IntrArgMemOnly implies that only memory pointed to by pointer typed arguments will be accessed. But these intrinsics allow you to pass null to the pointer argument and put the full address into the index argument. Other passes won't be able to understand this.
A colleague found that ISPC was creating gathers like this and then dead store elimination removed some stores because it didn't understand what the gather was doing since the pointer argument was null.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58805
llvm-svn: 355228
I'm assuming that the nan propogation logic for InstructonSimplify's handling of fadd and fsub is correct, and applying the same to atomicrmw.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58836
llvm-svn: 355222
This patch fixes an issue where we would compute an unnecessarily small alignment during scalar promotion when no store is not to be guaranteed to execute, but we've proven load speculation safety. Since speculating a load requires proving the existing alignment is valid at the new location (see Loads.cpp), we can use the alignment fact from the load.
For non-atomics, this is a performance problem. For atomics, this is a correctness issue, though an *incredibly* rare one to see in practice. For atomics, we might not be able to lower an improperly aligned load or store (i.e. i32 align 1). If such an instruction makes it all the way to codegen, we *may* fail to codegen the operation, or we may simply generate a slow call to a library function. The part that makes this super hard to see in practice is that the memory location actually *is* well aligned, and instcombine knows that. So, to see a failure, you have to have a) hit the bug in LICM, b) somehow hit a depth limit in InstCombine/ValueTracking to avoid fixing the alignment, and c) then have generated an instruction which fails codegen rather than simply emitting a slow libcall. All around, pretty hard to hit.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58809
llvm-svn: 355217
An idempotent atomicrmw is one that does not change memory in the process of execution. We have already added handling for the various integer operations; this patch extends the same handling to floating point operations which were recently added to IR.
Note: At the moment, we canonicalize idempotent fsub to fadd when ordering requirements prevent us from using a load. As discussed in the review, I will be replacing this with canonicalizing both floating point ops to integer ops in the near future.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58251
llvm-svn: 355210
Summary:
ConstIntInfoVec contains elements extracted from the previous function.
In new PM, releaseMemory() is not called and the dangling elements can
cause segfault in findConstantInsertionPoint.
Rename releaseMemory() to cleanup() to deliver the idea that it is
mandatory and call cleanup() in ConstantHoistingPass::runImpl to fix
this.
Reviewers: ormris, zzheng, dmgreen, wmi
Reviewed By: ormris, wmi
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58589
llvm-svn: 355174
This is part of a transform that may be done in the backend:
D13757
...but it should always be beneficial to fold this sooner in IR
for all targets.
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/vaiW
Name: sext add nsw
%add = add nsw i8 %i, C0
%ext = sext i8 %add to i32
%r = add i32 %ext, C1
=>
%s = sext i8 %i to i32
%r = add i32 %s, sext(C0)+C1
Name: zext add nuw
%add = add nuw i8 %i, C0
%ext = zext i8 %add to i16
%r = add i16 %ext, C1
=>
%s = zext i8 %i to i16
%r = add i16 %s, zext(C0)+C1
llvm-svn: 355118
This should have been part of r355110, but my brain isn't quite awake yet, despite the coffee. Per the original submit comment... Doing scalar promotion w/o being able to prove the alignment of the hoisted load or sunk store is a bug. Update tests to actually show the alignment so that impact of the patch which fixes this can be seen.
llvm-svn: 355111
Doing scalar promotion w/o being able to prove the alignment of the hoisted load or sunk store is a bug. Update tests to actually show the alignment so that impact of the patch which fixes this can be seen.
llvm-svn: 355110
Second part of D58593.
Compute precise overflow conditions based on all known bits, rather
than just the sign bits. Unsigned a - b overflows iff a < b, and we
can determine whether this always/never happens based on the minimal
and maximal values achievable for a and b subject to the known bits
constraint.
llvm-svn: 355109
Part of D58593.
