In foldSelectIntoOp we sometimes transform a select of a fadd into a
fadd of a select, where we select between data and an identity value.
For both fadd and fsub the identity is always -0.0, but if the nsz
flag is set on the select instruction we can use +0.0 instead. Doing
so then triggers other optimisations, such as when folding the select
of masked load into a new masked load.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126774
This patch improves the fix in D110529 to prevent from crashing on value
with byval attribute that is not added in SCCP solver.
Authored-by: sinan.lin@linux.alibaba.com
Reviewed By: ChuanqiXu
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126355
This adds a fold for aggressive instcombine that converts
smin(smax(fptosi(x))) into a llvm.fptosi.sat, providing that the
saturation constants are correct and the cost of the llvm.fptosi.sat is
lower.
Unfortunately, a llvm.fptosi.sat cannot always be converted back to a
smin/smax/fptosi. The llvm.fptosi.sat intrinsic is more defined that the
original, which produces poison if the original fptosi was out of range.
The llvm.fptosi.sat will saturate any value, so needs to be expanded to
a fptosi(fpmin(fpmax(x))), which can be worse for codegeneration
depending on the target.
So this change thais conditional on the backend reporting that the
llvm.fptosi.sat is cheaper that the original smin+smax+fptost. This is
a change to the way that AggressiveInstrcombine has worked in the past.
Instead of just being a canonicalization pass, that canonicalization can
be dependant on the target in certain specific cases.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D125755
Update the EarlyCSE tests to use opaque pointers.
Worth noting that this leaves some bitcast ptr to ptr instructions
in the input IR behind which are no longer necessary. This is
because these use numbered instructions, so it's hard to drop them
in an automated fashion (as it would require renumbering all other
instructions as well). I'm leaving that as a problem for another day.
The test updates have been performed using
https://gist.github.com/nikic/98357b71fd67756b0f064c9517b62a34.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127278
D125887 changed the ctlz/cttz despeculation transform to insert
a freeze for the introduced branch on zero. While this does fix
the "branch on poison" issue, we may still get in trouble if we
pick a different value for the branch and for the ctz argument
(i.e. non-zero for the branch, but zero for the ctz). To avoid
this, we should use the same frozen value in both positions.
This does cause a regression in RISCV codegen by introducing an
additional sext. The DAG looks like this:
t0: ch = EntryToken
t2: i64,ch = CopyFromReg t0, Register:i64 %3
t4: i64 = AssertSext t2, ValueType:ch:i32
t23: i64 = freeze t4
t9: ch = CopyToReg t0, Register:i64 %0, t23
t16: ch = CopyToReg t0, Register:i64 %4, Constant:i64<32>
t18: ch = TokenFactor t9, t16
t25: i64 = sign_extend_inreg t23, ValueType:ch:i32
t24: i64 = setcc t25, Constant:i64<0>, seteq:ch
t28: i64 = and t24, Constant:i64<1>
t19: ch = brcond t18, t28, BasicBlock:ch<cond.end 0x8311f68>
t21: ch = br t19, BasicBlock:ch<cond.false 0x8311e80>
I don't see a really obvious way to improve this, as we can't push
the freeze past the AssertSext (which may produce poison).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126638
Teach the unroller(s) how to handle an invalid cost. This avoids crashes when the backend can't provide a cost due to either a fundemental limitation or an unimplemented cost model case.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127305
Per the documentation in Support/InstructionCost.h, the purpose of an invalid cost is so that clients can change behavior on impossible to cost inputs. CodeMetrics was instead asserting that invalid costs never occurred.
On a target with an incomplete cost model - e.g. RISCV - this means that transformations would crash on (falsely) invalid constructs - e.g. scalable vectors. While we certainly should improve the cost model - and I plan to do so in the near future - we also shouldn't be crashing. This violates the explicitly stated purpose of an invalid InstructionCost.
I updated all of the "easy" consumers where bailouts were locally obvious. I plan to follow up with loop unroll in a following change.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127131
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/hRy3rE
As shown in D123408, we can produce this pattern when moving
cast around, and we already have a related fold for a binop
with a constant operand.
