a simple operation so we need to make sure we are really removing a call to it before doing these simplifications.
For the case when both LHS and RHS are bswaps I've allowed it to be moved if either LHS or RHS has a single use since that at least allows us to move it later where it might find another bswap to combine with and it decreases the use count on the other side so maybe the other user can be optimized.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34974
llvm-svn: 307273
We assumed the constant was a scalar when creating the replacement operand.
Also, improve tests for this fold and move the tests for this fold to their own file.
I'll move the related and missing tests to this file as a follow-up.
llvm-svn: 306985
I noticed this missed bswap optimization in the CGP memcmp() expansion,
and then I saw that we don't have the fold in InstCombine.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34763
llvm-svn: 306980
Summary:
I came across this while thinking about what would happen if one of the operands in this xor pattern was itself a inverted (A & ~B) ^ (~A & B)-> (A^B).
The patterns here assume that the (~a | ~b) will be demorganed to ~(a & b) first. Though I wonder if there's a multiple use case that would prevent the demorgan.
Reviewers: spatel
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34870
llvm-svn: 306967
There are two conditions ORed here with similar checks and each contain two matches that must be true for the if to succeed. With the commutable match on the first half of the OR then both ifs basically have the same first part and only the second part distinguishs. With this change we move the commutable match to second half and make the first half unique.
This caused some tests to change because we now produce a commuted result, but this shouldn't matter in practice.
llvm-svn: 306800
Summary:
The original intent of test/Transforms/InstCombine/memset.ll was to test for lowering of llvm.memset into stores when the size of the memset is 1, 2, 4, or 8. Sometime between then and now the test has stopped testing for that, but remained passing due to testing for the absence of llvm.memset calls rather than the presence of store instructions. Right now this test ends up with an empty function body because the alloca is eliminated as safe-to-remove, which results in the llvm.memset calls's being eliminated due to their pointer args being undef; so it is not testing for conversion of llvm.memset into store instructions at all.
This change alters the test to verify that store instructions are created, and moves the target of the memset to an arg of the proc to avoid it being eliminated as unused.
Reviewers: anna, efriedma
Reviewed By: efriedma
Subscribers: efriedma, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34642
llvm-svn: 306681
Summary:
Rather than testing for expected results, test/Transforms/InstCombine/memmove.ll is testing for the absence of calls to llvm.memmove.
In the case of test3, the test has stopped testing for materialization of loads/stores, but remained passing due to testing for the absence of llvm.memset calls rather than the presence of load/store instructions. Right now this test ends up with an empty function body because the alloca is eliminated as safe-to-remove, which results in the llvm.memmove calls being eliminated due to a pointer arg being undef; so it is not testing for conversion of llvm.memmove into load/store instructions at all.
Reviewers: eli.friedman, anna, efriedma
Reviewed By: efriedma
Subscribers: efriedma, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34645
llvm-svn: 306679
Summary:
As discussed on the mailing list it is legal to propagate TBAA to loads/stores
from/to smaller regions of a larger load tagged with TBAA. Do so for
(load->extractvalue)=>(gep->load) and similar foldings.
Reviewed By: sanjoy
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31954
llvm-svn: 306615
I think we only need to make sure the value fits in 64-bits not that bit width is 64-bit.
This helps places that use this for shift amounts since the shift amount needs to be the same bitwidth as the LHS, but can't be larger than the bit width.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34737
llvm-svn: 306577
Summary:
This commit allows matchSelectPattern to recognize clamp of float
arguments in the presence of FMF the same way as already done for
integers.
This case is a little different though. With integers, given the
min/max pattern is recognized, DAGBuilder starts selecting MIN/MAX
"automatically". That is not the case for float, because for them only
full FMINNAN/FMINNUM/FMAXNAN/FMAXNUM ISD nodes exist and they do care
about NaNs. On the other hand, some backends (e.g. X86) have only
FMIN/FMAX nodes that do not care about NaNS and the former NAN/NUM
nodes are illegal thus selection is not happening. So I decided to do
such kind of transformation in IR (InstCombiner) instead of
complicating the logic in the backend.
Reviewers: spatel, jmolloy, majnemer, efriedma, craig.topper
Reviewed By: efriedma
Subscribers: hiraditya, javed.absar, n.bozhenov, llvm-commits
Patch by Andrei Elovikov <andrei.elovikov@intel.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33186
llvm-svn: 306525
Summary:
This commit adds the tests for clamp pattern as a prerequisite of
D33186 to make the impact of that fix more clear and also to document
current behavior.
Reviewers: spatel, jmolloy
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: n.bozhenov, llvm-commits
Patch by Andrei Elovikov <andrei.elovikov@intel.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34350
llvm-svn: 306524
The check to see if we can propagate the nsw flag used m_ConstantInt(uint64_t*&) which doesn't work with splat vectors and has a restriction that the bitwidth of the ConstantInt must be 64-bits are less.
This patch changes it to use m_APInt to remove both these issues
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34699
llvm-svn: 306457
This canonicalization was suggested in D33172 as a way to make InstCombine behavior more uniform.
We have this transform for icmp+br, so unless there's some reason that icmp+select should be
treated differently, we should do the same thing here.
The benefit comes from increasing the chances of creating identical instructions. This is shown in
the tests in logical-select.ll (PR32791). InstCombine doesn't fold those directly, but EarlyCSE
can simplify the identical cmps, and then InstCombine can fold the selects together.
