Summary:
If the Worklist build causes an IR change this change flag currently factors into the flag for running another iteration of the iteration loop. But only changes during processing should trigger another loop.
This patch captures the worklist creation change flag into the outside the loop flag currently used for DbgDeclares and only sends that flag up to the caller. Rerunning the loop only depends on IC.run() now.
This uses the debug output of InstCombine to determine if one or two iterations run. I couldn't think of a better way to detect it since the second spurious iteration shoudn't make any visible changes. Just wasted computation.
I can do a pre-commit of the test case with the CHECK-NOT as a CHECK if this is an ok way to check this.
This is a subset of D31678 as I'm still not sure how to verify the analysis behavior for that.
Reviewers: davide, majnemer, spatel, chandlerc
Reviewed By: davide
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32453
llvm-svn: 302982
Tests with target intrinsics are inherently target specific, so it
doesn't actually make sense to run them if we've excluded their
target.
llvm-svn: 302979
// (X ^ C1) | C2 --> (X | C2) ^ (C1&~C2)
This canonicalization was added at:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL7264
By moving xors out/down, we can more easily combine constants. I'm adding
tests that do not change with this patch, so we can verify that those kinds
of transforms are still happening.
This is no-functional-change-intended because there's a later fold:
// (X^C)|Y -> (X|Y)^C iff Y&C == 0
...and demanded-bits appears to guarantee that any fold that would have
hit the fold we're removing here would be caught by that 2nd fold.
Similar reasoning was used in:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL299384
The larger motivation for removing this code is that it could interfere with
the fix for PR32706:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32706
Ie, we're not checking if the 'xor' is actually a 'not', so we could reverse
a 'not' optimization and cause an infinite loop by altering an 'xor X, -1'.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33050
llvm-svn: 302733
The first test in this file is duplicated exactly in and.ll -> test33.
We have commuted and vector variants there too.
The second test is a composite of 2 folds. The first fold is tested
independently in add.ll -> flip_and_mask (including vector variant).
After that transform fires, the IR is identical to the first transform.
llvm-svn: 302676
The script at utils/update_test_checks.py has (had?) a bug when variables
start with the same sequence of letters (clearly, not all of the time).
llvm-svn: 302674
This is another step towards favoring 'not' ops over random 'xor' in IR:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32706
This transformation may have occurred in longer IR sequences using computeKnownBits,
but that could be much more expensive to calculate.
As the scalar result shows, we do not currently favor 'not' in all cases. The 'not'
created by the transform is transformed again (unnecessarily). Vectors don't have
this problem because vectors are (wrongly) excluded from several other combines.
llvm-svn: 302659
The comment says to avoid the case where zero bits are shifted into the truncated value,
but the code checks that the shift is smaller than the truncated value instead of the
number of bits added by the sign extension. Fixing this allows a shift by more than the
value size to be introduced, which is undefined behavior, so the shift is capped at the
value size minus one, which has the expected behavior of filling the value with the sign
bit.
Patch by Jacob Young!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32285
llvm-svn: 302548
This is another step towards getting rid of dyn_castNotVal,
so we can recommit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL300977
As the tests show, we were missing the lshr case for constants
and both ashr/lshr vector splat folds. The ashr case with constant
was being performed inefficiently in 2 steps. It's also possible
there was a latent bug in that case because we can't do that fold
if the constant is positive:
http://rise4fun.com/Alive/Bge
llvm-svn: 302465
This patch uses KnownOnes of the input of ctlz/cttz to bound the value that can be returned from these intrinsics. This makes these intrinsics more similar to the handling for ctpop which already uses known bits to produce a similar bound.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32521
llvm-svn: 302444
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/rL301260https://reviews.llvm.org/D32143
llvm-svn: 302370
Change checkRippleForAdd from a heuristic to a full check -
if it is provable that the add does not overflow return true, otherwise false.
