fabs(X) * fabs(Y) --> fabs(X * Y)
fabs(X) / fabs(Y) --> fabs(X / Y)
If both operands of fmul/fdiv are positive, then the result must be positive.
There's a NAN corner-case that prevents removing the more specific fold just
above this one:
fabs(X) * fabs(X) -> X * X
That fold works even with NAN because the sign-bit result of the multiply is
not specified if X is NAN.
We can't remove that and use the more general fold that is proposed here
because once we convert to this:
fabs (X * X)
...it is not legal to simplify the 'fabs' out of that expression when X is NAN.
That's because fabs() guarantees that the sign-bit is always cleared - even
for NAN values.
So this patch has the potential to lose information, but it seems unlikely if
we do the more specific fold ahead of this one.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82277
Summary: Rewrite the fsub-0.0 idiom to fneg and always emit fneg for fp
negation. This also extends the scalarization cost in instcombine for unary
operators to result in the same IR rewrites for fneg as for the idiom.
Reviewed By: cameron.mcinally
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75467
This is a special case of Z / (X / Y) => (Y * Z) / X, with X = 1.0.
The m_OneUse check is avoided because even in the case of the
multiple uses for 1.0/Y, the number of instructions remain the same
and a division is replaced by a multiplication.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D72319
The added testcase shows the current transformation for the operation
Z / (1.0 / Y), which remains unchanged. This will be updated to align
with the transformed code (Y * Z) with D72319.
The existing transformation Z / (X / Y) => (Y * Z) / X is not handling
this case as there are multiple uses for (1.0 / Y) in this testcase.
Patch by: @raghesh (Raghesh Aloor)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D72388
Reverse the canonicalization of fneg relative to fmul/fdiv. That makes it
easier to implement the transforms (and possibly other fneg transforms) in
1 place because we can always start the pattern match from fneg (either the
legacy binop or the new unop).
There's a secondary practical benefit seen in PR21914 and PR42681:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21914https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42681
...hoisting fneg rather than sinking seems to play nicer with LICM in IR
(although this change may expose analysis holes in the other direction).
1. The instcombine test changes show the expected neutral IR diffs from
reversing the order.
2. The reassociation tests show that we were missing an optimization
opportunity to fold away fneg-of-fneg. My reading of IEEE-754 says
that all of these transforms are allowed (regardless of binop/unop
fneg version) because:
"For all other operations [besides copy/abs/negate/copysign], this
standard does not specify the sign bit of a NaN result."
In all of these transforms, we always have some other binop
(fadd/fsub/fmul/fdiv), so we are free to flip the sign bit of a
potential intermediate NaN operand.
(If that interpretation is wrong, then we must already have a bug in
the existing transforms?)
3. The clang tests shouldn't exist as-is, but that's effectively a
revert of rL367149 (the test broke with an extension of the
pre-existing fneg canonicalization in rL367146).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65399
llvm-svn: 367447
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).
This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.
llvm-svn: 358546
Using cstfp_pred_ty in the definition allows us to match vectors with undef elements.
This replicates the change for m_Not from D44076 / rL326823 and continues
towards making all pattern matchers allow undef elements in vectors.
llvm-svn: 329303
Note: gcc appears to allow this fold with -freciprocal-math alone,
but clang/llvm require more than that with this patch. The wording
in the definitions seems fuzzy enough that it could go either way,
but we'll err on the conservative side of FMF interpretation.
This patch also changes the newly created fmul to have FMF propagated
by the last fdiv rather than intersecting the FMF of the fdivs. This
matches the behavior of other folds near here. The new fmul is only
used to produce an intermediate op for the final fdiv result, so it
shouldn't be any stricter than that result. The previous behavior
could result in dropping FMF via other folds in instcombine or CSE.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D43398
llvm-svn: 326098
It's possible that we could allow this either 'arcp' or 'reassoc' alone, but this
should be conservatively better than what we have right now. GCC allows this with
only -freciprocal-math.
The last test is changed to show a case that is expected to fold, but we need D43398.
llvm-svn: 325533
This is similar to the instsimplify fold added with D42385
( rL323716 )
...but this can't be in instsimplify because we're creating/morphing
a different instruction.
llvm-svn: 324927
This logic hadn't been updated to handle FastMathFlags, and it took me a while to detect it because it doesn't show up in a simple search for CreateFAdd.
llvm-svn: 199629
This update was done with the following bash script:
find test/Transforms -name "*.ll" | \
while read NAME; do
echo "$NAME"
if ! grep -q "^; *RUN: *llc" $NAME; then
TEMP=`mktemp -t temp`
cp $NAME $TEMP
sed -n "s/^define [^@]*@\([A-Za-z0-9_]*\)(.*$/\1/p" < $NAME | \
while read FUNC; do
sed -i '' "s/;\(.*\)\([A-Za-z0-9_]*\):\( *\)@$FUNC\([( ]*\)\$/;\1\2-LABEL:\3@$FUNC(/g" $TEMP
done
mv $TEMP $NAME
fi
done
llvm-svn: 186268
Sanjay Patel