318 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Craig Topper
479daaf74c [InstSimplify] Add patterns for folding (A & B) | (~A ^ B) -> (~A ^ B) and its commuted variants.
We already had (A & ~B) | (A ^ B), but we missed the cases where the not was part of the xor.

llvm-svn: 303004
2017-05-14 07:54:43 +00:00
Craig Topper
982cc3b1d5 foo
llvm-svn: 303003
2017-05-14 07:54:40 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
0b24b7ef72 [InstSimplify, InstCombine] move 'or' simplification tests; NFC
Surprisingly, I don't think these are redundant for InstSimplify. 
They were just misplaced as InstCombine tests.

llvm-svn: 302684
2017-05-10 15:57:47 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
390f1dc6ba [InstSimplify] add tests for PR32949 miscompile; NFC
llvm-svn: 302374
2017-05-07 18:19:13 +00:00
Zvi Rackover
973ff7c74c InstructionSimplify: Relanding r301766
Summary:
Re-applying r301766 with a fix to a typo and a regression test.

The log message for r301766 was:
==================================================================================
    InstructionSimplify: Canonicalize shuffle operands. NFC-ish.

    Summary:
     Apply canonicalization rules:
        1. Input vectors with no elements selected from can be replaced with undef.
        2. If only one input vector is constant it shall be the second one.

    This allows constant-folding to cover more ad-hoc simplifications that
    were in place and avoid duplication for RHS and LHS checks.

    There are more rules we may want to add in the future when we see a
    justification. e.g. mask elements that select undef elements can be
    replaced with undef.
==================================================================================

Reviewers: spatel, RKSimon

Reviewed By: spatel

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32863

llvm-svn: 302373
2017-05-07 18:16:37 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
599e65b1ff [InstSimplify] use ConstantRange to simplify or-of-icmps
We can simplify (or (icmp X, C1), (icmp X, C2)) to 'true' or one of the icmps in many cases.
I had to check some of these with Alive to prove to myself it's right, but everything seems 
to check out. Eg, the deleted code in instcombine was completely ignoring predicates with
mismatched signedness.

This is a follow-up to:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL301260
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32143

llvm-svn: 302370
2017-05-07 15:11:40 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
3bf1d6b763 [InstSimplify] fix copy-paste mistake in test comments; NFC
llvm-svn: 302251
2017-05-05 16:24:58 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
34cd5e4307 [InstSimplify] add tests for (icmp X, C1 | icmp X, C2); NFC
These are the 'or' counterparts for the tests added with r300493.

llvm-svn: 302248
2017-05-05 16:12:05 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
e42b4d566e [InstSimplify] add folds for or-of-casted-icmps
The sibling folds for 'and' with casts were added with https://reviews.llvm.org/rL273200.
This is a preliminary step for adding the 'or' variants for the folds added with https://reviews.llvm.org/rL301260.

The reason for the strange form with constant LHS in the 1st test is because there's another missing fold in that
case for the inverted predicate. That should be fixed when we add the ConstantRange functionality for 'or-of-icmps' 
that already exists for 'and-of-icmps'.

I'm hoping to share more code for the and/or cases, so we won't have these differences. This will allow us to remove
code from InstCombine. It's also possible that we can remove some code here in InstSimplify. I think we have some 
duplicated folds because patterns are not matched in a general way.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32876

llvm-svn: 302189
2017-05-04 19:51:34 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
500e5122d3 [InstSimplify] add tests for or-of-casted-icmps; NFC
llvm-svn: 302174
2017-05-04 17:36:53 +00:00
George Burgess IV
7bc507a2e8 Revert r301880
This change caused buildbot failures, apparently because we're not
passing around types that InstSimplify is used to seeing. I'm not overly
familiar with InstSimplify, so I'm reverting this until I can figure out
what exactly is wrong.

