This changes the lowering of f32 and f64 COPY from a 128bit vector ORR to
a fmov of the appropriate type. At least on some CPU's with 64bit NEON
data paths this is expected to be faster, and shouldn't be slower on any
CPU that treats fmov as a register rename.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106365
According to IR LangRef, the FMF flag:
contract
Allow floating-point contraction (e.g. fusing a multiply followed by an
addition into a fused multiply-and-add).
reassoc
Allow reassociation transformations for floating-point instructions.
This may dramatically change results in floating-point.
My understanding is that these two flags shouldn't imply each other,
as we might have a SDNode that can be reassociated with others, but
not contractble.
eg: We may want following fmul/fad/fsub to freely reassoc, but don't
want fma being generated here.
%F = fmul reassoc double %A, %B ; <double> [#uses=1]
%G = fmul reassoc double %C, %D ; <double> [#uses=1]
%H = fadd reassoc double %F, %G ; <double> [#uses=1]
%I = fsub reassoc double %H, %E ; <double> [#uses=1]
Before https://reviews.llvm.org/D45710, `reassoc` flag actually
did not imply isContratable either.
The current implementation also only check the flag in fadd node,
ignoring fmul node, this patch update that as well.
Reviewed By: spatel, qiucf
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104247
fadd (fma A, B, (fmul C, D)), E --> fma A, B, (fma C, D, E)
This is only allowed when "reassoc" is present on the fadd.
As discussed in D80801, this transform goes beyond
what is allowed by "contract" FMF (-ffp-contract=fast).
That is because we are fusing the trailing add of 'E' with a
multiply, but without "reassoc", the code mandates that the
products A*B and C*D are added together before adding in 'E'.
I've added this example to the LangRef to try to clarify the
meaning of "contract". If that seems reasonable, we should
probably do something similar for the clang docs because
there does not appear to be any formal spec for the behavior
of -ffp-contract=fast.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82499
If fmul and fadd are separated by an fma, we can fold them together
to save an instruction:
fadd (fma A, B, (fmul C, D)), N1 --> fma(A, B, fma(C, D, N1))
The fold implemented here is actually a specialization - we should
be able to peek through >1 fma to find this pattern. That's another
patch if we want to try that enhancement though.
This transform was guarded by the TLI hook enableAggressiveFMAFusion(),
so it was done for some in-tree targets like PowerPC, but not AArch64
or x86. The hook is protecting against forming a potentially more
expensive computation when fma takes longer to execute than a single
fadd. That hook may be needed for other transforms, but in this case,
we are replacing fmul+fadd with fma, and the fma should never take
longer than the 2 individual instructions.
'contract' FMF is all we need to allow this transform. That flag
corresponds to -ffp-contract=fast in Clang, so we are allowed to form
fma ops freely across expressions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D80801
This is the codegen part of fixing:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32939
Even with the optimal/canonical IR that is ideally created by D65954,
we would reverse that transform in DAGCombiner and end up with the same
asm on AArch64 or x86.
I see 2 options for trying to correct this:
1. Limit isNegatibleForFree() by special-casing the fmul pattern (this patch).
2. Avoid creating (fmul X, 2.0) in the 1st place by adding a special-case
transform to SelectionDAG::getNode() and/or SelectionDAGBuilder::visitFMul()
that matches the transform done by DAGCombiner.
This seems like the less intrusive patch, but if there's some other reason to
prefer 1 option over the other, we can change to the other option.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66016
llvm-svn: 368490
Summary: Honoring no signed zeroes is also available as a user control through clang separately regardless of fastmath or UnsafeFPMath context, DAG guards should reflect this context.
Reviewers: spatel, arsenm, hfinkel, wristow, craig.topper
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: rampitec, foad, nhaehnle, wuzish, nemanjai, jvesely, wdng, javed.absar, MaskRay, jsji
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65170
llvm-svn: 367486
This patch changes isFPImmLegal to return if the value can be enconded
as the immediate operand of a logical instruction besides checking if
for immediate field for fmov.
This optimizes some floating point materization, inclusive values
used on isinf lowering.
Reviewed By: rengolin, efriedma, evandro
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57044
llvm-svn: 352866
Summary: This patch originated from D46562 and is a proper subset, with some issues addressed.
Reviewers: spatel, hfinkel, wristow, arsenm, javed.absar
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: wdng, nhaehnle
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47909
llvm-svn: 334996
We're constant folding here, so we shouldn't check uses. This matches
the IR optimizer behavior.
The x86 test shows the expected win. The AArch64 test shows something
else. This only seems to happen if the "generic" AArch64 CPU model is
used by MachineCombiner, so I'll file a bug report to follow-up.
llvm-svn: 334608
David Green