Patch by Yoav Ben-Shalom
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32686
llvm-svn: 302093
Fixes PR31789 - When loop-vectorize tries to use these intrinsics for a
non-default address space pointer we fail with a "Calling a function with a
bad singature!" assertion. This patch solves this by adding the 'vector of
pointers' argument as an overloaded type which will determine the address
space.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31490
llvm-svn: 302018
This was originally checked in here:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL301923
And reverted here:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL301924
Because there's a clang test that would fail after this. I fixed/removed the
offending CHECK lines in:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL301928
So let's try this again. Original commit message:
This is the fold that causes the infinite loop in BoringSSL
(https://github.com/google/boringssl/blob/master/crypto/cipher/e_rc2.c)
when we fix instcombine demanded bits to prefer 'not' ops as in https://reviews.llvm.org/D32255.
There are 2 or 3 problems with dyn_castNotVal, and I don't think we can
reinstate https://reviews.llvm.org/D32255 until dyn_castNotVal is completely eliminated.
1. As shown here, it transforms 'not' into random xor. This transform is harmful to SCEV and codegen because 'not' can often be folded while random xor cannot.
2. It does not transform vector constants. This is actually a good thing, but if you don't believe the above argument, then we shouldn't have excluded vectors.
3. It tries to avoid transforming not(not(X)). That's nice, but it doesn't match the greedy nature of instcombine. If we DeMorganize a pattern that has an extra 'not' in it: ~(~(~X) & Y) --> (~X | ~Y)
That's just another case of DeMorgan, so we should trust that we'll fold that pattern too: (~X | ~ Y) --> ~(X & Y)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32665
llvm-svn: 301929
This is the fold that causes the infinite loop in BoringSSL
(https://github.com/google/boringssl/blob/master/crypto/cipher/e_rc2.c)
when we fix instcombine demanded bits to prefer 'not' ops as in D32255.
There are 2 or 3 problems with dyn_castNotVal, and I don't think we can
reinstate D32255 until dyn_castNotVal is completely eliminated.
1. As shown here, it transforms 'not' into random xor. This transform is
harmful to SCEV and codegen because 'not' can often be folded while
random xor cannot.
2. It does not transform vector constants. This is actually a good thing,
but if you don't believe the above argument, then we shouldn't have
excluded vectors.
3. It tries to avoid transforming not(not(X)). That's nice, but it doesn't
match the greedy nature of instcombine. If we DeMorganize a pattern
that has an extra 'not' in it:
~(~(~X) & Y) --> (~X | ~Y)
That's just another case of DeMorgan, so we should trust that we'll fold
that pattern too:
(~X | ~ Y) --> ~(X & Y)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32665
llvm-svn: 301923
If we have ~(~X & Y), it only makes sense to transform it to (X | ~Y) when we do not need
the intermediate (~X & Y) value. In that case, we would need an extra instruction to
generate ~Y + 'or' (as shown in the test changes).
It's ok if we have multiple uses of ~X or Y, however. In those cases, we may not reduce the
instruction count or critical path, but we might improve throughput because we can generate
~X and ~Y in parallel. Whether that actually makes perf sense or not for a target is something
we can't answer in IR.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32703
llvm-svn: 301848
The matching here wasn't able to handle all the possible commutes. It always assumed the not would be on the left of the xor, but that's not guaranteed.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32474
llvm-svn: 301316
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
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
When the location description of a source variable involves arithmetic
on the value itself, it needs to be marked with DW_OP_stack_value since it
is not describing the variable's location, but rather its value.
This is a follow-up to r297971 and fixes the source testcase quoted in
the comment in debuginfo-dce.ll.
rdar://problem/30725338
This reapplies r301093 without modifications.
llvm-svn: 301210
There is logic to track the expected number of instructions
produced. It thought in this case an instruction would
be necessary to negate the result, but here it folded
into a ConstantExpr fneg when the non-undef value operand
was cancelled out by the second fsub.
I'm not sure why we don't fold constant FP ops with undef currently,
but I think that would also avoid this problem.
llvm-svn: 301199
Summary:
The return value of these intrinsics should always have 0 bits for
inactive threads. This means that when all arguments are constant
and the comparison evaluates to true, the intrinsic should return
the current exec mask.