llvm-svn: 301885
2017-05-01 23:54:41 +00:00
George Burgess IV
6935aefdf0 [InstSimplify] Handle selects of GEPs with 0 offset
In particular (since it wouldn't fit nicely in the summary):
(select (icmp eq V 0) P (getelementptr P V)) -> (getelementptr P V)

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31435

llvm-svn: 301880
2017-05-01 23:12:08 +00:00
Zvi Rackover
4086e13e0d InstructionSimplify: Simplify a shuffle with a undef mask to undef
Summary:
Following the discussion in pr32486, adding the simplification:
 shuffle %x, %y, undef -> undef

Reviewers: spatel, RKSimon, andreadb, davide

Reviewed By: spatel

Subscribers: jroelofs, davide, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32293

llvm-svn: 301764
2017-04-30 06:06:26 +00:00
Craig Topper
b3b3c29c87 [InstCombine] Fix CHECK-LABEL in two tests.
llvm-svn: 301337
2017-04-25 17:40:58 +00:00
Craig Topper
0b650d3569 [InstSimplify] Handle (~A & ~B) | (~A ^ B) -> ~A ^ B
The code Sanjay Patel moved over from InstCombine doesn't work properly if the 'and' has both inputs as nots because we used a commuted op matcher on the 'and' first. But this will bind to the first 'not' on 'and' when there could be two 'not's. InstCombine could rely on DeMorgan to ensure the 'and' wouldn't have two 'not's eventually, but InstSimplify can't rely on that.

This patch matches the xor first then checks for the ands and allows a not of either operand of the xor.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32458

llvm-svn: 301329
2017-04-25 17:01:32 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
35c362ebbb [InstSimplify] use ConstantRange to simplify more and-of-icmps
We can simplify (and (icmp X, C1), (icmp X, C2)) to one of the icmps in many cases. 
I had to check some of these with Alive to prove to myself it's right, but everything 
seems to check out. Eg, the code in instcombine was completely ignoring predicates with 
mismatched signedness.

Handling or-of-icmps would be a follow-up step.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32143

llvm-svn: 301260
2017-04-24 21:52:39 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
0889225f51 [InstSimplify] move (A & ~B) | (A ^ B) -> (A ^ B) from InstCombine
This is a straight cut and paste, but there's a bigger problem: if this
fold exists for simplifyOr, there should be a DeMorganized version for
simplifyAnd. But more than that, we have a patchwork of ad hoc logic
optimizations in InstCombine. There should be some structure to ensure 
that we're not missing sibling folds across and/or/xor.
 

llvm-svn: 301213
2017-04-24 18:24:36 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
a3c297dba4 [InstSimplify] fold identity shuffles (recursing if needed)
This patch simplifies the examples from D31509 and D31927 (PR30630) and catches 
the basic identity shuffle tests that Zvi recently added.

I'm not sure if we have something like this in DAGCombiner, but we should?

It's worth noting that "MaxRecurse / RecursionLimit" is only 3 on entry at the moment. 
We might want to bump that up if there are longer shuffle chains like this in the wild.

For now, we're ignoring shuffles that have undef mask elements because it's not
clear how those should be handled.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31960

llvm-svn: 300714
2017-04-19 16:48:22 +00:00
Davide Italiano
a9f047a594 [InstSimplify] Deduce correct type for vector GEP.
InstSimplify returned the wrong type when simplifying a vector GEP
and we ended up crashing when trying to replace all uses with the
new value. Fixes PR32697.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32180

llvm-svn: 300693
2017-04-19 14:23:42 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
9083dc9680 [InstSimplify] add/move tests for (icmp X, C1 & icmp X, C2); NFC
We simplify based on range intersection, but we're missing folds.

llvm-svn: 300493
2017-04-17 20:38:33 +00:00
Zvi Rackover
30efd24d78 InstSimplify: A shuffle of a splat is always the splat itself
Summary:
Fold:
 shuffle (splat-shuffle), undef, M --> splat-shuffle

