transformToIndexedCompare
If they don't have the same type, the size of the constant
index would need to be adjusted (and this wouldn't be always
possible).
Alternatively we could try the analysis with the initial
RHS value, which would guarantee that the two sides have
the same type. However it is unlikely that in practice this
would pass our transformation requirements.
Fixes PR31808 (https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=31808).
llvm-svn: 293629
This is a minimal patch to avoid the infinite loop in:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=31751
But the general problem is bigger: we're not canonicalizing all of the min/max forms reported
by value tracking's matchSelectPattern(), and we don't define min/max consistently. Some code
uses matchSelectPattern(), other code uses matchers like m_Umax, and others have their own
inline definitions which may be subtly different from any of the above.
The reason that the test cases in this patch need a cast op to trigger is because we don't
(yet) canonicalize all min/max forms based on matchSelectPattern() in
canonicalizeMinMaxWithConstant(), but we do make min/max+cast transforms based on
matchSelectPattern() in visitSelectInst().
The location of the icmp transforms that trigger the inf-loop seems arbitrary at best, so
I'm moving those behind the min/max fence in visitICmpInst() as the quick fix.
llvm-svn: 293345
Allows LLVM to optimize sequences like the following:
%add = add nuw i32 %x, 1
%cmp = icmp ugt i32 %add, %y
Into:
%cmp = icmp uge i32 %x, %y
Previously, only signed comparisons were being handled.
Decrements could also be handled, but 'sub nuw %x, 1' is currently canonicalized to
'add %x, -1' in InstCombineAddSub, losing the nuw flag. Removing that canonicalization
seems like it might have far-reaching ramifications so I kept this simple for now.
Patch by Matti Niemenmaa!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24700
llvm-svn: 291975
Min/max canonicalization (r287585) exposes the fact that we're missing combines for min/max patterns.
This patch won't solve the example that was attached to that thread, so something else still needs fixing.
The line between InstCombine and InstSimplify gets blurry here because sometimes the icmp instruction that
we want to fold to already exists, but sometimes it's the swapped form of what we want.
Corresponding changes for smax/umin/umax to follow.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27531
llvm-svn: 289855
After r289755, the AssumptionCache is no longer needed. Variables affected by
assumptions are now found by using the new operand-bundle-based scheme. This
new scheme is more computationally efficient, and also we need much less
code...
llvm-svn: 289756
At least the plugin used by the LibreOffice build
(<https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Clang_plugins>) indirectly
uses those members (through inline functions in LLVM/Clang include files in turn
using them), but they are not exported by utils/extract_symbols.py on Windows,
and accessing data across DLL/EXE boundaries on Windows is generally
problematic.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26671
llvm-svn: 289647
Instead, expose whether the current type is an array or a struct, if an array
what the upper bound is, and if a struct the struct type itself. This is
in preparation for a later change which will make PointerType derive from
Type rather than SequentialType.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26594
llvm-svn: 288458
These 2 helper functions were already using APInt internally, so just
change the API and caller to allow folds for splats. The scalar
regression tests look quite thorough, so I just added a couple of
tests to prove that vectors are handled too.
These folds should be grouped with the other cmp+shift folds though.
That can be an NFC follow-up.
llvm-svn: 281663
This pattern is matched in foldICmpBinOpEqualityWithConstant() and already works
with vectors too. I changed some comments over there to point out the current
location. The tests for this transform are currently in 'sub.ll'.
Note that the remaining folds in this block all require a sub too, so they should
get grouped with the other icmp(sub) patterns.
llvm-svn: 281627
This is a big glob of transforms that probably should work for vectors,
but currently they are disallowed because of ConstantInt guards.
llvm-svn: 281614
Everything under foldICmpInstWithConstant() should now be working for
splat vectors via m_APInt matchers. Ie, I've removed all of the FIXMEs
that I added while cleaning that section up. Note that not all of the
associated FIXMEs in the regression tests are gone though, because some
of the tests require earlier folds that are still scalar-only.
llvm-svn: 281139
I introduced this potential bug by missing this diff in:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL280873
...however, I'm not sure how to reach this code path with a regression test.
We may be able to remove this code and assume that the transform to a constant
is always handled by InstSimplify?
llvm-svn: 280964
This is a revert of r280676 which was a revert of r280637;
ie, this is r280637 again. It was speculatively reverted to
help debug buildbot failures.
llvm-svn: 280861
The transform in question:
icmp (and (trunc W), C2), C1 -> icmp (and W, C2'), C1'
...is still not enabled for vectors, thus no functional change intended.
It's not clear to me if this is a good transform for vectors or even
scalars in general. Changing that behavior may be a follow-on patch.
llvm-svn: 280627
While removing a scalar shackle from an icmp fold, I noticed that I couldn't find any tests to trigger
this code path.
The 'and' shrinking transform should be handled by InstCombiner::foldCastedBitwiseLogic()
or eliminated with InstSimplify. The icmp narrowing is part of InstCombiner::foldICmpWithCastAndCast().
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24031
llvm-svn: 280370
Sanjay Patel