117 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Nikita Popov
a266af7211 [InstCombine] Canonicalize SPF to min/max intrinsics
Now that integer min/max intrinsics have good support in both
InstCombine and other passes, start canonicalizing SPF min/max
to intrinsic min/max.

Once this sticks, we can stop matching SPF min/max in various
places, and can remove hacks we have for preventing infinite loops
and breaking of SPF canonicalization.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98152
2022-02-24 09:01:20 +01:00
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
Sanjay Patel
cc9c545fb4 [InstCombine] generalize subtract with 'not' operands; 2nd try
This is a re-try of 3aa009cc87e3 which was reverted at
9577fac0fddf because it caused an infinite loop.

For the extra test case, either re-ordering the transforms
or adding the extra clause to avoid sub-of-sub is enough
to prevent the infinite compile, but I'm doing both to be
safer.

Original commit message:
The motivation was to get min/max intrinsics to parity
with cmp+select idioms, but this unlocks a few more
folds because isFreeToInvert recognizes add/sub with
constants too.

In the min/max example, we have too many extra uses
for smaller folds to improve things, but this fold
is able to eliminate uses even though we can't reduce
the number of instructions.
2021-08-23 17:06:51 -04:00
Florian Hahn
7872074f22
[InstCombine] Add reduced sub/negate test from PR51584. 2021-08-23 15:47:22 +01:00
Florian Hahn
9577fac0fd
Revert "[InstCombine] generalize subtract with 'not' operands"
This reverts commit 3aa009cc87e3789ac44bbb98b04846736373e08f.

The reverted commit causes an infinite loop in instcombine. See PR51584.
2021-08-23 15:47:21 +01:00
Sanjay Patel
3aa009cc87 [InstCombine] generalize subtract with 'not' operands
The motivation was to get min/max intrinsics to parity
with cmp+select idioms, but this unlocks a few more
folds because isFreeToInvert recognizes add/sub with
constants too.

In the min/max example, we have too many extra uses
for smaller folds to improve things, but this fold
is able to eliminate uses even though we can't reduce
the number of instructions.
2021-08-22 07:18:31 -04:00
David Sherwood
8439415333 [IR] Let ConstantVector::getSplat use poison instead of undef
This patch updates ConstantVector::getSplat to use poison instead
of undef when using insertelement/shufflevector to splat.

This follows on from D93793.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D107751
2021-08-10 08:27:43 +01:00
Fraser Cormack
ae3f6de3a8 [InstCombine] Support negation of scalable-vector splats
This patch is an extension of D103421. It allows the InstCombiner to
generate the negated form of integer scalable-vector splats. It can
technically handle fixed-length vectors too but those are completely
covered by the preceding logic.

This enables extra combining opportunities for scalable vector types.

Reviewed By: RKSimon

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103801
2021-06-07 15:14:00 +01:00
Fraser Cormack
fd3b556958 [Constants] Extend support for scalable-vector splats
This patch extends the various "isXXX" functions of the `Constant` class
to include scalable-vector splats.

In several "isXXX" functions, code that was separately inspecting
`ConstantVector` and `ConstantDataVector` was unified to use
`getSplatValue`, which already includes support for said splats.

In the varous "isNotXXX" functions, code was added to check whether the
scalar splat value -- if any -- satisfies the predicate.

An extra fix for `isNotMinSignedValue` was included, as it previously
crashed when passed a scalable-vector type because it unconditionally
cast to `FixedVectorType`

These changes address numerous missed optimizations, a compiler crash
mentioned above and -- perhaps most egregiously -- an infinite loop in
InstCombine due to the compiler breaking canonical form when it failed
to pick up on a splat in a select instruction.

Test cases have been added to cover as many of these functions as
possible, though existing coverage is slim; it doesn't appear that there
are any in-tree uses of `Constant::isNegativeZeroValue`, for example.