Reviewers: spatel, RKSimon, craig.topper

Reviewed By: RKSimon

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31527

llvm-svn: 299990
2017-04-11 21:37:02 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
f0cb5a80ad [InstSimplify] add tests for chains of shuffles; NFC
llvm-svn: 299984
2017-04-11 20:54:57 +00:00
Craig Topper
2f1e1c351b [InstSimplify] Teach SimplifyMulInst to recognize vectors of i1 as And. Not just scalar i1.
llvm-svn: 299665
2017-04-06 17:33:37 +00:00
Craig Topper
f7298b0ef0 [InstSimplify] Add test cases for mixing add/sub i1 with xor of i1. Seems we can simplify in one direction but not the other.
llvm-svn: 299627
2017-04-06 05:48:06 +00:00
Craig Topper
aa5f524095 [InstSimplify] Teach SimplifyAddInst and SimplifySubInst that vectors of i1 can be treated as Xor too.
llvm-svn: 299626
2017-04-06 05:28:41 +00:00
Zvi Rackover
8f460655a2 InstSimplify: Add a hook for shufflevector
Summary:
Add a hook for simplification of shufflevector's with the following rules:
- Constant folding - NFC, as it was already being done by the default handler.
-  If only one of the operands is constant, constant fold the shuffle if the
    mask does not select elements from the variable operand -  to show the hook is firing and affecting the test-cases.

Reviewers: RKSimon, craig.topper, spatel, sanjoy, nlopes, majnemer

Reviewed By: spatel

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31525

llvm-svn: 299393
2017-04-03 22:05:30 +00:00
Zvi Rackover
e479980686 Add another interesting shufflevector test case for InstSimplify. NFC.
Test case shows opportunity to constant fold a shuffle with one variable
input vector operand.

llvm-svn: 299327
2017-04-02 10:42:21 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
8b5ad3f00e [InstSimplify] add constant folding for fdiv/frem
Also, add a helper function so we don't have to repeat this code for each binop.

llvm-svn: 299309
2017-04-01 19:05:11 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
ee0f5cc41f [InstSimplify] add tests for missed constant folding; NFC
llvm-svn: 299308
2017-04-01 18:44:03 +00:00
Zvi Rackover
38ba75c238 Instsimplify: Adding shufflevector test. NFC.
Adding some test-cases demonstrating cases that need to be improved.
To be followed by patches that improve these cases.

llvm-svn: 299189
2017-03-31 07:46:02 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
962a8431ea [InstSimplify] allow folds for bool vector div/rem
llvm-svn: 297411
2017-03-09 21:56:03 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
7e56366204 [ConstantFold] vector div/rem with any zero element in divisor is undef
Follow-up for:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D30665
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL297390

llvm-svn: 297409
2017-03-09 20:42:30 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
bb47616aef [InstSimplify] add tests for vector constant folding div/rem-by-0; NFC
llvm-svn: 297407
2017-03-09 20:31:20 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
2b1f6f4b92 [InstSimplify] vector div/rem with any zero element in divisor is undef
This was suggested as a DAG simplification in the review for rL297026 :
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20170306/435253.html
...but let's start with IR since we have actual docs for IR (LangRef).

Differential Revision:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D30665

llvm-svn: 297390
2017-03-09 16:20:52 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
3bbee79d9e [InstSimplify] add tests for vector div/rem with UB potential; NFC
llvm-svn: 297048
2017-03-06 18:45:39 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
c494239bd8 [InstSimplify] regenerate checks; NFC
llvm-svn: 297040
2017-03-06 18:13:01 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
fe67255961 [InstSimplify] add nsw/nuw (xor X, signbit), signbit --> X
The change to InstCombine in:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D29729
...exposes this missing fold in InstSimplify, so adding this
first to avoid a regression.

llvm-svn: 295573
2017-02-18 21:59:09 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
308eb22118 [InstSimplify] add tests for add nsw/nuw (xor X, signbit), signbit --> X; NFC
llvm-svn: 295572
2017-02-18 21:51:14 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
54656ca7db [ValueTracking] emit a remark when we detect a conflicting assumption (PR31809)
This is a follow-up to D29395 where we try to be good citizens and let the user know that
we've probably gone off the rails.