The possible regression for the tests in select.ll raises questions about poison/undef:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-May/113261.html
...but that transform is just as likely to be triggered by this canonicalization as it is to be
missed, so we're just pointing out a commutation deficiency in the pattern matching:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL228409
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34242
llvm-svn: 306435
Not sure why this restriction existed, but it seems like we should support any size Constant here.
The particular pattern in the tests is not the only use of this matcher in the tree. There's one in CodeGenPrepare and one in InstSimplify as well.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34666
llvm-svn: 306417
http://rise4fun.com/Alive/i8Q
A narrow bitwise logic op is obviously better than math for value tracking,
and zext is better than sext. Typically, the 'not' will be folded into an
icmp predicate.
The IR difference would even survive through codegen for x86, so we would see
worse code:
https://godbolt.org/g/C14HMF
one_or_zero(int, int): # @one_or_zero(int, int)
xorl %eax, %eax
cmpl %esi, %edi
setle %al
retq
one_or_zero_alt(int, int): # @one_or_zero_alt(int, int)
xorl %ecx, %ecx
cmpl %esi, %edi
setg %cl
movl $1, %eax
subl %ecx, %eax
retq
llvm-svn: 306243
Summary:
InstCombine replaces large allocas with small globals consts causing buffer overflows
on valid code, see PR33372.
This fix permits this optimization only if the global is dereference for alloca size.
Fixes PR33372
Reviewers: eugenis, majnemer, chandlerc
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34311
llvm-svn: 306194
Summary:
Many languages have a three way comparison idiom where comparing two values
produces not a boolean, but a tri-state value. Typical values (e.g. as used in
the lcmp/fcmp bytecodes from Java) are -1 for less than, 0 for equality, and +1
for greater than.
We actually do a great job already of converting three way comparisons into
binary comparisons when the result produced has one a single use. Unfortunately,
such values can have more than one use, and in that case, our existing
optimizations break down.
The patch adds a peephole which converts a three-way compare + test idiom into a
binary comparison on the original inputs. It focused on replacing the test on
the result of the three way compare and does nothing about removing the three
way compare itself. That's left to other optimizations (which do actually kick
in commonly.)
We currently recognize one idiom on signed integer compare. In the future, we
plan to recognize and simplify other comparison idioms on
other signed/unsigned datatypes such as floats, vectors etc.
This is a resurrection of Philip Reames' original patch:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D19452
Reviewers: majnemer, apilipenko, reames, sanjoy, mkazantsev
Reviewed by: mkazantsev
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34278
llvm-svn: 306100
Summary:
InstCombine likes to turn (icmp eq (and X, C1), 0) into (icmp slt (trunc (X)), 0) sometimes. This breaks foldSelectICmpAndOr's ability to recognize (select (icmp eq (and X, C1), 0), Y, (or Y, C2))->(or (shl (and X, C1), C3), y).
This patch tries to recover this. I had to flip around some of the early out checks so that I could create a new And instruction during the compare processing without it possibly never getting used.
Reviewers: spatel, majnemer, davide
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34184
llvm-svn: 306029
If the components of the and/or had multiple uses, this transform created an additional instruction.
This patch makes sure we remove one of the components.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34498
llvm-svn: 306027
There are 2 parts to this patch made simultaneously to avoid a regression.
We're reversing the canonicalization that moves bitwise vector ops before bitcasts.
We're moving bitwise vector ops *after* bitcasts instead. That's the 1st and 3rd hunks
of the patch. The motivation is that there's only one fold that currently depends on
the existing canonicalization (see next), but there are many folds that would
automatically benefit from the new canonicalization.
PR33138 ( https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33138 ) shows why/how we have these
patterns in IR.
There's an or(and,andn) pattern that requires an adjustment in order to continue matching
to 'select' because the bitcast changes position. This match is unfortunately complicated
because it requires 4 logic ops with optional bitcast and sext ops.
Test diffs:
1. The bitcast.ll and bitcast-bigendian.ll changes show the most basic difference -
bitcast comes before logic.
2. There are also tests with no diffs in bitcast.ll that verify that we're still doing
folds that were enabled by the previous canonicalization.
3. icmp-xor-signbit.ll shows the payoff. We don't need to adjust existing icmp patterns
to look through bitcasts.
4. logical-select.ll contains several tests for the or(and,andn) --> select fold to
verify that we are still handling those cases. The lone diff shows the movement of
the bitcast from the new canonicalization rule.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33517
llvm-svn: 306011
Summary:
I noticed that passing known bits across these intrinsics isn't great at capturing the information we really know. Turning known bits of the input into known bits of a count output isn't able to convey a lot of what we really know.
This patch adds range metadata to these intrinsics based on the known bits.
Currently the patch punts if we already have range metadata present.
Reviewers: spatel, RKSimon, davide, majnemer
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Subscribers: sanjoy, hfinkel, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32582
llvm-svn: 305927
Summary:
Previously this folding had no checks to see if it was going to result in less instructions. This was pointed out during the review of D34184
This patch adds code to count how many instructions its going to create vs how many its going to remove so we can make a proper decision.
Reviewers: spatel, majnemer
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34437
llvm-svn: 305926
We have a large portfolio of folds for and-of-icmps and or-of-icmps in InstSimplify and InstCombine,
but hardly anything for xor-of-icmps. Rather than trying to rethink and translate all of those folds,
we can use the truth table definition of xor:
X ^ Y --> (X | Y) & !(X & Y)
...to see if we can convert the xor to and/or and then use the existing folds.
http://rise4fun.com/Alive/J9v
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33342
llvm-svn: 305792
Hans Wennborg