Reviewed By: RKSimon

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103421
2021-06-07 14:37:56 +01:00
Dávid Bolvanský
ae69fa9b9f [InstCombine] Transform (A + B) - (A & B) to A | B (PR48604)
define i32 @src(i32 %x, i32 %y) {
%0:
  %a = add i32 %x, %y
  %o = and i32 %x, %y
  %r = sub i32 %a, %o
  ret i32 %r
}
=>
define i32 @tgt(i32 %x, i32 %y) {
%0:
  %b = or i32 %x, %y
  ret i32 %b
}
Transformation seems to be correct!

https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/2fhW6r
2020-12-31 15:04:32 +01:00
Dávid Bolvanský
c1937c2af2 [NFC] Added/adjusted tests for PR48604; second pattern 2020-12-31 14:59:15 +01:00
Sanjay Patel
678b9c5dde [InstCombine] try difference-of-shifts factorization before negator
We need to preserve wrapping flags to allow better folds.
The cases with geps may be non-intuitive, but that appears to agree with Alive2:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/JQcqw7
We create 'nsw' ops independent from the original wrapping on the sub.
2020-11-24 13:56:30 -05:00
Sanjay Patel
ccf6f15bc6 [InstCombine] add tests for sub of muls; NFC 2020-11-24 13:56:30 -05:00
Sanjay Patel
ab29f091eb [InstCombine] propagate 'nsw' on pointer difference of 'inbounds' geps
This is a retry of 324a53205. I cautiously reverted that at 6aa3fc4
because the rules about gep math were not clear. Since then, we
have added this line to LangRef for gep inbounds:
"The successive addition of offsets (without adding the base address)
does not wrap the pointer index type in a signed sense (nsw)."

See D90708 and post-commit comments on the revert patch for more details.
2020-11-23 16:50:09 -05:00
Nikita Popov
30b5c3f3a6 [Local] Emit nsw for inbounds offset calculation
In line with D90708, we can use nsw for the inbounds offset
calculation -- the muls were already using nsw, but the adds were
not.
2020-11-13 18:39:46 +01:00
Sanjay Patel
0abde4bc92 [InstCombine] fold sub of low-bit masked value from offset of same value
There might be some demanded/known bits way to generalize this,
but I'm not seeing it right now.

This came up as a regression when I was looking at a different
demanded bits improvement.

https://rise4fun.com/Alive/5fl

  Name: general
  Pre: ((-1 << countTrailingZeros(C1)) & C2) == 0
  %a1 = add i8 %x, C1
  %a2 = and i8 %x, C2
  %r = sub i8 %a1, %a2
  =>
  %r = and i8 %a1, ~C2

  Name: test 1
  %a1 = add i8 %x, 192
  %a2 = and i8 %x, 10
  %r = sub i8 %a1, %a2
  =>
  %r = and i8 %a1, -11

  Name: test 2
  %a1 = add i8 %x, -108
  %a2 = and i8 %x, 3
  %r = sub i8 %a1, %a2
  =>
  %r = and i8 %a1, -4
2020-11-12 20:10:28 -05:00
Sanjay Patel
87e006bedd [InstCombine] add tests for sub with masked bits; NFC 2020-11-12 20:10:28 -05:00
Sanjay Patel
6aa3fc4a5b Revert "[InstCombine] propagate 'nsw' on pointer difference of 'inbounds' geps (PR47430)"
This reverts commit 324a53205a3af979e3de109fdd52f91781816cba.

On closer examination of at least one of the test diffs,
this does not appear to be correct in all cases. Even the
existing 'nsw' creation may be wrong based on this example:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/uL4Hw9
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/fJMKQS
2020-09-11 10:54:48 -04:00
Sanjay Patel
324a53205a [InstCombine] propagate 'nsw' on pointer difference of 'inbounds' geps (PR47430)
There's no signed wrap if both geps have 'inbounds':
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/nZkQTg
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/7qFauh
2020-09-11 10:39:09 -04:00
Sanjay Patel
6b5b6511a5 [InstCombine] add/move tests for ptr diff; NFC 2020-09-11 10:39:09 -04:00
Sanjay Patel
8b30067919 [InstCombine] improve fold of pointer differences
This was supposed to be an NFC cleanup, but there's
a real logic difference (did not drop 'nsw') visible
in some tests in addition to an efficiency improvement.

