InstCombine is supposed to be a superset of InstSimplify, but
failed to invoke load simplification.
Unfortunately, this causes a minor compile-time regression, which
will be mitigated in a future commit.
define i1 @compare_vscales() {
%vscale = call i64 @llvm.vscale.i64()
%vscalex2 = shl nuw nsw i64 %vscale, 1
%vscalex4 = shl nuw nsw i64 %vscale, 2
%cmp = icmp ult i64 %vscalex2, %vscalex4
ret i1 %cmp
}
This IR is currently emitted by LLVM. This icmp is redundant as this snippet
can be simplified to true or false as both operands originate from the same
@llvm.vscale.i64() call.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D142542
We can only fold insertvalue undef, (extractvalue x, n) to x
if x is not poison, otherwise we might be replacing undef with
poison (https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/fnw3c8). The insertvalue
poison case is always fine.
I didn't go to particularly large effort to preserve cases where
folding with undef is still legal (mainly when there is a chain of
multiple inserts that end up covering the whole aggregate),
because this shouldn't really occur in practice: We should always
be generating the insertvalue poison form when constructing
aggregates nowadays.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D144106
There are 2 issues here:
1. In the default LLVM FP environment (regular FP math instructions),
SNaN is some flavor of "don't care" which we will nail down in
D143074, so this is just a quality-of-implementation improvement
for default FP.
2. In the constrained FP environment (constrained intrinsics), SNaN
must not propagate through a math operation; it has to be quieted
according to IEEE-754 spec. That is independent of exception
handling mode, so the current behavior is a miscompile.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D143505
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/xuvL46
This is the similar to the existing folds added with:
D138853 / f2973327496fc966c4e89597
7dbeb127eaf6
...but with the and/or swapped.
Definitionally a non-zero power of 2 will only have 1 bit set so this
is a freebee.
Reviewed By: spatel
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D141990
Use deduction guides instead of helper functions.
The only non-automatic changes have been:
1. ArrayRef(some_uint8_pointer, 0) needs to be changed into ArrayRef(some_uint8_pointer, (size_t)0) to avoid an ambiguous call with ArrayRef((uint8_t*), (uint8_t*))
2. CVSymbol sym(makeArrayRef(symStorage)); needed to be rewritten as CVSymbol sym{ArrayRef(symStorage)}; otherwise the compiler is confused and thinks we have a (bad) function prototype. There was a few similar situation across the codebase.
3. ADL doesn't seem to work the same for deduction-guides and functions, so at some point the llvm namespace must be explicitly stated.
4. The "reference mode" of makeArrayRef(ArrayRef<T> &) that acts as no-op is not supported (a constructor cannot achieve that).
Per reviewers' comment, some useless makeArrayRef have been removed in the process.
This is a follow-up to https://reviews.llvm.org/D140896 that introduced
the deduction guides.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D140955
value() has undesired exception checking semantics and calls
__throw_bad_optional_access in libc++. Moreover, the API is unavailable without
_LIBCPP_NO_EXCEPTIONS on older Mach-O platforms (see
_LIBCPP_AVAILABILITY_BAD_OPTIONAL_ACCESS).
This commit fixes LLVMAnalysis and its dependencies.
Copied from the existing llvm.amdgcn.class handling; eventually I will
fold that to the generic intrinsic when legal. The tests should
probably move into an instsimplify only test.
Any undef element in a vector would trigger the whole constant
to be replaced with a canonical NaN. This propagates each
element when possible.
issue #59122
We cannot remove an insertvalue of undef if it inserts into a
potentially poison value. The new implementation matches that of
insertelement.
See https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/pCcFsW for the previously
incorrect transform.
InstSimplify currently checks whether the instruction simplifies
back to itself, and returns undef in that case. Generally, this
should only occur in unreachable code.
However, this was also done for the simplifyInstructionWithOperands()
API. In that case, the instruction only serves as a template that
provides the opcode and other non-operand data. In this case,
simplifying back to the same "instruction" may be expected. This
caused PR58401 in conjunction with D134954.
As such, move this check into simplifyInstruction() only. The only
other caller of simplifyInstructionWithOperands() also handles the
self-simplification case explicitly.
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/oShzr3
This was noted as a missing fold in D134876 (with additional
examples based on issue #58046).
I'm assuming that fmul with a zero operand is rare enough
that the use of ValueTracking will not noticeably increase
compile-time.
This adjusts a PowerPC codegen test that was added with D88388
because it would get folded away and no longer provide coverage
for the bug fix.
The constant is already commuted for an fmul opcode,
but this code can be called more directly for fma,
so we have to swap for that caller. There are tests
in InstSimplify and InstCombine to verify that this
works as expected.
This is an extension of the existing min/max+select fold (which already
has a very large number of variations) to allow a vector shuffle because
that's what we have in the motivating example from issue #42100.
A couple of Alive2 checks of variants (I don't know how to generalize
these in Alive):
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/jUFAqT
And verify the PR42100 test:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/3EcASf
It's possible there is some generalization of the fold or a
VectorCombine/SLP answer for the motivating test, but I haven't found a
better/smaller solution yet.
We can also add even more variants here as follow-up patches. For example,
we can have shuffle followed by min/max; we also don't have this
canonicalization or the reverse:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/StHD9f
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D134879
The test shows that we would fail to consistently fold the
instruction based on the max value operand. This is also
the root cause for issue #57986, but I'll add an instcombine
test + assert for that exact problem in another commit.
It's still possible that there's a simpler way to specify
the conditions needed for this set of folds, but "getStrictPred"
converts >= to > for example, so there's no need to explicitly
check that.
This extends e5d15e116292 to handle the inverse predicates
(there's probably a more elegant way to specify the preds).
These patterns correspond to the existing simplify:
max (min X, Y), X --> X
...and extra preds for (non)equality.
The tests cycle through all 10 icmp preds for each min/max
variant with 4 swapped operand patterns each (and the min/max
operands are commuted in every other test within those).
Some Alive2 examples to verify:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/XMvEKQhttps://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/QpMChr
This is similar to the existing simplify:
max (max X, Y), X --> max X, Y
...but the select condition can be one of
several predicates as shown in the tests.
The tests cycle through all 10 icmp preds for
each min/max variant with 4 swapped operand
patterns each (and the min/max operands are
commuted in every other test within those).
Some Alive2 examples to verify:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/lCAQm4https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/kzxVXC
We can handle vectors inside simplifyWithOpReplaced(), as long as
cross-lane operations are excluded. The equality can hold (or not
hold) for each vector lane independently, so we shouldn't use the
replacement value from other lanes.
I believe the only operations relevant here are shufflevector (where
all previous bugs were seen) and calls (which might use shuffle-like
intrinsics and would require more careful classification).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D134348
