Commit Graph

737 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Juneyoung Lee 0441df94ad [InstCombine,InstSimplify] Optimize select followed by and/or/xor
This patch adds `A & (A && B)` -> `A && B`  (similarly for or + logical or)

Also, this patch adds `~(select C, (icmp pred X, Y), const)` -> `select C, (icmp pred' X, Y), ~const`.

Alive2 proof:
merge_and: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/teMR97
merge_or: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/b4yZUp
xor_and: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/_-TXHi
xor_or: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/2uYx_a

Reviewed By: nikic

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94861
2021-01-19 09:14:17 +09:00
Nikita Popov a13c0f62c3 [InstSimplify] Fold x*C1/C2 <= x (PR48744)
We can fold x*C1/C2 <= x to true if C1 <= C2. This is valid even
if the multiplication is not nuw: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/vULors

The multiplication or division can be replaced by shifts. We don't
handle the case where both are shifts, as that should get folded
away by InstCombine.
2021-01-17 16:02:55 +01:00
Dávid Bolvanský bfd75bdf3f [NFC] Removed extra text in comments 2021-01-16 22:48:56 +01:00
Dávid Bolvanský 63bedc80da [InstSimplify] Handle commutativity for 'and' and 'outer or' for (~A & B) | ~(A | B) --> ~A
Reviewed By: lebedev.ri

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94870
2021-01-16 19:42:50 +01:00
Dávid Bolvanský bdd4dda58b [InstSimplify] Update comments, remove redundant tests 2021-01-16 16:31:23 +01:00
Dávid Bolvanský a4e2a5145a [InstSimplify] Add (~A & B) | ~(A | B) --> ~A 2021-01-16 15:43:34 +01:00
Nikita Popov 7ecad2e4ce [InstSimplify] Don't fold gep p, -p to null
This is a partial fix for https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44403.
Folding gep p, q-p to q is only legal if p and q have the same
provenance. This fold should probably be guarded by something like
getUnderlyingObject(p) == getUnderlyingObject(q).

This patch is a partial fix that removes the special handling for
gep p, 0-p, which will fold to a null pointer, which would certainly
not pass an underlying object check (unless p is also null, in which
case this would fold trivially anyway). Folding to a null pointer
is particularly problematic due to the special handling it receives
in many places, making end-to-end miscompiles more likely.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93820
2021-01-12 20:24:23 +01:00
Juneyoung Lee 3a60a1f165 [InstSimplify] Fold insertelement vec, poison, idx into vec
This is a simple patch that adds folding from `insertelement vec, poison, idx` into `vec`.

Alive2 proof: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/2y2vbC

Reviewed By: nikic

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93994
2021-01-07 10:10:14 +09:00
Nikita Popov 221c3b174b [InstSimplify] Canonicalize non-demanded shuffle op to poison (NFCI)
I don't believe this has an observable effect, because the only
thing we care about here is replacing the operand with a constant
so following folds can apply. This change is just to make the
representation follow canonical unary shuffle form.
2021-01-06 21:22:27 +01:00
Nikita Popov d042f2db5b [InstSimplify] Fold call null/undef to poison
Calling null or undef results in immediate undefined behavior.
Return poison instead of undef in this case, similar to what
we do for immediate UB due to division by zero.
2021-01-06 21:09:30 +01:00
Nikita Popov a6df39236f [InstSimplify] Fold out-of-bounds shift to poison
Make InstSimplify return poison rather than undef for out-of-bounds
shifts, as specified by LandRef:

> If op2 is (statically or dynamically) equal to or larger than the
> number of bits in op1, this instruction returns a poison value.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93998
2021-01-06 20:41:37 +01:00
Juneyoung Lee f665a8c5b8 [InstSimplify] gep with poison operand is poison
This is a tiny update to fold gep poison into poison. :)

Alive2 proofs:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/7Nwdri
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/sDP4sC
2021-01-05 11:07:49 +09:00
Kazu Hirata 848e8f938f [llvm] Construct SmallVector with iterator ranges (NFC) 2021-01-04 11:42:44 -08:00
Nikita Popov 3715c99be9 [InstSimplify] Fold nnan/ninf violation to poison
As the comment already indicates, performing an operation with
nnan/ninf flags on a nan/inf or undef results in poison. Now that
we have a proper poison value, we no longer need to relax it to
undef.
2021-01-03 22:05:40 +01:00
Nikita Popov 766cf7f32e [InstSimplify] Fold division by zero to poison
Div/rem by zero is immediate undefined behavior and anything goes.
Currently we fold it to undef, this patch changes it to fold to
poison instead, which is slightly stronger.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93995
2021-01-03 20:52:45 +01:00
Nikita Popov f094d65bea [InstSimplify] Fix addo/subo with undef (PR43188)
We can't fold the first result to undef, because not all values
may be reachable under the constraint that no overflow occurred.
Use the same folds we do for saturated math instead.