This should allow us to resolve:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=31809

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29404

llvm-svn: 294208
2017-02-06 18:26:06 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
52e4e6594e [ValueTracking] remove a FIXME for something we don't want to do; NFC
The comment was added with:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL293773
...but there would be a cost to implement this and possibly no payoff.

llvm-svn: 293823
2017-02-01 22:27:34 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
25f6d710d9 [ValueTracking] avoid crashing from bad assumptions (PR31809)
A program may contain llvm.assume info that disagrees with other analysis. 
This may be caused by UB in the program, so we must not crash because of that.

As noted in the code comments:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=31809
...we can do better, but this at least avoids the assert/crash in the bug report.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29395

llvm-svn: 293773
2017-02-01 15:41:32 +00:00
Justin Lebar
7e3184c412 [ValueTracking] Implement SignBitMustBeZero correctly for sqrt.
Summary:
Previously we assumed that the result of sqrt(x) always had 0 as its
sign bit.  But sqrt(-0) == -0.

Reviewers: hfinkel, efriedma, sanjoy

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28928

llvm-svn: 293115
2017-01-26 00:10:26 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
562272536a [InstSimplify] try to eliminate icmp Pred (add nsw X, C1), C2
I was surprised to see that we're missing icmp folds based on 'add nsw' in InstCombine, 
but we should handle the InstSimplify cases first because that could make the InstCombine
code simpler.

Here are Alive-based proofs for the logic:

Name: add_neg_constant
Pre: C1 < 0 && (C2 > ((1<<(width(C1)-1)) + C1))
%a = add nsw i7 %x, C1
%b = icmp sgt %a, C2
  =>
%b = false

Name: add_pos_constant
Pre: C1 > 0 && (C2 < ((1<<(width(C1)-1)) + C1 - 1))
%a = add nsw i6 %x, C1
%b = icmp slt %a, C2
  =>
%b = false

Name: nuw
Pre: C1 u>= C2
%a = add nuw i11 %x, C1
%b = icmp ult %a, C2
  =>
%b = false

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29053

llvm-svn: 292952
2017-01-24 17:03:24 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
ce9d6faed6 [InstSimplify] add tests to show missing folds from 'icmp (add nsw)'; NFC
llvm-svn: 292841
2017-01-23 22:42:55 +00:00
Chad Rosier
8520429bdd [ValueTracking] Extend known bits to understand @llvm.bitreverse.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28780

llvm-svn: 292233
2017-01-17 17:23:51 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
d511dde2ec [InstCombine / InstSimplify] add and move tests for lshr transforms; NFC
llvm-svn: 291970
2017-01-13 22:54:12 +00:00
Sanjay Patel
5178363687 [InstCombine] if the condition of a select may be known via assumes, eliminate the select
This is a limited solution for PR31512:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=31512

The motivation is that we will need to increase usage of llvm.assume and/or metadata to solve PR28430:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=28430

...and this kind of simplification is needed to take advantage of that extra information.

The 'not' test case would be handled by:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D28485

Differential Revision:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D28337

llvm-svn: 291915
2017-01-13 17:02:42 +00:00
Matt Arsenault
1e0edbf03c InstSimplify: Eliminate fabs on known positive
llvm-svn: 291624
2017-01-11 00:33:24 +00:00
David Majnemer
63da0c238b [InstSimplify] Optimize away udivs in the presence of range metadata
We know that udiv %V, C can be optimized away to 0 if %V is ult C.

llvm-svn: 291296
2017-01-06 22:58:02 +00:00
David Majnemer
8c0e62f507 [InstSimplify] Optimize away urems in the presence of range metadata
We know that urem %V, C can be optimized away to %V if %V is ult C.

llvm-svn: 291282
2017-01-06 21:23:51 +00:00