Fixes some GL_ARB_shader_ballot tests.
Reviewers: arsenm
Subscribers: kzhuravl, wdng, yaxunl, dstuttard, tpr, llvm-commits, t-tye
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32344
llvm-svn: 301195
We handled all of the commuted variants for plain xor already,
although they were scattered around and sometimes folded less
efficiently using distributive laws. We had no folds for not-xor.
Handling all of these patterns consistently is part of trying to
reinstate:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL300977
llvm-svn: 301144
There's probably some better way to write this that eliminates the
code duplication without hurting readability, but at least this
eliminates the logic holes and is hopefully slightly more efficient
than creating new instructions.
llvm-svn: 301129
When the location description of a source variable involves arithmetic
on the value itself, it needs to be marked with DW_OP_stack_value since it
is not describing the variable's location, but rather its value.
This is a follow-up to r297971 and fixes the source testcase quoted in
the comment in debuginfo-dce.ll.
rdar://problem/30725338
llvm-svn: 301093
The bug was introduced by r301018 "[InstCombine] fadd double (sitofp x), y check that the promotion is valid". The patch didn't expect that fadd can be on vectors not necessarily scalars. Add vector support along with the test.
llvm-svn: 301070
Doing these transformations check that the result of integer addition is representable in the FP type.
(fadd double (sitofp x), fpcst) --> (sitofp (add int x, intcst))
(fadd double (sitofp x), (sitofp y)) --> (sitofp (add int x, y))
This is a fix for https://bugs.llvm.org//show_bug.cgi?id=27036
Reviewed By: andrew.w.kaylor, scanon, spatel
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31182
llvm-svn: 301018
This change is correct because the verifier requires that at most one
argument be marked 'sret'.
NFC, removes a use of AttributeList slot APIs.
llvm-svn: 300784
So, `cast<Instruction>` is not guaranteed to succeed. Change the
code so that we create a new constant and use it in the newly
created instruction, as it's done in other places in InstCombine.
OK'ed by Sanjay/Craig. Fixes PR32686.
llvm-svn: 300495
Causes some VGPR usage improvements in shaderdb, but
introduces some SGPR spilling regressions due to random
scheduling changes later.
llvm-svn: 300453
This patch adds new optimization (Folding cmp(sub(a,b),0) into cmp(a,b))
to instCombineCall pass and was written specific for X86 CMP intrinsics.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31398
llvm-svn: 300422
...when C1 differs from C2 by one bit and C1 <u C2:
http://rise4fun.com/Alive/Vuo
And move related folds to a helper function. This reduces code duplication and
will make it easier to remove the scalar-only restriction as a follow-up step.
llvm-svn: 300364
We currently only support folding a subtract into a select but not a PHI. This fixes that.
I had to fix an assumption in FoldOpIntoPhi that assumed the PHI node was always in operand 0. Now we pass it in like we do for FoldOpIntoSelect. But we still require some dancing to find the Constant when we create the BinOp or ConstantExpr. This is based code is similar to what we do for selects.
Since I touched all call sites, this also renames FoldOpIntoPhi to foldOpIntoPhi to match coding standards.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31686
llvm-svn: 300363
Switch from Euclid's algorithm to Stein's algorithm for computing GCD. This
avoids the (expensive) APInt division operation in favour of bit operations.
Remove all memory allocation from within the GCD loop by tweaking our `lshr`
implementation so it can operate in-place.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31968
llvm-svn: 300252
Summary:
Bug noticed by inspection.
Extend the test to handle invokes as well as calls, and rewrite it to
not depend on the inliner and other passes.
Also simplify the call site replacement code with CallSite, similar to
what I did to dead arg elimination and arg promotion (rL300235 and
rL300229).
Reviewers: danielcdh, davidxl
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32041
llvm-svn: 300251
This is effectively a retry of:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL299851
but now we have tests and an assert to make sure the bug
that was exposed with that attempt will not happen again.
I'll fix the code duplication and missing sibling fold next,
but I want to make this change as small as possible to reduce
risk since I messed it up last time.