For the longest time we used `AAValueSimplify` and
`genericValueTraversal` to determine "potential values". This was
problematic for many reasons:
- We recomputed the result a lot as there was no caching for the 9
locations calling `genericValueTraversal`.
- We added the idea of "intra" vs. "inter" procedural simplification
only as an afterthought. `genericValueTraversal` did offer an option
but `AAValueSimplify` did not. Thus, we might end up with "too much"
simplification in certain situations and then gave up on it.
- Because `genericValueTraversal` was not a real `AA` we ended up with
problems like the infinite recursion bug (#54981) as well as code
duplication.
This patch introduces `AAPotentialValues` and replaces the
`AAValueSimplify` uses with it. `genericValueTraversal` is folded into
`AAPotentialValues` as are the instruction simplifications performed in
`AAValueSimplify` before. We further distinguish "intra" and "inter"
procedural simplification now.
`AAValueSimplify` was not deleted as we haven't ported the
re-materialization of instructions yet. There are other differences over
the former handling, e.g., we may not fold trivially foldable
instructions right now, e.g., `add i32 1, 1` is not folded to `i32 2`
but if an operand would be simplified to `i32 1` we would fold it still.
We are also even more aware of function/SCC boundaries in CGSCC passes,
which is good.
Fixes: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/54981
When determining liveness via Attributor::isAssumedDead(...) we might
end up without a liveness AA or with one pointing into another function.
Neither is helpful and we will avoid both from now on.
This reverts commit 1fbdbb559569641f6d509b569966901c8fb02b63.
All known issues surfaced by this patch should have been fixed now.
The fixes included fixing issues with SCEV expansion in LV and DA's
reliance on LCSSA phis.
All information is already available in VPlan. Note that there are some
test changes, because we now can correctly look through instructions
like truncates to analyze the actual users.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D123541
We used to be very conservative when integer states were merged.
Instead of adding the known range (which is large due to uncertainty)
into the assumed range (which is hopefully small), we can also only
allow to merge in both at the same time into their respective
counterpart. This will ensure we keep the invariant that assumed is part
of known.
When we recreate instructions as part of simplification we need to take
care of debug metadata and replacing the value multiple times. For now,
we handle both conservatively.
The patch simplifies some of the patterns as below
(A | (B & C0)) | (B & C1) -> A | (B & C0|C1)
((B & C0) | A) | (B & C1) -> (B & C0|C1) | A
In some scenarios like byte reverse on half word, we can see this pattern multiple times and this conversion can optimize these patterns.
Additionally this commit fixes the issue reported with the test case.
int f(int a, int b) {
int c = ((unsigned char)(a >> 23) & 925);
if (a)
c = (a >> 23 & b) | ((unsigned char)(a >> 23) & 925) | (b >> 23 & 157);
return c;
}
The previous revision/commit did not check one-use of an intermediate value that this transform re-uses.
When that value has another use, an existing transform will try to invert the transform here.
By adding one-use checks, we avoid the infinite loops seen with the earlier commit.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D124119
Existing condition for
fold icmp ugt (ashr X, ShAmtC), C --> icmp ugt X, ((C + 1) << ShAmtC) - 1
missed some boundary. It cause this fold don't work for some cases, and the
reason is due to signed number overflow.
Reviewed By: spatel
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127188
The IV widening code currently asserts that terminators aren't SCEVable
-- however, this is not the case for invokes with a returned attribute.
As far as I can tell, this assertions is not necessary -- even if we
have a critical edge (the second test case), the trunc gets inserted
in a legal position.
