19 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Nicolas Abram Lujan
f8a574bf4d [InstCombine] C0 >> (X - C1) --> (C0 << C1) >> X
With the right pre-conditions, we can fold the offset
into the shifted constant:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/drMRBU
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/cUQv-_

Fixes #55016

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D124369
2022-04-27 14:18:30 -04:00
Sanjay Patel
fd9026131e [InstCombine] add tests for ashr/lshr of constant with shift amount offset; NFC
Baseline tests for D124369
2022-04-27 09:48:38 -04:00
Sanjay Patel
664ae7bbcc [InstCombine] C0 <<{nsw, nuw} (X - C1) --> (C0 >> C1) << X (2nd try)
The first attempt at this missed a check to make sure the offset
constant was in range and caused many bot failures.

That was missed in the Alive2 proof because on overshift creates
poison rather than the assert from APInt. Here's an alternate
attempt at a proof using count-trailing-zeros:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/pnXQYR

Original commit message:

This is similar to an existing pre-shift-of-constant fold:
8a9c70fc01e6
...but in this case, we need no-wrap on the shl and a negative
offset:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/_RVz99
2022-04-21 16:18:46 -04:00
Sanjay Patel
49f950ae26 [InstCombine] add more tests for a planned shift fold; NFC
These are reductions for a missed constraint (the offset
constant must be less than the bitwidth) that caused the
first version of the patch ( 5819f4a42286 ) to be reverted.
2022-04-21 14:08:50 -04:00
Sanjay Patel
8960ba7491 Revert "[InstCombine] C0 <<{nsw, nuw} (X - C1) --> (C0 >> C1) << X"
This reverts commit 5819f4a422865fc9a8ea4dc772769e14010ff6a7.
This caused bots to fail with a crash/assert during the fold,
so some constraint was missed.
2022-04-21 12:15:27 -04:00
Sanjay Patel
5819f4a422 [InstCombine] C0 <<{nsw, nuw} (X - C1) --> (C0 >> C1) << X
This is similar to an existing pre-shift-of-constant fold:
8a9c70fc01e6
...but in this case, we need no-wrap on the shl and a negative
offset:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/_RVz99

Fixes #54890
2022-04-21 11:38:27 -04:00
Sanjay Patel
782d0105ba [InstCombine] add tests for C << (X - C1); NFC 2022-04-21 11:38:26 -04:00
Sanjay Patel
8a9c70fc01 [InstCombine] C0 shift (X add nuw C) --> (C0 shift C) shift X
With 'nuw' we can convert the increment of the shift amount
into a pre-shift (constant fold) of the shifted constant:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/FkTyR2

Fixes issue #41976
2022-04-19 15:21:34 -04:00
Sanjay Patel
a9aa14e0cb [InstCombine] add tests for shift-of-add with constants; NFC 2022-04-19 15:21:34 -04:00
Bjorn Pettersson
acdc419c89 [test] Use -passes=instcombine instead of -instcombine in lots of tests. NFC
Another step moving away from the deprecated syntax of specifying
pass pipeline in opt.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D119081
2022-02-07 14:26:59 +01:00
Philip Reames
e6ad9ef4e7 [instcombine] Canonicalize constant index type to i64 for extractelement/insertelement
The basic idea to this is that a) having a single canonical type makes CSE easier, and b) many of our transforms are inconsistent about which types we end up with based on visit order.

I'm restricting this to constants as for non-constants, we'd have to decide whether the simplicity was worth extra instructions. For constants, there are no extra instructions.

We chose the canonical type as i64 arbitrarily.  We might consider changing this to something else in the future if we have cause.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115387
2021-12-13 16:56:22 -08:00
Juneyoung Lee
395607af3c Reapply [ConstantFold] Fold more operations to poison
This was reverted to mitigate mitigate miscompiles caused by
the logical and/or to bitwise and/or fold. Reapply it now that
the underlying issue has been fixed by D101191.

-----

This patch folds more operations to poison.

Alive2 proof: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/mxcb9G (it does not contain tests about div/rem because they fold to poison when raising UB)

Reviewed By: nikic

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92270
2021-05-13 16:04:12 +02:00
Juneyoung Lee
06829034ca Revert "[ConstantFold] Fold more operations to poison"
This reverts commit 53040a968dc2ff20931661e55f05da2ef8b964a0 due to its
bad interaction with select i1 -> and/or i1 transformation.

This fixes:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49005
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48435
2021-02-04 00:24:02 +09:00
Juneyoung Lee
53040a968d [ConstantFold] Fold more operations to poison
This patch folds more operations to poison.

Alive2 proof: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/mxcb9G (it does not contain tests about div/rem because they fold to poison when raising UB)

Reviewed By: nikic

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92270
2020-11-29 21:19:48 +09:00
Simon Pilgrim
105e5c940c [ValueTracking] Add DemandedElts support to computeKnownBits/ComputeNumSignBits (PR36319)
This patch adds initial support for a DemandedElts mask to the internal computeKnownBits/ComputeNumSignBits methods, matching the SelectionDAG and GlobalISel equivalents.

So far only a couple of instructions have been setup to handle the DemandedElts, the remainder still using the existing 'all elements' default. The plan is to extend support as we have test coverage.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D73435
2020-02-01 12:45:46 +00:00
Simon Pilgrim
f99ef5455a [InstCombine] Add extra shift(c1,add(c2,y)) tests for PR15141 2020-01-26 19:04:12 +00:00
Eric Christopher
cee313d288 Revert "Temporarily Revert "Add basic loop fusion pass.""
The reversion apparently deleted the test/Transforms directory.

Will be re-reverting again.

llvm-svn: 358552
2019-04-17 04:52:47 +00:00
Eric Christopher
a863435128 Temporarily Revert "Add basic loop fusion pass."
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).

This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.

llvm-svn: 358546
2019-04-17 02:12:23 +00:00
Simon Pilgrim
6dd8fab443 [InstCombine] Folding of shifts by the sum of positive values
This patch introduces the combine:

(C1 shift (A add C2)) -> ((C1 shift C2) shift A)
iff A and C2 are both positive

If both A and C2 are know to be positive then we can safely split into 2 shifts, permitting the folding of the Inner shift.

Fix for the spec benchmark case mentioned by @nadav on PR15141 (assuming we can prove that the inputs as positive).

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26000

llvm-svn: 285696
2016-11-01 15:40:30 +00:00