This should fix:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32524
llvm-svn: 300236
If we had these tests, the bug caused by https://reviews.llvm.org/rL299851 would have been caught sooner.
There's also an assert in the code that should have caught that bug, but the assert line itself has a bug.
llvm-svn: 300201
As discussed in:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32486
...the canonicalization of vector select to shufflevector does not hold up
when undef elements are present in the condition vector.
Try to make the undef handling clear in the code and the LangRef.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31980
llvm-svn: 300092
Currently if we reach an instruction with multiples uses we know we can't do any optimizations to that instruction itself since we only have the demanded bits for one of the users. But if we know all of the bits are zero/one for that one user we can still go ahead and create a constant to give to that user.
This might then reduce the instruction to having a single use and allow additional optimizations on the other path.
This picks up an additional case that r300075 didn't catch.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31552
llvm-svn: 300084
If we are adding/subtractings 0s below the highest demanded bit we can just use the other operand and remove the operation.
My primary motivation is observing that we can call ShrinkDemandedConstant for the add/sub and create a 0 constant, rather than removing the add completely. In the case I saw, we modified the constant on an add instruction to a 0, but the add is not put into the worklist. So we didn't revisit it until the next InstCombine iteration. This caused an IR modification to remove add and a subsequent iteration to be ran.
With this change we get bypass the add in the first iteration and prevent the second iteration from changing anything.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31120
llvm-svn: 300075
One potential way to make InstCombine (very slightly?) faster is to recycle instructions
when possible instead of creating new ones. It's not explicitly stated AFAIK, but we don't
consider this an "InstSimplify". We could, however, make a new layer to house transforms
like this if that makes InstCombine more manageable (just throwing out an idea; not sure
how much opportunity is actually here).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31863
llvm-svn: 300067
Also, make the same change in and-of-icmps and remove a hack for detecting that case.
Finally, add some FIXME comments because the code duplication here is awful.
This should fix the remaining IR problem noted in:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32524
llvm-svn: 299851
We currently only fold scalar add of constants into selects. This improves this to support vectors too.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31683
llvm-svn: 299847
Summary: I noticed in the select folding code that we copied fast math flags, but did not do the same for the similar handling in phi nodes. This patch fixes that to do the same thing as select
Reviewers: spatel, davide, majnemer, hfinkel
Reviewed By: davide
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31690
llvm-svn: 299838
Currently we only fold with ConstantInt RHS. This generalizes to any Constant RHS.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31610
llvm-svn: 299466
A common way to implement nearbyint is by fiddling with the floating
point environment and calling rint. This is used at least by the BSD
libm and musl. As such, canonicalizing the latter to the former will
create infinite loops for libm and generally pessimize performance, at
least when the generic C versions are used.
This change preserves the rint in the libcall translation and also
handles the domain truncation logic, so that rint with float argument
will be reduced to rintf etc.
llvm-svn: 299247
Summary: Currently the VP metadata was dropped when InstCombine converts a call to direct call. This patch converts the VP metadata to branch_weights so that its hotness is recorded.
Reviewers: eraman, davidxl
Reviewed By: davidxl
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31344
llvm-svn: 299228
Some of the GEP combines (e.g., descaling) can't handle vector GEPs. We have an
existing check that attempts to bail out if given a vector GEP. However, the
check only tests the GEP's pointer operand. A GEP results in a vector of
pointers if at least one of its operands is vector-typed (e.g., its pointer
operand could be a scalar, but its index could be a vector). We should just
check the type of the GEP itself. This should fix PR32414.
Reference: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32414
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31470
llvm-svn: 299017
Summary:
We are incorrectly folding selects into phi nodes when the incoming value of a phi
node is a constant vector. This optimization is done in `FoldOpIntoPhi` when the
select condition is a phi node with constant incoming values.
Without the fix, we are miscompiling (i.e. incorrectly folding the
select into the phi node) when the vector contains non-zero
elements.
This patch fixes the miscompile and we will correctly fold based on the
select vector operand (see added test cases).