Fixes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/55925.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127288
Background:
When we construct coroutine frame, we would insert a dbg.declare
intrinsic for it:
```
%hdl = call void @llvm.coro.begin() ; would return coroutine handle
call void @llvm.dbg.declare(metadata ptr %hdl, metadata
![[DEBUG_VARIABLE: __coro_frame]], metadata !DIExpression())
```
And in the splitted coroutine, it looks like:
```
define void @coro_func.resume(ptr *hdl) {
entry.resume:
call void @llvm.dbg.declare(metadata ptr %hdl, metadata
![[DEBUG_VARIABLE: __coro_frame]], metadata !DIExpression())
}
```
And we would salvage the debug info by inserting a new alloca here:
```
define void @coro_func.resume(ptr %hdl) {
entry.resume:
%frame.debug = alloca ptr
call void @llvm.dbg.declare(metadata ptr %frame.debug, metadata
![[DEBUG_VARIABLE: __coro_frame]], metadata !DIExpression())
store ptr %hdl, %frame.debug
}
```
But now, the problem comes since the `dbg.declare` refers to the address
of that alloca instead of actual coroutine handle. I saw there are codes
to solve the problem but it only applies to complex expression only. I
feel if it is OK to relax the condition to make it work for
`__coro_frame`.
Reviewed By: jmorse
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126277
InstCombine tries to rewrite
%prod = mul nsw i64 %X, Scale
%acc = add nsw i64 %prod, Offset
%0 = alloca i8, i64 %acc, align 4
%1 = bitcast i8* %0 to i32*
Use ( %1 )
into
%prod = mul nsw i64 %X, Scale/4
%acc = add nsw i64 %prod, Offset/4
%0 = alloca i32, i64 %acc, align 4
Use (%0)
But it assumes Scale is unsigned, and performs an unsigned division.
So we should bail out if Scale cannot be interpreted as an unsigned safely.
Reviewed By: nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126546
If we don't demand low bits and it is valid to pre-shift a constant:
(C2 >> X) << C1 --> (C2 << C1) >> X
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/_UzTMP
This is the reverse-order shift sibling to 82040d414b3c ( D127122 ).
It seems likely that we would want to add this to the SDAG version of
the code too to keep it on par with IR.
Enhance memchr libcall folder to handle constant arrays consisting
of one or two sequences of cosecutive equal characters.
Reviewed By: nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126515
If we don't demand high bits (zeros) and it is valid to pre-shift a constant:
(C2 << X) >> C1 --> (C2 >> C1) << X
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/P3dWDW
There are a variety of related patterns, but I haven't found a single solution
that gets all of the motivating examples - so pulling this piece out of
D126617 along with more tests.
We should also handle the case where we shift-right followed by shift-left,
but I'll make that a follow-on patch assuming this one is ok. It seems likely
that we would want to add this to the SDAG version of the code too to keep it
on par with IR.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127122
If we look through a truncate in matchLinearIVUser, it's possible
we find a sext/zext instruction that didn't come from widening.
This will fail the MatchedItCount->getType() == InnerInductionPHI->getType()
assertion.
Fix this by checking that we did not look through a truncate already.
Reviewed By: SjoerdMeijer
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127149
Based on reviewer comments on https://reviews.llvm.org/D126692 I've
added FastMathFlags to the select instruction used when tail-folding
with reductions. These flags can then be used by InstCombine to
decide upon the most optimal floating point identity value for
fadd/fsub. Doing so unlocks further optimisations, such as folding
selects into masked loads.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126778
Now that transforms introducing branch on poison have been removed,
we can stop marking ranges that have been derived from branch
conditions as containing undef. The existing comment explains why
this is legal. I've checked that alive2 is happy with SCCP tests
after this change.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126647
Try to simplify BranchOnCount to `BranchOnCond true` if TC <= UF * VF.
This is an alternative to D121899 which simplifies the VPlan directly
instead of doing so late in code-gen.
The potential benefit of doing this in VPlan is that this may help
cost-modeling in the future. The reason this is done in prepareToExecute
at the moment is that a single plan may be used for multiple VFs/UFs.
There are further simplifications that can be applied as follow ups:
1. Replace inductions with constants
2. Replace vector region with regular block.
Fixes#55354.
Depends on D126679.
Reviewed By: Ayal
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126680
