Some Include What You Use suggestions were used too.
Use anonymous namespaces in source files.
Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18778
llvm-svn: 265454
Useful utility function; this wasn't too hard to do before, but also wasn't
obviously discoverable. Make it explicit. Reviewed offline by Michael
Gottesman.
llvm-svn: 253254
Because mod is always exact, this function should have never taken a rounding mode argument. The actual implementation still has issues, which I'll look at resolving in a subsequent patch.
llvm-svn: 248195
Summary: Adds accessor functions for all the fields in llvm::fltSemantics. This will be used in MergeFunctions to order two APFloats with different semanatics.
Author: jrkoenig
Reviewers: jfb
Subscribers: dschuff, llvm-commits
Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12253
llvm-svn: 245999
The newly added function returns the size of the specified floating
point semantics in bits.
Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D8413
llvm-svn: 241793
The patch is generated using this command:
tools/clang/tools/extra/clang-tidy/tool/run-clang-tidy.py -fix \
-checks=-*,llvm-namespace-comment -header-filter='llvm/.*|clang/.*' \
llvm/lib/
Thanks to Eugene Kosov for the original patch!
llvm-svn: 240137
Simplify boolean expressions using `true` and `false` with `clang-tidy`
Patch by Richard Thomson - I dropped the parens and != 0 test, for
consistency with other patches/tests like this, but I'm open to the
notion that we should add the explicit non-zero test in all these sort
of cases (non-bool assigned to a bool).
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D8526
llvm-svn: 233004
This patch adds a check for underflow when truncating results back to lower
precision at the end of an FMA. The additional sign handling logic in
APFloat::fusedMultiplyAdd should only be performed when the result of the
addition step of the FMA (in full precision) is exactly zero, not when the
result underflows to zero.
Unit tests for this case and related signed zero FMA results are included.
Fixes <rdar://problem/18925551>.
llvm-svn: 225123
As detailed at http://llvm.org/PR20728, due to an internal overflow in
APFloat::multiplySignificand the APFloat::fusedMultiplyAdd method can return
incorrect results for x87DoubleExtended (x86_fp80) values. This commonly
manifests as incorrect constant folding of libm fmal calls on x86. E.g.
fmal(1.0L, 1.0L, 3.0L) == 0.0L (should be 4.0L)
This patch fixes PR20728 by adding an extra bit to the significand for
intermediate results of APFloat::multiplySignificand, avoiding the overflow.
llvm-svn: 222374
Reapply r216913, a fix for PR20832 by Andrea Di Biagio. The commit was reverted
because of buildbot failures, and credit goes to Ulrich Weigand for isolating
the underlying issue (which can be confirmed by Valgrind, which does helpfully
light up like the fourth of July). Uli explained the problem with the original
patch as:
It seems the problem is calling multiplySignificand with an addend of category
fcZero; that is not expected by this routine. Note that for fcZero, the
significand parts are simply uninitialized, but the code in (or rather, called
from) multiplySignificand will unconditionally access them -- in effect using
uninitialized contents.
This version avoids using a category == fcZero addend within
multiplySignificand, which avoids this problem (the Valgrind output is also now
clean).
Original commit message:
[APFloat] Fixed a bug in method 'fusedMultiplyAdd'.
When folding a fused multiply-add builtin call, make sure that we propagate the
correct result in the case where the addend is zero, and the two other operands
are finite non-zero.
Example:
define double @test() {
%1 = call double @llvm.fma.f64(double 7.0, double 8.0, double 0.0)
ret double %1
}
Before this patch, the instruction simplifier wrongly folded the builtin call
in function @test to constant 'double 7.0'.
With this patch, method 'fusedMultiplyAdd' correctly evaluates the multiply and
propagates the expected result (i.e. 56.0).
Added test fold-builtin-fma.ll with the reproducible from PR20832 plus extra
test cases to verify the behavior of method 'fusedMultiplyAdd' in the presence
of NaN/Inf operands.
This fixes PR20832.
llvm-svn: 219708
When folding a fused multiply-add builtin call, make sure that we propagate the
correct result in the case where the addend is zero, and the two other operands
are finite non-zero.
Example:
define double @test() {
%1 = call double @llvm.fma.f64(double 7.0, double 8.0, double 0.0)
ret double %1
}
Before this patch, the instruction simplifier wrongly folded the builtin call
in function @test to constant 'double 7.0'.
With this patch, method 'fusedMultiplyAdd' correctly evaluates the multiply and
propagates the expected result (i.e. 56.0).
Added test fold-builtin-fma.ll with the reproducible from PR20832 plus extra
test cases to verify the behavior of method 'fusedMultiplyAdd' in the presence
of NaN/Inf operands.
This fixes PR20832.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5152
llvm-svn: 216913
Because we don't have a separate negate( ) function, 0 - NaN does double-duty as the IEEE-754 negate( ) operation, which (unlike most FP ops) *does* attach semantic meaning to the signbit of NaN.
llvm-svn: 210428
This is a re-commit of r189442; I'll follow up with clang changes.
The previous default was almost, but not quite enough digits to
represent a floating-point value in a manner which preserves the
representation when it's read back in. The larger default is much
less confusing.
