This patch mechanically replaces None with std::nullopt where the
compiler would warn if None were deprecated. The intent is to reduce
the amount of manual work required in migrating from Optional to
std::optional.
This is part of an effort to migrate from llvm::Optional to
std::optional:
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/deprecating-llvm-optional-x-hasvalue-getvalue-getvalueor/63716
When X is a power-of-two or zero and zero input is poison:
ctlz(i32 X) ^ 31 --> cttz(X)
cttz(i32 X) ^ 31 --> ctlz(X)
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/Cs7sFE
For (X op Y) op Z --> (Y op Z) op X
we can still do transform when Y is multi-use. In D131356 limit it to one-use,
this patch remove this limit.
This is still not a complete solution, I add a todo test to show it.
In this case, X and Y are both multi use, we can't differentiate how to convert based on this.
But at least we don't make the code worse，and it can solve half the scenarios.
If the shift constant has undefined lanes, we can assume those
are the same as the defined lanes in these transforms:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/t6TTJ2
Replace undef with poison in the test while here to support
the transition away from undef.
Canonicalize ((x + C1) & C2) --> ((x & C2) + C1) for suitable constants
C1 and C2, instead of the other way round. This should allow more
constant ADDs to be matched as part of addressing modes for loads and
stores.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D130080
(X op Y) op Z --> (Y op Z) op X
This isn't a complete solution (see TODO tests for possible refinements),
but it shows some nice wins and doesn't seem to cause any harm. I think
the most potential danger is from conflicting with other folds and causing
an infinite loop - that's the reason for avoiding patterns with constant
operands.
Alternatively, we could try this in the reassociate pass, but we would not
immediately see all of the logic folds that instcombine provides. I also
looked at improving ValueTracking's isImpliedCondition() (and we should
still add some enhancements there), but that would not work in general for
bitwise logic reduction.
The tests that reduce completely to 0/-1 are motivated by issue #56653.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D131356
(~A | C) | (A ^ B) --> ~(A & B) | C
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/Qw3aiJ
This extends the existing fold (just above the new match)
to peek through another 'or' instruction.
This should let the motivating case from issue #57174
simplify completely.
(A | ?) | (A ^ B) --> (A | ?) | B
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/dbNQw4
This extends the existing transform to peek through
another 'or' instruction for the common operand.
This is the underlying missing fold that should allow
issue #56711 and issue #57120 to reduce even more.
This works with any logic + extend:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/vzsqQD
The motivating case is from issue #56294, but that's still not optimal
(it should simplify completely).
The 'and (sext (ashr X, ShiftC)), C' --> 'lshr (sext X), ShiftC'
transformation would access out of bounds bits in APInt::getLowBitsSet
if the shift count was larger than X's bit width or if it was negative.
Fixes#56424
(-(X & 1)) & Y --> (X & 1) == 0 ? 0 : Y
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/rhpH3i
This is noted as a missing IR canonicalization in issue #55618.
We already managed to fix codegen to the expected form.
When the mask is a power-of-2 constant and op0 is a shifted-power-of-2
constant, test if the shift amount equals the offset bit index:
(ShiftC << X) & C --> X == (log2(C) - log2(ShiftC)) ? C : 0
(ShiftC >> X) & C --> X == (log2(ShiftC) - log2(C)) ? C : 0
This is an alternate to D127610 with a more general pattern.
We match only shift+and instead of the trailing xor, so we see a few
more tests diffs. I think we discussed this initially in D126617.
Here are proofs for shifts in both directions:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/CFrLs4
The test diffs look equal or better for IR, and this makes the
patterns more uniform in IR. The backend can partially invert this
in both cases if that is profitable. It is not trivially reversible,
however, so if we find perf regressions that are not easy to undo,
then we may want to revert this.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D127801
This shows narrowing improvements on the logic tests
(transforms recently added with e247b0e5c9).
This is not a complete fix. That would require adding
folds to visitOr/visitXor. But it enables the expected
transforms for the basic patterns in the affected tests.
