This caused miscompiles of Chromium (https://crbug.com/1023818). The reduced
repro is small enough to fit here:
$ cat /tmp/a.c
unsigned char f(unsigned char *p) {
unsigned char result = 0;
for (int shift = 0; shift < 1; ++shift)
result |= p[0] << (shift * 8);
return result;
}
$ bin/clang -O2 -S -o - /tmp/a.c | grep -A4 f:
f: # @f
.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0: # %entry
xorl %eax, %eax
retq
That's nicely optimized, but I don't think it's the right result :-)
> Same as D60846 but with a fix for the problem encountered there which
> was a missing context adjustment in the handling of PHI nodes.
>
> The test that caused D60846 to be reverted was added in e15ab8f277.
>
> Reviewers: nikic, nlopes, mkazantsev,spatel, dlrobertson, uabelho, hakzsam
>
> Subscribers: hiraditya, bollu, llvm-commits
>
> Tags: #llvm
>
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69571
This reverts commit 57dd4b03e4.
Same as D60846 but with a fix for the problem encountered there which
was a missing context adjustment in the handling of PHI nodes.
The test that caused D60846 to be reverted was added in e15ab8f277.
Reviewers: nikic, nlopes, mkazantsev,spatel, dlrobertson, uabelho, hakzsam
Subscribers: hiraditya, bollu, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69571
This patch improves the handling of pointer offset in GEP expressions where
one argument is the base pointer. isPointerOffset() is being used by memcpyopt
where current code synthesizes consecutive 32 bytes stores to one store and
two memset intrinsic calls. With this patch, we convert the stores to one
memset intrinsic.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67989
llvm-svn: 374454
The static analyzer is warning about a potential null dereferences, but since the pointer is only used in a switch statement for Operator::getOpcode() (with an empty default) then its easiest just to wrap this in a null test as the dyn_cast might return null here.
llvm-svn: 372962
Static analyzer complains about const_cast uninitialized variables, we should explicitly set these to null.
Ideally that const wrapper would go away though.......
llvm-svn: 372603
Expose a utility function so that all places which want to suppress speculation (when otherwise legal) due to ordering and/or sanitizer interaction can do so.
llvm-svn: 371556
Summary:
Simplify the API using Optional<> and address comments in
https://reviews.llvm.org/D66165
Reviewers: vitalybuka
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits, ostannard, pcc
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66317
llvm-svn: 369300
Summary:
Currently we fail to compute known bits for recurrences where the
first incoming value is the start value of the recurrence.
Instead of exiting the loop when the first incoming value is not
the step of the recurrence, continue to check the second incoming
value.
The original code uses a loop to handle both cases, but incorrectly
exits instead of continuing.
Reviewers: lebedev.ri, spatel, nikic
Reviewed By: lebedev.ri
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66216
llvm-svn: 369088
Some uses of getArgumentAliasingToReturnedPointer and
isIntrinsicReturningPointerAliasingArgumentWithoutCapturing require the
calls/intrinsics to preserve the nullness of the argument.
For alias analysis, the nullness property does not really come into
play.
This patch explicitly sets it to true. In D61669, the alias analysis
uses will be switched to not require preserving nullness.
Reviewers: nlopes, efriedma, hfinkel, sanjoy, aqjune, jdoerfert
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64150
llvm-svn: 368993
Use isGuaranteedToTransferExecutionToSuccessor() instead of
isSafeToSpeculativelyExecute() when seeing whether we can propagate
the information in an assume backwards in isValidAssumeForContext().
The latter is more general - it also allows arbitrary loads/stores -
and is also the condition we want: if our assume is guaranteed to
execute, its condition not holding would be UB.
Original patch by arielb1.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37215
llvm-svn: 368723
The matchSelectPattern code can match patterns like (x >= 0) ? x : -x
for absolute value. But it can also match ((x-y) >= 0) ? (x-y) : (y-x).
If the latter form was matched we can only use the nsw flag if its
set on both subtracts.
This match makes sure we're looking at the former case only.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65692
llvm-svn: 368195
Summary:
In D37215, AssumeLikeInstruction are regarded as `willreturn`. In this patch, annotation is added to those which don't have `willreturn` now(`sideeffect, object_size, experimental_widenable_condition`).