I spent some time looking into printing exactly the right number of
digits if a precision isn't specified, but it's kind of complicated,
and I'm not really sure I understand what APFloat::toString is supposed
to output for FormatPrecision != 0 (or maybe the current API specification
is just silly, not sure which). I have a WIP patch if anyone is interested.
llvm-svn: 189624
The previous default was almost, but not quite enough digits to
represent a floating-point value in a manner which preserves the
representation when it's read back in. The larger default is much
less confusing.
I spent some time looking into printing exactly the right number of
digits if a precision isn't specified, but it's kind of complicated,
and I'm not really sure I understand what APFloat::toString is supposed
to output for FormatPrecision != 0 (or maybe the current API specification
is just silly, not sure which). I have a WIP patch if anyone is interested.
llvm-svn: 189442
IEEE-754R 1.4 Exclusions states that IEEE-754R does not specify the
interpretation of the sign of NaNs. In order to remove an irrelevant
variable that most floating point implementations do not use,
standardize add, sub, mul, div, mod so that operating anything with
NaN always yields a positive NaN.
In a later commit I am going to update the APIs for creating NaNs so
that one can not even create a negative NaN.
llvm-svn: 187314
Zeroing the significand of a floating point number does not necessarily cause a
floating point number to become finite non zero. For instance, if one has a NaN,
zeroing the significand will cause it to become +/- infinity.
llvm-svn: 187313
There were a couple of different loops that were not handling
'.' correctly in APFloat::convertFromHexadecimalString; these mistakes
could lead to assertion failures and incorrect rounding for overlong
hex float literals.
Fixes PR16643.
llvm-svn: 186539
When truncating to a format with fewer mantissa bits, APFloat::convert
will perform a right shift of the mantissa by the difference of the
precision of the two formats. Usually, this will result in just the
mantissa bits needed for the target format.
One special situation is if the input number is denormal. In this case,
the right shift may discard significant bits. This is usually not a
problem, since truncating a denormal usually results in zero (underflow)
after normalization anyway, since the result format's exponent range is
usually smaller than the target format's.
However, there is one case where the latter property does not hold:
when truncating from ppc_fp128 to double. In particular, truncating
a ppc_fp128 whose first double of the pair is denormal should result
in just that first double, not zero. The current code however
performs an excessive right shift, resulting in lost result bits.
This is then caught in the APFloat::normalize call performed by
APFloat::convert and causes an assertion failure.
This patch checks for the scenario of truncating a denormal, and
attempts to (possibly partially) replace the initial mantissa
right shift by decrementing the exponent, if doing so will still
result in a valid *target format* exponent.
Index: test/CodeGen/PowerPC/pr16573.ll
===================================================================
--- test/CodeGen/PowerPC/pr16573.ll (revision 0)
+++ test/CodeGen/PowerPC/pr16573.ll (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+; RUN: llc < %s | FileCheck %s
+
+target triple = "powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu"
+
+define double @test() {
+ %1 = fptrunc ppc_fp128 0xM818F2887B9295809800000000032D000 to double
+ ret double %1
+}
+
+; CHECK: .quad -9111018957755033591
+
Index: lib/Support/APFloat.cpp
===================================================================
--- lib/Support/APFloat.cpp (revision 185817)
+++ lib/Support/APFloat.cpp (working copy)
@@ -1956,6 +1956,23 @@
X86SpecialNan = true;
}
+ // If this is a truncation of a denormal number, and the target semantics
+ // has larger exponent range than the source semantics (this can happen
+ // when truncating from PowerPC double-double to double format), the
+ // right shift could lose result mantissa bits. Adjust exponent instead
+ // of performing excessive shift.
+ if (shift < 0 && isFiniteNonZero()) {
+ int exponentChange = significandMSB() + 1 - fromSemantics.precision;
+ if (exponent + exponentChange < toSemantics.minExponent)
+ exponentChange = toSemantics.minExponent - exponent;
+ if (exponentChange < shift)
+ exponentChange = shift;
+ if (exponentChange < 0) {
+ shift -= exponentChange;
+ exponent += exponentChange;
+ }
+ }
+
// If this is a truncation, perform the shift before we narrow the storage.
if (shift < 0 && (isFiniteNonZero() || category==fcNaN))
lostFraction = shiftRight(significandParts(), oldPartCount, -shift);
llvm-svn: 186409
This reverts commit r185099.
Looks like both the ppc-64 and mips bots are still failing after I reverted this
change.
Since:
1. The mips bot always performs a clean build,
2. The ppc64-bot failed again after a clean build (I asked the ppc-64
maintainers to clean the bot which they did... Thanks Will!),
I think it is safe to assume that this change was not the cause of the failures
that said builders were seeing. Thus I am recomitting.
llvm-svn: 185111
This reverts commit r185095. This is causing a FileCheck failure on
the 3dnow intrinsics on at least the mips/ppc bots but not on the x86
bots.
Reverting while I figure out what is going on.
llvm-svn: 185099
The category which an APFloat belongs to should be dependent on the
actual value that the APFloat has, not be arbitrarily passed in by the
user. This will prevent inconsistency bugs where the category and the
actual value in APFloat differ.
I also fixed up all of the references to this constructor (which were
only in LLVM).
llvm-svn: 185095
Currently inside APFloat fcNormal still implies the old definition of Normal
(i.e. isFiniteNonZero) instead of the proper IEEE-754R definition that the
external method isNormal() uses.
This patch prepares for the internal switch inside APFloat by converting all
references that check if a category is fcNormal directly with an indirect call
via isFiniteNonZero().
llvm-svn: 185036
Mehdi Amini