Compute precise overflow conditions based on all known bits, rather
than just the sign bits. Unsigned a + b overflows iff a > ~b, and we
can determine whether this always/never happens based on the minimal
and maximal values achievable for a and ~b subject to the known bits
constraint.
llvm-svn: 355072
Splitting can make sanitizer errors harder to understand, as the
trapping instruction may not be in the function where the bug was
detected.
rdar://48142697
llvm-svn: 354931
As discussed on llvm-dev:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-February/130491.html
We can't remove the compare+select in the general case because
we are treating funnel shift like a standard instruction (as
opposed to a special instruction like select/phi).
That means that if one of the operands of the funnel shift is
poison, the result is poison regardless of whether we know that
the operand is actually unused based on the instruction's
particular semantics.
The motivating case for this transform is the more specific
rotate op (rather than funnel shift), and we are preserving the
fold for that case because there is no chance of introducing
extra poison when there is no anonymous extra operand to the
funnel shift.
llvm-svn: 354905
Rotate is a special-case of funnel shift that has different
poison constraints than the general case. That's not visible
yet in the existing tests, but it needs to be corrected.
llvm-svn: 354894
This requires a couple of tweaks to existing vectorization functions as they were assuming that only the second call argument (ctlz/cttz/powi) could ever be the 'always scalar' argument, but for smul.fix + umul.fix its the third argument.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58616
llvm-svn: 354790
And regenerate checks. I had to rename some variables, because
update_test_checks can't deal with the same variable names used
in lower and upper case. I've also dropped the result type aliases,
as just using the type directly gives a cleaner result.
llvm-svn: 354759
add A, sext(B) --> sub A, zext(B)
We have to choose 1 of these forms, so I'm opting for the
zext because that's easier for value tracking.
The backend should be prepared for this change after:
D57401
rL353433
This is also a preliminary step towards reducing the amount
of bit hackery that we do in IR to optimize icmp/select.
That should be waiting to happen at a later optimization stage.
The seeming regression in the fuzzer test was discussed in:
D58359
We were only managing that fold in instcombine by luck, and
other passes should be able to deal with that better anyway.
llvm-svn: 354748
There's likely a missed IR canonicalization for at least 1 of these
patterns. Otherwise, we wouldn't have needed the pattern-matching
enhancement in D57516.
Note that -- unlike usubo added with D57789 -- the TLI hook for
this transform defaults to 'on'. So if there's any perf fallout
from this, targets should look at how they're lowering the uaddo
node in SDAG and/or override that hook.
The x86 diffs suggest that there's some missing pattern-matching
for forming inc/dec.
This should fix the remaining known problems in:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40486https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31754
llvm-svn: 354746
This patch adds LazyValueInfo to LowerSwitch to compute the range of the
value being switched over and reduce the size of the tree LowerSwitch
builds to lower a switch.
Reviewed By: arsenm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58096
llvm-svn: 354670
Summary:
MemorySSA is not properly updated in LoopSimplifyCFG after recent changes. Use SplitBlock utility to resolve that and clear all updates once handleDeadExits is finished.
All updates that follow are removal of edges which are safe to handle via the removeEdge() API.
Also, deleting dead blocks is done correctly as is, i.e. delete from MemorySSA before updating the CFG and DT.
Reviewers: mkazantsev, rtereshin
Subscribers: sanjoy, jlebar, Prazek, george.burgess.iv, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58524
llvm-svn: 354613
The m_APFloat matcher does not work with anything but strict
splat vector constants, so we could miss these folds and then
trigger an assertion in instcombine:
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=13201
The previous attempt at this in rL354406 had a logic bug that
actually triggered a regression test failure, but I failed to
notice it the first time.
llvm-svn: 354467
As this has broken the lto bootstrap build for 3 days and is
showing a significant regression on the Dither_benchmark results (from
the LLVM benchmark suite) -- specifically, on the
BENCHMARK_FLOYD_DITHER_128, BENCHMARK_FLOYD_DITHER_256, and
BENCHMARK_FLOYD_DITHER_512; the others are unchanged. These have
regressed by about 28% on Skylake, 34% on Haswell, and over 40% on
Sandybridge.
This reverts commit r353923.
llvm-svn: 354434
Noticed these while doing a final sweep of the code to make sure I hadn't missed anything in my last couple of patches. The (minor) missed optimization was noticed because of the stylistic fix to avoid an overly specific cast.
llvm-svn: 354412
