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.
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
This is a lshr equivalent to D122340 - if we don't demand any of the additional sign bits introduced by the ashr, the lshr can be treated as an ashr and we can remove the shift entirely if we only demand already known sign bits.
Another step towards PR21929
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/6f3kjq
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D123118
We already do this for SelectionDAG, but we're missing it here.
Noticed while re-triaging PR21929
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122340
This should no longer be necessary now that we canonicalize to
intrinsics. This may not be entirely NFC in practice if worklist
order gets inverted and we perform demanded bits simplification
of a select user before the select is canonicalized.
This is a follow-up suggested in D119060.
Instead of checking each of the bottom 2 bits individually,
we can check them together and handle the possibility that
we demand both together.
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/C2ihC2
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D119139
gep(x, undef) carries the provenance of x, so we can't replace it with any
pointer like undef.
This leaves room for improvement for the poison case, but that's currently
not possible as the demanded bits API doesn't distinguish between undef &
poison bits.
Fixes#44790
Stop using APInt constructors and methods that were soft-deprecated in
D109483. This fixes all the uses I found in llvm, except for the APInt
unit tests which should still test the deprecated methods.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110807
The first two tries at this were reverted because they caused an
infinite loop in instcombine.
That should be fixed after a series of patches that ended with
removing the faulty opposing transform:
3fabd98e5b3e
Original commit message:
(masked) trunc (lshr X, C) --> (masked) lshr (trunc X), C
Narrowing the shift should be better for analysis and can lead
to follow-on transforms as shown.
Attempt at a general proof in Alive2:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/tRnnSF
Here are a couple of the specific tests:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/bCnTp-https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/TfaHnb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110170
This reverts commit bb9333c3504a4a02b982526ad8264d14c6ec1ad4.
This exposes another existing bug that causes an infinite loop as shown in
D110170
...so reverting while I look at another fix.
This reverts commit 2f6b07316f560a1f6d225919019dff2e5d6346e5.
This caused several bots to hit an infinite loop at stage 2,
so it needs to be reverted while figuring out how to fix that.
This renames the primary methods for creating a zero value to `getZero`
instead of `getNullValue` and renames predicates like `isAllOnesValue`
to simply `isAllOnes`. This achieves two things:
1) This starts standardizing predicates across the LLVM codebase,
following (in this case) ConstantInt. The word "Value" doesn't
convey anything of merit, and is missing in some of the other things.
2) Calling an integer "null" doesn't make any sense. The original sin
here is mine and I've regretted it for years. This moves us to calling
it "zero" instead, which is correct!
APInt is widely used and I don't think anyone is keen to take massive source
breakage on anything so core, at least not all in one go. As such, this
doesn't actually delete any entrypoints, it "soft deprecates" them with a
comment.
Included in this patch are changes to a bunch of the codebase, but there are
more. We should normalize SelectionDAG and other APIs as well, which would
make the API change more mechanical.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109483
This is a direct translation of the select folds added with
D53033 / D53036 and another step towards canonicalization
using the intrinsics (see D98152).
This is a patch that replaces shufflevector and insertelement's placeholder value with poison.
Underlying motivation is to fix the semantics of shufflevector with undef mask to return poison instead
(D93818)
The consensus has been made in the late 2020 via mailing list as well as the thread in https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44185 .
This patch is a simple syntactic change to the existing code, hence directly pushed as a commit.
As with other transforms in demanded bits, we must be careful not to
wrongly propagate nsw/nuw if we are reducing values leading up to the shift.
This bug was introduced with 1b24f35f843c and leads to the miscompile
shown in:
https://llvm.org/PR50341
As discussed in https://llvm.org/PR50096 , we could
convert the 'not' into a 'sub' and see the same
fold. That's because we already have another demanded
bits optimization for 'sub'.
We could add a related transform for
odd-number-of-type-bits, but that seems unlikely
to be practical.
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/TWJZXr
Currently undef is used as a don’t-care vector when constructing a vector using a series of insertelement.
However, this is problematic because undef isn’t undefined enough.
Especially, a sequence of insertelement can be optimized to shufflevector, but using undef as its placeholder makes shufflevector a poison-blocking instruction because undef cannot be optimized to poison.