This is because in the case where we have 2 GEPs,
the code was *always* swapping the operands and
negating the result. But if we have 2 GEPs, we
should *never* need swapping/negation AFAICT.

This is part of improving flags propagation noticed
with PR47430.
2020-09-07 15:54:32 -04:00
Sanjay Patel
3ca8b9a560 [InstCombine] give a name to an intermediate value for easier tracking; NFC
As noted in PR47430, we probably want to conditionally include 'nsw'
here anyway, so we are going to need to fill out the optional args.
2020-09-07 08:19:42 -04:00
Roman Lebedev
3a3c9519e2
[InstCombine] Negator: 0 - (X + Y) --> (-X) - Y iff a single operand negated
This was the most obvious regression in
f5df5cd5586ae9cfb2d9e53704dfc76f47aff149.f5df5cd5586ae9cfb2d9e53704dfc76f47aff149

We really don't want to do this if the original/outermost subtraction
isn't a negation, and therefore doesn't go away - just sinking negation
isn't a win. We are actually appear to be missing folds so hoist it.

https://rise4fun.com/Alive/tiVe
2020-08-05 20:01:13 +03:00
Roman Lebedev
f5df5cd558
Recommit "[InstCombine] Negator: -(X << C) --> X * (-1 << C)"
This reverts commit ac70b37a00dc02bd8923e0a4602d26be4581c570
which reverted commit 8aeb2fe13a4100b4c2e78d6ef75119304100cb1f
because codegen tests got broken and i needed time to investigate.

This shows some regressions in tests, but they are all around GEP's,
so i'm not really sure how important those are.

https://rise4fun.com/Alive/1Gn
2020-08-05 15:59:13 +03:00
Roman Lebedev
ac70b37a00
Revert "[InstCombine] Negator: -(X << C) --> X * (-1 << C)"
Breaks codegen tests, will recommit later.

This reverts commit 8aeb2fe13a4100b4c2e78d6ef75119304100cb1f.
2020-08-05 03:19:38 +03:00
Roman Lebedev
8aeb2fe13a
[InstCombine] Negator: -(X << C) --> X * (-1 << C)
This shows some regressions in tests, but they are all around GEP's,
so i'm not really sure how important those are.

https://rise4fun.com/Alive/1Gn
2020-08-05 03:13:14 +03:00
Roman Lebedev
8fd57b06a4
[NFC][InstCombine] Fix value names (s/%tmp/%i/) and autogenerate a few tests being affected by negator change 2020-08-05 03:12:14 +03:00
Sanjay Patel
1a2bffaf8b [InstCombine] reassociate sub+add to increase adds and throughput
The -reassociate pass tends to transform this kind of pattern into
something that is worse for vectorization and codegen. See PR43953:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43953

Follows-up the FP version of the same transform:
rGa0ce2338a083
2020-05-26 14:49:17 -04:00
Sanjay Patel
0788392637 [InstCombine] add tests for reassociative sub/add expressions; NFC 2020-05-26 14:49:16 -04:00
Roman Lebedev
5a159ed2a8
[InstCombine] Negator: don't negate multi-use sub
While we can do that, it doesn't increase instruction count,
if the old `sub` sticks around then the transform is not only
not a unlikely win, but a likely regression, since we likely
now extended live range and use count of both of the `sub` operands,
as opposed to just the result of `sub`.

As Kostya Serebryany notes in post-commit review in
https://reviews.llvm.org/D68408#1998112
this indeed can degrade final assembly,
increase register pressure, and spilling.

This isn't what we want here,
so at least for now let's guard it with an use check.
2020-04-23 23:59:15 +03:00
Roman Lebedev
352fef3f11
[InstCombine] Negator - sink sinkable negations
Summary:
As we have discussed previously (e.g. in D63992 / D64090 / [[ https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42457 | PR42457 ]]), `sub` instruction
can almost be considered non-canonical. While we do convert `sub %x, C` -> `add %x, -C`,
we sparsely do that for non-constants. But we should.