Proofs:
uaddo: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/zf55N_
saddo: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/a_xPgS
usubo: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/DmRqwt
ssubo: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/8ag7U-
2021-01-03 18:51:49 +01:00
Nikita Popov c6ad00d709 [InstSimplify] Return poison for out of bounds extractelement
This is the same change as D93990, but for extractelement rather
than insertelement.

> If idx exceeds the length of val for a fixed-length vector, the
> result is a poison value. For a scalable vector, if the value of
> idx exceeds the runtime length of the vector, the result is a
> poison value.
2021-01-03 18:15:58 +01:00
Juneyoung Lee 2139958b53 [InstSimplify] Return poison if insertelement touches out of bounds
This is a simple patch that updates InstSimplify to return poison if the index is/can be out-of-bounds

Reviewed By: nikic

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93990
2021-01-04 00:43:02 +09:00
Kazu Hirata a87c7003ac [Analysis] Remove unused code recursivelySimplifyInstruction (NFC)
The last use of the function, located in RemovePredecessorAndSimplify,
was removed on Dec 25, 2020 in commit
46bea9b297.

The last use of RemovePredecessorAndSimplify was removed on Sep 29,
2010 in commit 99c985c37d.
2020-12-30 17:45:40 -08:00
Sanjay Patel 236c4524a7 [InstSimplify] remove ctpop of 1 (low) bit
https://llvm.org/PR48608

As noted in the test comment, we could handle a more general
case in instcombine and remove this, but I don't have evidence
that we need to do that.

https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/MRW9gD
2020-12-28 16:06:20 -05:00
Sanjay Patel 38ca7face6 [InstSimplify] reduce logic with inverted add/sub ops
https://llvm.org/PR48559
This could be part of a larger ValueTracking API,
but I don't see that currently.

https://rise4fun.com/Alive/gR0

  Name: and
  Pre: C1 == ~C2
  %sub = add i8 %x, C1
  %sub1 = sub i8 C2, %x
  %r = and i8 %sub, %sub1
  =>
  %r = 0

  Name: or
  Pre: C1 == ~C2
  %sub = add i8 %x, C1
  %sub1 = sub i8 C2, %x
  %r = or i8 %sub, %sub1
  =>
  %r = -1

  Name: xor
  Pre: C1 == ~C2
  %sub = add i8 %x, C1
  %sub1 = sub i8 C2, %x
  %r = xor i8 %sub, %sub1
  =>
  %r = -1
2020-12-21 08:51:43 -05:00
Roman Lebedev e9289dc25f
[InstSimplify] Don't miscompile `X == 0 ? abs(X) : -abs(X) --> -abs(X)` xform
The transform wasn't checking that the LHS of the comparison
*is* the `X` in question...
This is the miscompile that was holding up D87188.

Thanks to Dave Green for producing an actionable reproducer!
2020-12-18 21:18:13 +03:00
Kazu Hirata eb44682d67 [Analysis] Use is_contained (NFC) 2020-12-11 21:19:31 -08:00
Cullen Rhodes 7b8d50b141 [InstSimplify] Clarify use of FixedVectorType in SimplifySelectInst
Folding a select of vector constants that include undef elements only
applies to fixed vectors, but there's no earlier check the type is not
scalable so it crashes for scalable vectors. This adds a check so this
optimization is only attempted for fixed vectors.

Reviewed By: sdesmalen

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92046
2020-11-27 09:55:29 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 00808e321c [InstSimplify] allow vector folds for (Pow2C << X) == NonPow2C
Existing pre-conditions seem to be correct:
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/lCLB

  Name: non-zero C1
  Pre: !isPowerOf2(C1) && isPowerOf2(C2) && C1 != 0
  %sub = shl i8 C2, %X
  %cmp = icmp eq i8 %sub, C1
  =>
  %cmp = false

  Name: one == C2
  Pre: !isPowerOf2(C1) && isPowerOf2(C2) && C2 == 1
  %sub = shl i8 C2, %X
  %cmp = icmp eq i8 %sub, C1
  =>
  %cmp = false

  Name: nuw
  Pre: !isPowerOf2(C1) && isPowerOf2(C2)
  %sub = shl nuw i8 C2, %X
  %cmp = icmp eq i8 %sub, C1
  =>
  %cmp = false

