A patch by Chakshu Grover!
This patch allows constfolding of trunc,rint,nearbyint,ceil and floor intrinsics using APFloat class.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11144
llvm-svn: 242763
This change does a few things:
- Move some InstCombine transforms to InstSimplify
- Run SimplifyCall from within InstCombine::visitCallInst
- Teach InstSimplify to fold [us]mul_with_overflow(X, undef) to 0.
llvm-svn: 237995
This patch teaches the Instruction Combiner how to fold a cttz/ctlz followed by
a icmp plus select into a single cttz/ctlz with flag 'is_zero_undef' cleared.
Added test InstCombine/select-cmp-cttz-ctlz.ll.
llvm-svn: 227197
Some intrinsics, like s/uadd.with.overflow and umul.with.overflow, are already strength reduced.
This change adds other arithmetic intrinsics: s/usub.with.overflow, smul.with.overflow.
It completes the work on PR20194.
llvm-svn: 224417
This update was done with the following bash script:
find test/Transforms -name "*.ll" | \
while read NAME; do
echo "$NAME"
if ! grep -q "^; *RUN: *llc" $NAME; then
TEMP=`mktemp -t temp`
cp $NAME $TEMP
sed -n "s/^define [^@]*@\([A-Za-z0-9_]*\)(.*$/\1/p" < $NAME | \
while read FUNC; do
sed -i '' "s/;\(.*\)\([A-Za-z0-9_]*\):\( *\)@$FUNC\([( ]*\)\$/;\1\2-LABEL:\3@$FUNC(/g" $TEMP
done
mv $TEMP $NAME
fi
done
llvm-svn: 186268
We use constant folding to see if an intrinsic evaluates to the same value as a
constant that we know. If we don't take the undefinedness into account we get a
value that doesn't match the actual implementation, and miscompiled code.
This was uncovered by Chandler's simplifycfg changes.
llvm-svn: 173356
I followed three heuristics for deciding whether to set 'true' or
'false':
- Everything target independent got 'true' as that is the expected
common output of the GCC builtins.
- If the target arch only has one way of implementing this operation,
set the flag in the way that exercises the most of codegen. For most
architectures this is also the likely path from a GCC builtin, with
'true' being set. It will (eventually) require lowering away that
difference, and then lowering to the architecture's operation.
- Otherwise, set the flag differently dependending on which target
operation should be tested.
Let me know if anyone has any issue with this pattern or would like
specific tests of another form. This should allow the x86 codegen to
just iteratively improve as I teach the backend how to differentiate
between the two forms, and everything else should remain exactly the
same.
llvm-svn: 146370
of the instruction.
Note that this change affects the existing non-atomic load and store
instructions; the parser now accepts both forms, and the change is noted
in the release notes.
llvm-svn: 137527
This happens a lot in clang-compiled C++ code because it adds overflow checks to operator new[]:
unsigned *foo(unsigned n) { return new unsigned[n]; }
We can optimize away the overflow check on 64 bit targets because (uint64_t)n*4 cannot overflow.
llvm-svn: 127418
Amaury Sechet