Here, i propose to interpret `sub %x, %y` as `add (sub 0, %y), %x` IFF the negation can be sinked into the `%y`

This has some potential to cause endless combine loops (either around PHI's, or if there are some opposite transforms).
For former there's `-instcombine-negator-max-depth` option to mitigate it, should this expose any such issues
For latter, if there are still any such opposing folds, we'd need to remove the colliding fold.
In any case, reproducers welcomed!

Reviewers: spatel, nikic, efriedma, xbolva00

Reviewed By: spatel

Subscribers: xbolva00, mgorny, hiraditya, reames, llvm-commits

Tags: #llvm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68408
2020-04-21 22:00:23 +03:00
Sanjay Patel
5b5a74f7d1 [InstCombine] remove stale FIXME comment; NFC 2020-04-09 10:33:49 -04:00
Roman Lebedev
1badf7c33a
[InstComine] Forego of one-use check in (X - (X & Y)) --> (X & ~Y) if Y is a constant
Summary:
This is potentially more friendly for further optimizations,
analysies, e.g.: https://godbolt.org/z/G24anE

This resolves phase-ordering bug that was introduced
in D75145 for https://godbolt.org/z/2gBwF2
https://godbolt.org/z/XvgSua

Reviewers: spatel, nikic, dmgreen, xbolva00

Reviewed By: nikic, xbolva00

Subscribers: hiraditya, zzheng, llvm-commits

Tags: #llvm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75757
2020-03-06 21:39:07 +03:00
Roman Lebedev
69ec84f8e7
[NFC][InstCombine] Add 'x - (x & y)' tests with multi-use 'and'
If %y is constant, we could still perform the fold
2020-03-06 19:41:19 +03:00
Nikita Popov
ff17da3f75 [InstCombine] Push negation through multiply (PR44234)
Fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44234 by adding
multiply support to freelyNegateValue(). Only one of the operands
needs to be negatible, so this still fits within the framework.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D73410
2020-01-31 20:58:55 +01:00
Nikita Popov
bcfa0f592f [InstCombine] Move negation handling into freelyNegateValue()
Followup to D72978. This moves existing negation handling in
InstCombine into freelyNegateValue(), which make it composable.
In particular, root negations of div/zext/sext/ashr/lshr/sub can
now always be performed through a shl/trunc as well.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D73288
2020-01-27 20:46:23 +01:00
Nikita Popov
0957748cb7 [InstCombine] Add more negation tests; NFC
Additional test cases for pushing negations through various
instructions.
2020-01-27 20:46:23 +01:00
Nikita Popov
0b83c5a78f [InstCombine] Combine neg of shl of sub (PR44529)
Fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44529. We already have
a combine to sink a negation through a left-shift, but it currently
only works if the shift operand is negatable without creating any
instructions. This patch introduces freelyNegateValue() as a more
powerful extension of dyn_castNegVal(), which allows negating a
value as long as this doesn't end up increasing instruction count.
Specifically, this patch adds support for negating A-B to B-A.

This mechanism could in the future be extended to handle general
negation chains that a) start at a proper 0-X negation and b) only
require one operand to be freely negatable. This would end up as a
weaker form of D68408 aimed at the most obviously profitable subset
that eliminates a negation entirely.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D72978
2020-01-22 23:03:58 +01:00
Nikita Popov
80c34f94ac [InstCombine] Add test for PR44529; NFC 2020-01-22 23:03:58 +01:00
Mikhail Maltsev
b6534b2a26 [Analysis] Don't assume that unsigned overflow can't happen in EmitGEPOffset (PR42699)
Summary:
Currently when computing a GEP offset using the function EmitGEPOffset
for the following instruction

  getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %p, i64 %offs

we get

  mul nuw i64 %offs, 4

Unfortunately we cannot assume that unsigned wrapping won't happen
here because %offs is allowed to be negative.