  Name: nsw
  Pre: !isPowerOf2(C1) && isPowerOf2(C2)
  %sub = shl nsw i8 C2, %X
  %cmp = icmp eq i8 %sub, C1
  =>
  %cmp = false
2020-11-08 09:52:05 -05:00
Sanjay Patel c74db55ff5 [InstSimplify] allow vector folds for icmp Pred (1 << X), 0x80 2020-11-04 08:12:48 -05:00
Sanjay Patel e77ba263fe [InstSimplify] peek through 'not' operand in logic-of-icmps fold
This extends D78430 to solve cases like:
https://llvm.org/PR47858

There are still missed opportunities shown in the tests,
and as noted in the earlier patches, we have related
functionality in InstCombine, so we may want to extend
other folds in a similar way.

A semi-random sampling of test diff proofs in this patch:
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/sS4C
2020-10-25 11:13:30 -04:00
Sjoerd Meijer 51d7df3fa1 [InstructionSimplify] icmp (X+Y), (X+Z) simplification
This improves simplifications for pattern `icmp (X+Y), (X+Z)` -> `icmp Y,Z`
if only one of the operands has NSW set, e.g.:

    icmp slt (x + 0), (x +nsw 1)

We can still safely rewrite this to:

    icmp slt 0, 1

because we know that the LHS can't overflow if the RHS has NSW set and
C1 < C2 && C1 >= 0, or C2 < C1 && C1 <= 0

This simplification is useful because ScalarEvolutionExpander which is used to
generate code for SCEVs in different loop optimisers is not always able to put
back NSW flags across control-flow, thus inhibiting CFG simplifications.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D89317
2020-10-22 08:55:52 +01:00
Sanjay Patel 7c516504a1 [InstSimplify] allow vector splats for icmp-of-neg folds 2020-10-20 09:24:36 -04:00
Juneyoung Lee 9b3c2a72e4 [ValueTracking] Use assume's noundef operand bundle
This patch updates `isGuaranteedNotToBeUndefOrPoison` to use `llvm.assume`'s `noundef` operand bundle.

Reviewed By: jdoerfert

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D89219
2020-10-14 20:16:33 +09:00
Simon Pilgrim 95a440b936 [IR] PatternMatch - add m_FShl/m_FShr funnel shift intrinsic matchers. NFCI. 2020-10-01 14:42:34 +01:00
Sanjay Patel 3f100e64b4 [InstSimplify] fix fmin/fmax miscompile for partial undef vectors (PR47567)
It would also be correct to return the variable operand in these cases,
but eliminating a variable use is probably better for optimization.
2020-09-18 10:05:44 -04:00
Nikita Popov 0bb06f297f [InstSimplify] Clarify SimplifyWithOpReplaced() return value
If SimplifyWithOpReplaced() cannot simplify the value, null should
be returned. Make sure this really does happen in all cases,
including those where SimplifyBinOp() returns the original value.

This does not matter for existing users, but does mattter for
D87480, which would go into an infinite loop otherwise.
2020-09-16 20:53:26 +02:00
Sanjay Patel 8985755762 [InstSimplify] add limit folds for fmin/fmax
If the constant operand is the opposite of the min/max value,
then the result must be the other value.

This is based on the similar codegen transform proposed in:
D87571
2020-09-15 10:58:44 -04:00
Sanjay Patel 55d371abd7 [InstSimplify] add folds for fmin/fmax with 'nnan'
maximum(nnan X, +INF) --> +INF
minimum(nnan X, -INF) --> -INF

This is based on the similar codegen transform proposed in:
D87571
2020-09-14 11:46:11 -04:00
Sanjay Patel 7526376164 [InstSimplify] allow folds for fmin/fmax with 'ninf'
maxnum(ninf X, +FLT_MAX) --> +FLT_MAX
minnum(ninf X, -FLT_MAX) --> -FLT_MAX

This is based on the similar codegen transform proposed in:
D87571
2020-09-14 11:18:08 -04:00
Sanjay Patel 22c583c3d0 [InstSimplify] reduce code duplication for fmin/fmax folds; NFC
We use the same code structure for folding integer min/max.
2020-09-14 10:32:11 -04:00
Sanjay Patel 7bb9a2f996 [InstSimplify] fix miscompiles with maximum/minimum intrinsics
As discussed in the sibling codegen functionality patch D87571,
this transform was created with D52766, but it is not correct.

