Commit Graph

7 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Juneyoung Lee 06829034ca Revert "[ConstantFold] Fold more operations to poison"
This reverts commit 53040a968d due to its
bad interaction with select i1 -> and/or i1 transformation.

This fixes:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49005
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48435
2021-02-04 00:24:02 +09:00
Juneyoung Lee 53040a968d [ConstantFold] Fold more operations to poison
This patch folds more operations to poison.

Alive2 proof: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/mxcb9G (it does not contain tests about div/rem because they fold to poison when raising UB)

Reviewed By: nikic

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92270
2020-11-29 21:19:48 +09:00
Sanjay Patel ee34d9b210 [InstCombine] use redirect of input file in regression tests; NFC
This is a repeat of 1880092722 from 2009. We should have less risk
of hitting bugs at this point because we auto-generate positive CHECK
lines only, but this makes things consistent.

Copying the original commit msg:
"Change tests from "opt %s" to "opt < %s" so that opt doesn't see the
input filename so that opt doesn't print the input filename in the
output so that grep lines in the tests don't unintentionally match
strings in the input filename."
2020-09-29 11:06:25 -04:00
Roman Lebedev c3b394ffba [InstCombine] dropRedundantMaskingOfLeftShiftInput(): propagate undef shift amounts
Summary:
When we do `ConstantExpr::getZExt()`, that "extends" `undef` to `0`,
which means that for patterns a/b we'd assume that we must not produce
any bits for that channel, while in reality we simply didn't care
about that channel - i.e. we don't need to mask it.

Reviewers: spatel

Reviewed By: spatel

Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits

Tags: #llvm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68239

llvm-svn: 373960
2019-10-07 20:52:52 +00:00
Roman Lebedev 0205be8f12 [NFC][InstCombine] Redundant-left-shift-input-masking: add some more undef tests
llvm-svn: 373248
2019-09-30 19:15:51 +00:00
Roman Lebedev b4a1d8a84c [InstCombine] dropRedundantMaskingOfLeftShiftInput(): pat. a/b with mask (PR42563)
Summary:
And this is **finally** the interesting part of that fold!

If we have a pattern `(x & (~(-1 << maskNbits))) << shiftNbits`,
we already know (have a fold) that will drop the `& (~(-1 << maskNbits))`
mask iff `(maskNbits+shiftNbits) u>= bitwidth(x)`.
But that is actually ignorant, there's more general fold here:

In this pattern, `(maskNbits+shiftNbits)` actually correlates
with the number of low bits that will remain in the final value.
So even if `(maskNbits+shiftNbits) u< bitwidth(x)`, we can still
fold, we will just need to apply a **constant** mask afterwards:
```
Name: a, normal+mask
  %onebit = shl i32 -1, C1
  %mask = xor i32 %onebit, -1
  %masked = and i32 %mask, %x
  %r = shl i32 %masked, C2
=>
  %n0 = shl i32 %x, C2
  %n1 = add i32 C1, C2
  %n2 = zext i32 %n1 to i64
  %n3 = shl i64 -1, %n2
  %n4 = xor i64 %n3, -1
  %n5 = trunc i64 %n4 to i32
  %r = and i32 %n0, %n5
```
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/F5R

Naturally, old `%masked` will have to be one-use.
Similar fold exists for patterns c,d,e, will post patch later.

https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42563

Reviewers: spatel, nikic, xbolva00

Reviewed By: spatel

Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits

Tags: #llvm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67677

llvm-svn: 372629
2019-09-23 17:04:14 +00:00
Roman Lebedev bed6e08e23 [NFC][InstCombine] More tests for "Dropping pointless masking before left shift" (PR42563)
While we already fold that pattern if the sum of shift amounts is not
smaller than bitwidth, there's painfully obvious generalization:
  https://rise4fun.com/Alive/F5R
I.e. the "sub of shift amounts" tells us how many bits will be left
in the output. If it's less than bitwidth, we simply need to
apply a mask, which is constant.

llvm-svn: 372170
2019-09-17 19:32:11 +00:00