Reviewers: majnemer, sanjoy, spatel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31189
llvm-svn: 298845
insertelement (insertelement X, Y, IdxC1), ScalarC, IdxC2 -->
insertelement (insertelement X, ScalarC, IdxC2), Y, IdxC1
As noted in the code comment and seen in the test changes, the motivation is that by pulling
constant insertion up, we may be able to constant fold some insertelement instructions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31196
llvm-svn: 298520
Summary: Subtracts can have constants on the left side, but we don't shrink them based on demanded bits. This patch fixes that to match the right hand side.
Reviewers: davide, majnemer, spatel, sanjoy, hfinkel
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31119
llvm-svn: 298478
This adds a parameter to @llvm.objectsize that makes it return
conservative values if it's given null.
This fixes PR23277.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28494
llvm-svn: 298430
Summary:
The reverse of an artbitrary bitpattern is also an arbitrary
bitpattern.
Reviewers: trentxintong, arsenm, majnemer
Reviewed By: majnemer
Subscribers: majnemer, wdng, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31118
llvm-svn: 298201
[Reapplies r297971 and punting on finding a better API for findDbgValues()]
This patch improves debug info quality in InstCombine by looking at
values that are about to be deleted, checking whether there are any
dbg.value instrinsics referring to them, and potentially encoding the
semantics of the deleted instruction into the dbg.value's
DIExpression.
In the example in the testcase (which was extracted from XNU) there is a sequence of
%4 = load %struct.entry*, %struct.entry** %next2, align 8, !dbg !41
%5 = bitcast %struct.entry* %4 to i8*, !dbg !42
%add.ptr4 = getelementptr inbounds i8, i8* %5, i64 -8, !dbg !43
%6 = bitcast i8* %add.ptr4 to %struct.entry*, !dbg !44
call void @llvm.dbg.value(metadata %struct.entry* %6, i64 0, metadata !20, metadata !21), !dbg 34
When these instructions are eliminated by instcombine one after
another, we can still salvage the otherwise dead debug info:
- Bitcasts have no effect, so have the dbg.value point to operand(0)
- Loads can be expressed via a DW_OP_deref
- Constant gep instructions can be replaced by DWARF expression arithmetic
The API introduced by this patch is not specific to instcombine and
can be useful in other places, too.
rdar://problem/30725338
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30919
llvm-svn: 297994
As the related tests show, we're not canonicalizing to this form for scalars or vectors yet,
but this solves the immediate problem in:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32306
llvm-svn: 297989
This patch improves debug info quality in InstCombine by looking at
values that are about to be deleted, checking whether there are any
dbg.value instrinsics referring to them, and potentially encoding the
semantics of the deleted instruction into the dbg.value's
DIExpression.
In the example in the testcase (which was extracted from XNU) there is a sequence of
%4 = load %struct.entry*, %struct.entry** %next2, align 8, !dbg !41
%5 = bitcast %struct.entry* %4 to i8*, !dbg !42
%add.ptr4 = getelementptr inbounds i8, i8* %5, i64 -8, !dbg !43
%6 = bitcast i8* %add.ptr4 to %struct.entry*, !dbg !44
call void @llvm.dbg.value(metadata %struct.entry* %6, i64 0, metadata !20, metadata !21), !dbg 34
When these instructions are eliminated by instcombine one after
another, we can still salvage the otherwise dead debug info:
- Bitcasts have no effect, so have the dbg.value point to operand(0)
- Loads can be expressed via a DW_OP_deref
- Constant gep instructions can be replaced by DWARF expression arithmetic
The API introduced by this patch is not specific to instcombine and
can be useful in other places, too.
rdar://problem/30725338
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30919
llvm-svn: 297971
If it is possible for the RHS of a shift operation to be greater than or equal
to the bit-width, then the result might be undef, and we can't report any known
bits.
In some cases, this was allowing a transformation in instcombine which widened
an undef value from i1 to i32, increasing the range of values that a function
could return.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30781
llvm-svn: 297724
Sanjay Patel