The incorrect test diffs were missed during review, but the
'TODO' comment about this functionality was still in the code -
we need 'nnan' to enable this fold.
2020-09-14 09:06:41 -04:00
Nikita Popov 36e2e2e12e [InstCombine] Fix incorrect SimplifyWithOpReplaced transform (PR47322)
This is a followup to D86834, which partially fixed this issue in
InstSimplify. However, InstCombine repeats the same transform while
dropping poison flags -- which does not cover cases where poison is
introduced in some other way.

The fix here is a bit more comprehensive, because things are quite
entangled, and it's hard to only partially address it without
regressing optimization. There are really two changes here:

 * Export the SimplifyWithOpReplaced API from InstSimplify, with an
   added AllowRefinement flag. For replacements inside the TrueVal
   we don't actually care whether refinement occurs or not, the
   replacement is always legal. This part of the transform is now
   done in InstSimplify only. (It should be noted that the current
   AllowRefinement check is not sufficient -- that's an issue we
   need to address separately.)
 * Change the InstCombine fold to work by temporarily dropping
   poison generating flags, running the fold and then restoring the
   flags if it didn't work out. This will ensure that the InstCombine
   fold is correct as long as the InstSimplify fold is correct.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87445
2020-09-12 14:45:06 +02:00
Nikita Popov e97f3b1b43 [InstCombine] Fold abs of known negative operand
If we know that the abs operand is known negative, we can replace
it with a neg.

To avoid computing known bits twice, I've removed the fold for the
non-negative case from InstSimplify. Both the non-negative and the
negative case are handled by InstCombine now, with one known bits call.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87196
2020-09-08 20:14:35 +02:00
Nikita Popov ff218cbc84 [InstSimplify] Fold degenerate abs of abs form
This addresses the remaining issue from D87188. Due to a series of
folds, we may end up with abs-of-abs represented as
x == 0 ? -abs(x) : abs(x). Rather than recognizing this as a special
abs pattern and doing an abs-of-abs fold on it afterwards,
I'm directly folding this to one of the select operands in InstSimplify.

The general pattern falls into the "select with operand replaced"
category, but that fold is not powerful enough to recognize that
both hands of the select are the same for value zero.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87197
2020-09-06 09:43:08 +02:00
Nikita Popov 73104b0751 [InstSimplify] Fold min/max based on dominating condition
If we have a dominating condition that x >= y, then umax(x, y) is x,
etc. I'm doing this in InstSimplify as the corresponding transform
for the select form is also done there.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87168
2020-09-05 16:16:40 +02:00
Nikita Popov 88b310f64b [InstSimplify] Reduce code duplication in simplifySelectWithICmpCond (NFC)
Canonicalize icmp ne to icmp eq and implement all the folds only once.
2020-08-29 22:38:49 +02:00
Nikita Popov a5be86fde5 [InstSimplify] Protect against more poison in SimplifyWithOpReplaced (PR47322)
Replace the check for poison-producing instructions in
SimplifyWithOpReplaced() with the generic helper canCreatePoison()
that properly handles poisonous shifts and thus avoids the problem
from PR47322.

This additionally fixes a bug in IIQ.UseInstrInfo=false mode, which
previously could have caused this code to ignore poison flags.
Setting UseInstrInfo=false should reduce the possible optimizations,
not increase them.

This is not a full solution to the problem, as poison could be
introduced more indirectly. This is just a minimal, easy to backport
fix.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86834
2020-08-29 21:59:39 +02:00
Roman Lebedev c1b3e32118
[NFC][InstructionSimplify] Add a warning about not simplifying to not def-reachable
See
https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20200824/824235.html
and
https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20200824/824967.html

InstSimply is not allowed to perform simplifications to instructions
that are not def-reachable from the original instruction.
2020-08-29 09:58:08 +03:00
Owen Anderson ed90f15efb Revert "[InstSimplify][EarlyCSE] Try to CSE PHI nodes in the same basic block"
This reverts commit 6102310d81.  It
appears to cause compilation non-determinism and caused stage3
mismatches.
2020-08-28 23:43:42 +00:00
David Sherwood f4257c5832 [SVE] Make ElementCount members private
This patch changes ElementCount so that the Min and Scalable
members are now private and can only be accessed via the get
functions getKnownMinValue() and isScalable(). In addition I've
added some other member functions for more commonly used operations.
Hopefully this makes the class more useful and will reduce the
need for calling getKnownMinValue().