This makes a few straightforward optimizations incorrect, such as:
```
; https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44185
define <4 x float> @insert_not_undef_shuffle_translate_commute(float %x, <4 x float> %y, <4 x float> %q) {
%xv = insertelement <4 x float> %q, float %x, i32 2
%r = shufflevector <4 x float> %y, <4 x float> %xv, <4 x i32> { 0, 6, 2, undef }
ret <4 x float> %r ; %r[3] is undef
}
=>
define <4 x float> @insert_not_undef_shuffle_translate_commute(float %x, <4 x float> %y, <4 x float> %q) {
%r = insertelement <4 x float> %y, float %x, i32 1
ret <4 x float> %r ; %r[3] = %y[3], incorrect if %y[3] = poison
}
Transformation doesn't verify!
ERROR: Target is more poisonous than source
```
I’d like to suggest
1. Using poison as insertelement’s placeholder value (IRBuilder::CreateVectorSplat should be patched too)
2. Updating shufflevector’s semantics to return poison element if mask is undef
Note that poison is currently lowered into UNDEF in SelDag, so codegen part is okay.
m_Undef() matches PoisonValue as well, so existing optimizations will still fire.
The only concern is hidden miscompilations that will go incorrect when poison constant is given.
A conservative way is copying all tests having `insertelement undef` & replacing it with `insertelement poison` & run Alive2 on it, but it will create many tests and people won’t like it. :(
Instead, I’ll simply locally maintain the tests and run Alive2.
If there is any bug found, I’ll report it.
Relevant links: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43958 , http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-November/137242.html
Reviewed By: nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93586
I noticed an add example like the one from D91343, so here's a similar patch.
The logic is based on existing code for the single-use demanded bits fold.
But I only matched a constant instead of using compute known bits on the
operands because that was the motivating patterni that I noticed.
I think this will allow removing a special-case (but incomplete) dedicated
fold within visitAnd(), but I need to untangle the existing code to be sure.
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/V6fP
Name: add with low mask
Pre: (C1 & (-1 u>> countLeadingZeros(C2))) == 0
%a = add i8 %x, C1
%r = and i8 %a, C2
=>
%r = and i8 %x, C2
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D91415
We have a frequent pattern where we're merging two KnownBits to get the common/shared bits, and I just fell for the gotcha where I tried to use the & operator to merge them........
The 1st attempt (rG557b890) was reverted because it caused miscompiles.
That bug is avoided here by changing the order of folds and as verified
in the new tests.
Original commit message:
InstCombine currently has odd rules for folding insert-extract chains to shuffles,
so we miss collapsing seemingly simple cases as shown in the tests here.
But poison makes this not quite as easy as we might have guessed. Alive2 tests to
show the subtle difference (similar to the regression tests):
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/hp4hv3 (this is ok)
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/ehEWaN (poison leakage)
SLP tends to create these patterns (as shown in the SLP tests), and this could
help with solving PR16739.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86460
In getCastInstrCost when the instruction is a truncate we were relying
upon the implicit TypeSize -> uint64_t cast when asking if a given type
has the same size as a legal integer. I've changed the code to only
ask the question if the type is fixed length.
I have also changed InstCombinerImpl::SimplifyDemandedUseBits to bail
out for now if the type is a scalable vector.
I've added the following new tests:
Analysis/CostModel/AArch64/sve-trunc.ll
Transforms/InstCombine/AArch64/sve-trunc.ll
for both of these fixes.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86432
InstCombine currently has odd rules for folding insert-extract chains to shuffles,
so we miss collapsing seemingly simple cases as shown in the tests here.
But poison makes this not quite as easy as we might have guessed. Alive2 tests to
show the subtle difference (similar to the regression tests):
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/hp4hv3 (this is ok)
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/ehEWaN (poison leakage)
SLP tends to create these patterns (as shown in the SLP tests), and this could
help with solving PR16739.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86460
There's a potential motivating case to increase this limit in PR47191:
http://bugs.llvm.org/PR47191
But first we should make it less hacky. The limit in InstCombine is directly tied
to this value because an increase there can cause asserts in the underlying value
tracking calls if not changed together. The usage in VectorUtils is independent,
but the comment suggests that we should use the same value unless there's a known
reason to diverge. There are similar limits in codegen analysis, but I think we
should leave those independent in case we intentionally want the optimization
power/cost to be different there.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86113