Reviewers: jdoerfert, nikic, sstefan1
Reviewed By: nikic
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65455
llvm-svn: 367342
Summary: As clarified in D53184, volatile load and store do not trap. Therefore, we should remove volatile checks for instructions in `isGuaranteedToTransferExecutionToSuccessor`.
Reviewers: jdoerfert, efriedma, nikic
Reviewed By: nikic
Subscribers: hiraditya, jfb, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65375
llvm-svn: 367226
Implement IR intrinsics for stack tagging. Generated code is very
unoptimized for now.
Two special intrinsics, llvm.aarch64.irg.sp and llvm.aarch64.tagp are
used to implement a tagged stack frame pointer in a virtual register.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64172
llvm-svn: 366360
Summary: Vector of the same value with few undefs will sill be considered "Bytewise"
Reviewers: eugenis, pcc, jfb
Reviewed By: jfb
Subscribers: dexonsmith, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64031
llvm-svn: 365971
Summary:
This helps with more efficient use of memset for pattern initialization
From @pcc prototype for -ftrivial-auto-var-init=pattern optimizations
Binary size change on CTMark, (with -fuse-ld=lld -Wl,--icf=all, similar results with default linker options)
```
master patch diff
Os 8.238864e+05 8.238864e+05 0.0
O3 1.054797e+06 1.054797e+06 0.0
Os zero 8.292384e+05 8.292384e+05 0.0
O3 zero 1.062626e+06 1.062626e+06 0.0
Os pattern 8.579712e+05 8.338048e+05 -0.030299
O3 pattern 1.090502e+06 1.067574e+06 -0.020481
```
Zero vs Pattern on master
```
zero pattern diff
Os 8.292384e+05 8.579712e+05 0.036578
O3 1.062626e+06 1.090502e+06 0.025124
```
Zero vs Pattern with the patch
```
zero pattern diff
Os 8.292384e+05 8.338048e+05 0.003333
O3 1.062626e+06 1.067574e+06 0.003193
```
Reviewers: pcc, eugenis
Subscribers: hiraditya, cfe-commits, llvm-commits
Tags: #clang, #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63967
llvm-svn: 365858
This patch replaces the three almost identical "strip & accumulate"
implementations for constant pointer offsets with a single one,
combining the respective functionalities. The old interfaces are kept
for now.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64468
llvm-svn: 365723
Summary:
We will need to handle IntToPtr which I will submit in a separate patch as it's
not going to be NFC.
Reviewers: eugenis, pcc
Reviewed By: eugenis
Subscribers: hiraditya, cfe-commits, llvm-commits
Tags: #clang, #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63940
llvm-svn: 365709
This makes the functions in Loads.h require a type to be specified
independently of the pointer Value so that when pointers have no structure
other than address-space, it can still do its job.
Most callers had an obvious memory operation handy to provide this type, but a
SROA and ArgumentPromotion were doing more complicated analysis. They get
updated to merge the properties of the various instructions they were
considering.
llvm-svn: 365468
The `willreturn` function attribute guarantees that a function call will
come back to the call site if the call is also known not to throw.
Therefore, this attribute can be used in
`isGuaranteedToTransferExecutionToSuccessor`.
Patch by Hideto Ueno (@uenoku)
Reviewers: jdoerfert, sstefan1
Reviewed By: jdoerfert
Subscribers: hiraditya, jfb, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63372
llvm-svn: 364580
I find the current documentation of poison somewhat confusing,
mainly because its use of "undefined behavior" doesn't seem to
align with our usual interpretation (of immediate UB). Especially
the sentence "any instruction that has a dependence on a poison
value has undefined behavior" is very confusing.
Clarify poison semantics by:
* Replacing the introductory paragraph with the standard rationale
for having poison values.
* Spelling out that instructions depending on poison return poison.
* Spelling out how we go from a poison value to immediate undefined
behavior and give the two examples we currently use in ValueTracking.