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86065
2020-08-28 14:43:53 +01:00
Roman Lebedev b85f91fdce
[InstSimplify] SimplifyPHINode(): check that instruction is in basic block first
As pointed out in post-commit review, this can legally be called
on instructions that are not inserted into basic blocks,
so don't blindly assume that there is basic block.
2020-08-27 22:32:03 +03:00
Roman Lebedev 6102310d81
[InstSimplify][EarlyCSE] Try to CSE PHI nodes in the same basic block
Apparently, we don't do this, neither in EarlyCSE, nor in InstSimplify,
nor in (old) GVN, but do in NewGVN and SimplifyCFG of all places..

While i could teach EarlyCSE how to hash PHI nodes,
we can't really do much (anything?) even if we find two identical
PHI nodes in different basic blocks, same-BB case is the interesting one,
and if we teach InstSimplify about it (which is what i wanted originally,
https://reviews.llvm.org/D86530), we get EarlyCSE support for free.

So i would think this is pretty uncontroversial.

On vanilla llvm test-suite + RawSpeed, this has the following effects:
```
| statistic name                                     | baseline  | proposed  |      Δ |        % |    \|%\| |
|----------------------------------------------------|-----------|-----------|-------:|---------:|---------:|
| instsimplify.NumPHICSE                             | 0         | 23779     |  23779 |    0.00% |    0.00% |
| asm-printer.EmittedInsts                           | 7942328   | 7942392   |     64 |    0.00% |    0.00% |
| assembler.ObjectBytes                              | 273069192 | 273084704 |  15512 |    0.01% |    0.01% |
| correlated-value-propagation.NumPhis               | 18412     | 18539     |    127 |    0.69% |    0.69% |
| early-cse.NumCSE                                   | 2183283   | 2183227   |    -56 |    0.00% |    0.00% |
| early-cse.NumSimplify                              | 550105    | 542090    |  -8015 |   -1.46% |    1.46% |
| instcombine.NumAggregateReconstructionsSimplified  | 73        | 4506      |   4433 | 6072.60% | 6072.60% |
| instcombine.NumCombined                            | 3640264   | 3664769   |  24505 |    0.67% |    0.67% |
| instcombine.NumDeadInst                            | 1778193   | 1783183   |   4990 |    0.28% |    0.28% |
| instcount.NumCallInst                              | 1758401   | 1758799   |    398 |    0.02% |    0.02% |
| instcount.NumInvokeInst                            | 59478     | 59502     |     24 |    0.04% |    0.04% |
| instcount.NumPHIInst                               | 330557    | 330533    |    -24 |   -0.01% |    0.01% |
| instcount.TotalInsts                               | 8831952   | 8832286   |    334 |    0.00% |    0.00% |
| simplifycfg.NumInvokes                             | 4300      | 4410      |    110 |    2.56% |    2.56% |
| simplifycfg.NumSimpl                               | 1019808   | 999607    | -20201 |   -1.98% |    1.98% |
```
I.e. it fires ~24k times, causes +110 (+2.56%) more `invoke` -> `call`
transforms, and counter-intuitively results in *more* instructions total.

That being said, the PHI count doesn't decrease that much,
and looking at some examples, it seems at least some of them
were previously getting PHI CSE'd in SimplifyCFG of all places..

I'm adjusting `Instruction::isIdenticalToWhenDefined()` at the same time.
As a comment in `InstCombinerImpl::visitPHINode()` already stated,
there are no guarantees on the ordering of the operands of a PHI node,
so if we just naively compare them, we may false-negatively say that
the nodes are not equal when the only difference is operand order,
which is especially important since the fold is in InstSimplify,
so we can't rely on InstCombine sorting them beforehand.

Fixing this for the general case is costly (geomean +0.02%),
and does not appear to catch anything in test-suite, but for
the same-BB case, it's trivial, so let's fix at least that.

As per http://llvm-compile-time-tracker.com/compare.php?from=04879086b44348cad600a0a1ccbe1f7776cc3cf9&to=82bdedb888b945df1e9f130dd3ac4dd3c96e2925&stat=instructions
this appears to cause geomean +0.03% compile time increase (regression),
but geomean -0.01%..-0.04% code size decrease (improvement).
2020-08-27 18:47:04 +03:00
Nikita Popov d7c119d89c [InstSimplify] Fold min/max intrinsic based on icmp of operands
This is a reboot of D84655, now performing the inner icmp
simplification query without undef folds.

It should be possible to handle the current foldMinMaxSharedOp()
fold based on this, by moving the logic into icmp of min/max instead,
making it more general. We can't drop the folds for constant operands,
because those also allow undef, which we exclude here.

The tests use assumes for exhaustive coverage, and have a few
more examples of misc folds we get based on icmp simplification.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85929
2020-08-26 22:02:57 +02:00