This code handled SCALAR_TO_VECTOR being returned by the recursion, but the code that used to return SCALAR_TO_VECTOR was removed in 2015.
llvm-svn: 342856
This comment was misleading about why we were restricting to before legalize types. The reason given would only apply to before legalize ops. But there is a before legalize types reason that should also be listed.
llvm-svn: 342851
This is an alternative to https://reviews.llvm.org/D37896. We can't decompose
multiplies generically without a target hook to tell us when it's profitable.
ARM and AArch64 may be able to remove some existing code that overlaps with
this transform.
This extends D52195 and may resolve PR34474:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34474
(still an open question about transforming legal vector multiplies, but we
could open another bug report for those)
llvm-svn: 342844
x86 had 2 versions of peekThroughBitcast. DAGCombiner had 1. Plus, it had a 1-off implementation for the one-use variant.
Move the x86 versions of the code to SelectionDAG, so we don't have different copies of the code.
No functional change intended.
I'm putting this next to isBitwiseNot() because I am planning to use it in there. Another option is next to the
helpers in the ISD namespace (eg, ISD::isConstantSplatVector()). But if there's no good reason for those to be
there, I'd prefer to pull other helpers over to SelectionDAG in follow-up steps.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52285
llvm-svn: 342669
The test diff in not-and-simplify.ll is from a use in SimplifyDemandedBits,
and the test diff in add.ll is from a DAGCombiner transform.
llvm-svn: 342594
This is an alternative to D37896. I don't see a way to decompose multiplies
generically without a target hook to tell us when it's profitable.
ARM and AArch64 may be able to remove some duplicate code that overlaps with
this transform.
As a first step, we're only getting the most clear wins on the vector examples
requested in PR34474:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34474
As noted in the code comment, it's likely that the x86 constraints are tighter
than necessary, but it may not always be a win to replace a pmullw/pmulld.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52195
llvm-svn: 342554
This is a follow-up suggested in D51630 and originally proposed as an IR transform in D49040.
Copying the motivational statement by @evandro from that patch:
"This transformation helps some benchmarks in SPEC CPU2000 and CPU2006, such as 188.ammp,
447.dealII, 453.povray, and especially 300.twolf, as well as some proprietary benchmarks.
Otherwise, no regressions on x86-64 or A64."
I'm proposing to add only the minimum support for a DAG node here. Since we don't have an
LLVM IR intrinsic for cbrt, and there are no other DAG ways to create a FCBRT node yet, I
don't think we need to worry about DAG builder, legalization, a strict variant, etc. We
should be able to expand as needed when adding more functionality/transforms. For reference,
these are transform suggestions currently listed in SimplifyLibCalls.cpp:
// * cbrt(expN(X)) -> expN(x/3)
// * cbrt(sqrt(x)) -> pow(x,1/6)
// * cbrt(cbrt(x)) -> pow(x,1/9)
Also, given that we bail out on long double for now, there should not be any logical
differences between platforms (unless there's some platform out there that has pow()
but not cbrt()).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51753
llvm-svn: 342348
Add support for bitcasts from float type to an integer type of the same element bitwidth.
There maybe cases where we need to support different widths (e.g. as SSE __m128i is treated as v2i64) - but I haven't seen cases of this in the wild yet.
llvm-svn: 341652
This was proposed as an IR transform in D49306, but it was not clearly justifiable as a canonicalization.
Here, we only do the transform when the target tells us that sqrt can be lowered with inline code.
This is the basic case. Some potential enhancements are in the TODO comments:
1. Generalize the transform for other exponents (allow more than 2 sqrt calcs if that's really cheaper).
2. If we have less fast-math-flags, generate code to avoid -0.0 and/or INF.
3. Allow the transform when optimizing/minimizing size (might require a target hook to get that right).
Note that by default, x86 converts single-precision sqrt calcs into sqrt reciprocal estimate with
refinement. That codegen is controlled by CPU attributes and can be manually overridden. We have plenty
of test coverage for that already, so I didn't bother to include extra testing for that here. AArch uses
its full-precision ops in all cases (not sure if that's the intended behavior or not, but that should
also be covered by existing tests).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51630
llvm-svn: 341481
Summary:
I'm not sure if this patch is correct or if it needs more qualifying somehow. Bitcast shouldn't change the size of the load so it should be ok? We already do something similar for stores. We'll change the type of a volatile store if the resulting store is Legal or Custom. I'm not sure we should be allowing Custom there...
I was playing around with converting X86 atomic loads/stores(except seq_cst) into regular volatile loads and stores during lowering. This would allow some special RMW isel patterns in X86InstrCompiler.td to be removed. But there's some floating point patterns in there that didn't work because we don't fold (f64 (bitconvert (i64 volatile load))) or (f32 (bitconvert (i32 volatile load))).
Reviewers: efriedma, atanasyan, arsenm
Reviewed By: efriedma
Subscribers: jvesely, arsenm, sdardis, kzhuravl, wdng, yaxunl, dstuttard, tpr, t-tye, arichardson, jrtc27, atanasyan, jfb, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50491
llvm-svn: 340797
I noticed this along with the patterns in D51125, but when the index is variable,
we don't convert insertelement into a build_vector.