The 1st try ( afa192cfb6 ) was reverted because it could
cause an infinite loop with constant expressions.
A test for that and an extra condition to enable the transform
are added now. I also added code comments to better describe
the transform and the existing, related transform.
Original commit message:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/hRy3rE
As shown in D123408, we can produce this pattern when moving
casts around, and we already have a related fold for a binop
with a constant operand.
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/hRy3rE
As shown in D123408, we can produce this pattern when moving
cast around, and we already have a related fold for a binop
with a constant operand.
Clang-format InstructionSimplify and convert all "FunctionName"s to
"functionName". This patch does touch a lot of files but gets done with
the cleanup of InstructionSimplify in one commit.
This is the alternative to the less invasive clang-format only patch: D126783
Reviewed By: spatel, rengolin
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126889
The patch simplifies some of the patterns as below
(A | (B & C0)) | (B & C1) -> A | (B & C0|C1)
((B & C0) | A) | (B & C1) -> (B & C0|C1) | A
In some scenarios like byte reverse on half word, we can see this pattern multiple times and this conversion can optimize these patterns.
Additionally this commit fixes the issue reported with the test case.
int f(int a, int b) {
int c = ((unsigned char)(a >> 23) & 925);
if (a)
c = (a >> 23 & b) | ((unsigned char)(a >> 23) & 925) | (b >> 23 & 157);
return c;
}
The previous revision/commit did not check one-use of an intermediate value that this transform re-uses.
When that value has another use, an existing transform will try to invert the transform here.
By adding one-use checks, we avoid the infinite loops seen with the earlier commit.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D124119
This reverts commit ec4adf1f6c. The commit causes
clang to hang on a certain input:
```
$ cat q.cc
int f(int a, int b) {
int c = ((unsigned char)(a >> 23) & 925);
if (a)
c = (a >> 23 & b) | ((unsigned char)(a >> 23) & 925) | (b >> 23 & 157);
return c;
}
$ time ./clang-15-10515 --target=x86_64--linux-gnu -O1 -c q.cc
^C
real 0m45.072s
user 0m0.025s
sys 0m0.099s
```
Most of the folds implemented in this function work fine with
logical operations. We only need to be careful for the cases that
work on non-constant masks, where the RHS operand shouldn't be
poison.
This is a conservative implementation that bails out of illegal
transforms, but we could also change these to insert freeze instead.
Similarly to a change recently done for fcmps, add a flag that
indicates whether the and/or is logical to foldAndOrOfICmps, and
reuse the function when folding logical and/or.
We were already calling some parts of it, but this gives us a
clearer indication of which parts may need poison-safe variants,
and would also allow to fold combinations of bitwise and logical
and/or.
This change should be close to NFC, because all folds this enables
were either already called previously, or can make use of implied
poison reasoning.
The patch simplifies some of the patterns as below
(A | (B & C0)) | (B & C1) -> A | (B & C0|C1)
((B & C0) | A) | (B & C1) -> (B & C0|C1) | A
In some scenarios like byte reverse on half word, we can see this pattern multiple times and this conversion can optimize these patterns.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D124119
D113035 enhanced the matching of bitwise selects from vector types. This
change unfortunately introduced crashes as it tries to cast scalable
vector types to integers.
Reviewed By: spatel
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D124997
This is an edge-case where we don't convert to bitwise and/or based
on implies poison reasoning, so explicitly try to perform the fold
in logical form. The transform itself is poison-safe, as both icmps
are based on the same value and any nowrap flags are discarded as
part of the fold (https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/aCwC8b for the used
example).
This fold handles a special subset of foldAndOrOfICmpsUsingRanges(),
use the more generic implementation instead.
The result can differ if a representation using a range comparison
is possible, in which case that is preferred over masking. There is
a canonicalization opportunity here.
This is the de Morgan conjugated variant of the existing fold for
ors. Implement this by switching the range code to always work
on ors and perform invert operands at the start and end. This makes
reasoning easier and makes the extension more obviosuly correct.
Fangrui Song