Making such assumptions can lead to miscompilations: see the new test
test24_neg_offs in InstCombine/icmp.ll. Without the patch InstCombine
would generate the following comparison:

   icmp eq i64 %offs, 4611686018427387902; 0x3ffffffffffffffe

Whereas the correct value to compare with is -2.

This patch replaces the NUW flag with NSW in the multiplication
instructions generated by EmitGEPOffset and adjusts the test suite.

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42699

Reviewers: chandlerc, craig.topper, ostannard, lebedev.ri, spatel, efriedma, nlopes, aqjune

Reviewed By: lebedev.ri

Subscribers: reames, lebedev.ri, hiraditya, llvm-commits

Tags: #llvm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68342

llvm-svn: 375089
2019-10-17 08:59:06 +00:00
Robert Lougher
8681ef8f41 [InstCombine] Add new combine to add folding
(X | C1) + C2 --> (X | C1) ^ C1 iff (C1 == -C2)

I verified the correctness using Alive:
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/YNV

This transform enables the following transform that already exists in
instcombine:

(X | Y) ^ Y --> X & ~Y

As a result, the full expected transform is:

(X | C1) + C2 --> X & ~C1 iff (C1 == -C2)

There already exists the transform in the sub case:

(X | Y) - Y --> X & ~Y

However this does not trigger in the case where Y is constant due to an earlier
transform:

X - (-C) --> X + C

With this new add fold, both the add and sub constant cases are handled.

Patch by Chris Dawson.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61517

llvm-svn: 360185
2019-05-07 19:36:41 +00:00
Robert Lougher
07298c9b1e Precommit tests for or/add transform. NFC.
llvm-svn: 360149
2019-05-07 14:14:29 +00:00
Robert Lougher
e28ab93546 Revert r359549 - incorrect update of test checks. NFC
llvm-svn: 359897
2019-05-03 15:14:19 +00:00
Jeremy Morse
562f5f04f5 Update checks in an instcombine test, NFC
This reduces the delta in some incoming work that changes this test.

llvm-svn: 359549
2019-04-30 10:56:33 +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
Nikita Popov
10edd2b79d [ValueTracking] Use computeConstantRange() in signed add overflow determination
This is D59386 for the signed add case. The computeConstantRange()
result is now intersected into the existing known bits information,
allowing to detect additional no-overflow/always-overflow conditions
(though the latter isn't used yet).

This (finally...) covers the motivating case from D59071.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60420

llvm-svn: 358014
2019-04-09 16:12:59 +00:00
Nikita Popov
3db93ac5d6 Reapply [ValueTracking] Support min/max selects in computeConstantRange()
Add support for min/max flavor selects in computeConstantRange(),
which allows us to fold comparisons of a min/max against a constant
in InstSimplify. This fixes an infinite InstCombine loop, with the
test case taken from D59378.

Relative to the previous iteration, this contains some adjustments for
AMDGPU med3 tests: The AMDGPU target runs InstSimplify prior to codegen,
which ends up constant folding some existing med3 tests after this
change. To preserve these tests a hidden -amdgpu-scalar-ir-passes option
is added, which allows disabling scalar IR passes (that use InstSimplify)
for testing purposes.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59506

llvm-svn: 357870
2019-04-07 17:22:16 +00:00
Nikita Popov
3af5b28f47 [ValueTracking] Use ConstantRange based overflow check for signed sub
This is D59450, but for signed sub. This case is not NFC, because
the overflow logic in ConstantRange is more powerful than the existing
check. This resolves the TODO in the function.

I've added two tests to show that this indeed catches more cases than
the previous logic, but the main correctness test coverage here is in
the existing ConstantRange unit tests.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59617

llvm-svn: 356685
2019-03-21 17:23:51 +00:00
Nikita Popov
03dbfc2eef [InstCombine] Add additional sub nsw inference tests; NFC
nsw can be determined based on known bits here, but currently
isn't.

llvm-svn: 356620
2019-03-20 21:42:17 +00:00