For x86, that means these get expanded at legalization time into the loading/spilling
code that we see in the tests. I think it's always better to avoid going to memory on
these, and we get the optimal 'broadcast' if it's available.
I suspect other targets may want to look at enabling the hook. AArch64 and AMDGPU have
regression tests that would be affected (although I did not check what would happen in
those cases). In the most basic cases shown here, AArch64 would probably do much
better with a splat.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51186
llvm-svn: 340705
Previously we allowed the store to be Custom. But without knowing for sure that the Custom handling won't split the store, we shouldn't convert a volatile store. We also probably shouldn't be creating a store the requires custom handling after LegalizeOps. This could lead to an infinite loop if the custom handling was to insert a bitcast. Though I guess isStoreBitCastBeneficial could be used to block such a loop.
The test changes here are due to the volatile part of this. The stores in the test are all volatile and i32 stores are marked custom, So we are no longer converting them
This is related to D50491 where I was trying to allow some bitcasting of volatile loads
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50578
llvm-svn: 340626
During combining, ReduceLoadWdith is used to combine AND nodes that
mask loads into narrow loads. This patch allows the mask to be a
shifted constant. This results in a narrow load which is then left
shifted to compensate for the new offset.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50432
llvm-svn: 340261
Summary:
I believe this restores the behavior we had before r339147.
Fixes PR38622.
Reviewers: RKSimon, chandlerc, spatel
Reviewed By: chandlerc
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50936
llvm-svn: 340120
Add support for cases where only some c1+c2 results exceed the max bitshift, clamping accordingly.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35722
llvm-svn: 340010
When nodes are reassociated the vector-reduction flag gets lost.
The test case is here is what would happen if you had a sum of absolute differences loop that started with a non-zero but contant sum and that loop was unrolled. The vectorizer will generate a constant vector for the initial value. And DAGCombiner reassociate tries to move it down the addition tree erasing the vector-reduction flag. Interestingly this moves constants the opposite direction of the reassociate IR pass.
I've chosen to just punt on the reassociate, but I suppose we could maybe preserve the flag if both nodes have it set.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50827
llvm-svn: 339946
Intentionally excluding nodes from the DAGCombine worklist is likely to
lead to weird optimizations and infinite loops, so it's generally a bad
idea.
To avoid the infinite loops, fix DAGCombine to use the
isDesirableToCommuteWithShift target hook before performing the
transforms in question, and implement the target hook in the ARM backend
disable the transforms in question.
Fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38530 . (I don't have a
reduced testcase for that bug. But we should have sufficient test
coverage for PerformSHLSimplify given that we're not playing weird
tricks with the worklist. I can try to bugpoint it if necessary,
though.)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50667
llvm-svn: 339734
Summary: This change provides a common optimization path for both Unsafe and FMF driven optimization for this fsub fold adding reassociation, as it the flag that most closely represents the translation
Reviewers: spatel, wristow, arsenm
Reviewed By: spatel
Subscribers: wdng
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50195
llvm-svn: 339357
isNegatibleForFree() should not matter here (as the test diffs show)
because it's always a win to replace an fsub+fadd with fneg. The
problem in D50195 persists because either (1) we are doing these
folds in the wrong order or (2) we're missing another fold for fadd.
llvm-svn: 339299
I don't know if it's possible to expose this diff in a test,
but we should always try simplifications (no new nodes created)
before more complicated transforms for efficiency (similar to
what we do in IR).
llvm-svn: 339298
The isConstOrConstSplat result is only used in a ISD::matchUnaryPredicate call which can perform the equivalent iteration just as quickly.
llvm-svn: 339262
Scatter could have multiple identical indices. We need to maintain sequential order. We get this right in LegalizeVectorTypes, but not in this code.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50374
llvm-svn: 339157
This was missed in D50185.
NFC until we add actual non-uniform support to BuildSDIV (similar BuildUDIV support in D49248) - for now it just early outs.
llvm-svn: 339147
This patch refactors the existing TargetLowering::BuildUDIV base implementation to support non-uniform constant vector denominators.
It also includes a fold for MULHU by pow2 constants to SRL which can now more readily occur from BuildUDIV.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D49248
llvm-svn: 339121
Src0 doesn't really convey any meaning to what the operand is. Passthru matches what's used in the documentation for the intrinsic this comes from.
llvm-svn: 339101
First step towards a BuildSDIV equivalent to D49248 for non-uniform vector support - this just pushes the splat detection down into TargetLowering::BuildSDIV where its still used.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50185
llvm-svn: 338838
The vector contains the SDNodes that these functions create. The number of nodes is always a small number so we should use SmallVector to avoid a heap allocation.
llvm-svn: 338329
This is exchanging a sub-of-1 with add-of-minus-1:
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/plKAH
This is another step towards improving select-of-constants codegen (see D48970).
x86 is the motivating target, and those diffs all appear to be wins. PPC and AArch64 look neutral.
I've limited this to early combining (!LegalOperations) in case a target wants to reverse it, but
I think canonicalizing to 'add' is more likely to produce further transforms because we have more
folds for 'add'.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D49924
llvm-svn: 338317
Thinking about it more it might be possible for the later nodes to be folded in getNode in such a way that the other created nodes are left dead. This can cause use counts to be incorrect on nodes that aren't dead.
So its probably safer to leave this alone.
llvm-svn: 338298