* Spelling out that side effects depending on poison are UB.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63044
llvm-svn: 363320
I recently got this wrong (again), and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Put a comment in the logical place someone would look to "fix" the obvious "missed optimization" which arrises based on the common misunderstanding. Hopefully, this will save others time. :)
llvm-svn: 363318
Summary:
The logic in EarlyCSE that looks through 'not' operations in the
predicate recognizes e.g. that `select (not (cmp sgt X, Y)), X, Y` is
equivalent to `select (cmp sgt X, Y), Y, X`. Without this change,
however, only the latter is recognized as a form of `smin X, Y`, so the
two expressions receive different hash codes. This leads to missed
optimization opportunities when the quadratic probing for the two hashes
doesn't happen to collide, and assertion failures when probing doesn't
collide on insertion but does collide on a subsequent table grow
operation.
This change inverts the order of some of the pattern matching, checking
first for the optional `not` and then for the min/max/abs patterns, so
that e.g. both expressions above are recognized as a form of `smin X, Y`.
It also adds an assertion to isEqual verifying that it implies equal
hash codes; this fires when there's a collision during insertion, not
just grow, and so will make it easier to notice if these functions fall
out of sync again. A new flag --earlycse-debug-hash is added which can
be used when changing the hash function; it forces hash collisions so
that any pair of values inserted which compare as equal but hash
differently will be caught by the isEqual assertion.
Reviewers: spatel, nikic
Reviewed By: spatel, nikic
Subscribers: lebedev.ri, arsenm, craig.topper, efriedma, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62644
llvm-svn: 363274
In order to fold an always overflowing signed saturating add/sub,
we need to know in which direction the always overflow occurs.
This patch splits up AlwaysOverflows into AlwaysOverflowsLow and
AlwaysOverflowsHigh to pass through this information (but it is
not used yet).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62463
llvm-svn: 361858
The implementation in ValueTracking and ConstantRange are equally
powerful, reuse the one in ConstantRange, which will make this easier
to extend.
llvm-svn: 361723
Summary:
Both the input Value pointer and the returned Value
pointers in GetUnderlyingObjects are now declared as
const.
It turned out that all current (in-tree) uses of
GetUnderlyingObjects were trivial to update, being
satisfied with have those Value pointers declared
as const. Actually, in the past several of the users
had to use const_cast, just because of ValueTracking
not providing a version of GetUnderlyingObjects with
"const" Value pointers. With this patch we get rid
of those const casts.
Reviewers: hfinkel, materi, jkorous
Reviewed By: jkorous
Subscribers: dexonsmith, jkorous, jholewinski, sdardis, eraman, hiraditya, jrtc27, atanasyan, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61038
llvm-svn: 359072
ConstantRanges have an annoying special case: If upper and lower are
the same, it can be either an empty or a full set. When constructing
constant ranges nearly always a full set is intended, but this still
requires an explicit check in many places.
This revision adds a getNonEmpty() constructor that disambiguates this
case: If upper and lower are the same, a full set is created.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60947
llvm-svn: 358854
This adds a WithOverflowInst class with a few helper methods to get
the underlying binop, signedness and nowrap type and makes use of it
where sensible. There will be two more uses in D60650/D60656.
The refactorings are all NFC, though I left some TODOs where things
could be improved. In particular we have two places where add/sub are
handled but mul isn't.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60668
llvm-svn: 358512
This is a follow-up patch to D60504 to further improve
performance issues in computeKnownBitsFromAssume.
The patch is NFC, but may improve compile-time performance
if the compiler isn't clever enough to do the optimization
itself.
llvm-svn: 358163
This patch changes the order of pattern matching by first testing
a compare instruction's predicate, before doing the pattern
match for the whole expression tree.
Patch by Paul Walker.
Reviewed By: spatel
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60504
llvm-svn: 358097
This is the same change as D60420 but for signed sub rather than
signed add: Range information is intersected into the known bits
result, allows to detect more no/always overflow conditions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60469
llvm-svn: 358020
This is D59386 for the signed add case. The computeConstantRange()
result is now intersected into the existing known bits information,
allowing to detect additional no-overflow/always-overflow conditions
(though the latter isn't used yet).
This (finally...) covers the motivating case from D59071.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60420
llvm-svn: 358014
Switch part of the computeOverflowForSignedAdd() implementation to
use Range.isAllNegative() rather than KnownBits.isNegative() and
similar. They do the same thing, but using the ConstantRange methods
allows dropping the KnownBits variables more easily in D60420.
llvm-svn: 357969
Add support for min/max flavor selects in computeConstantRange(),
which allows us to fold comparisons of a min/max against a constant
in InstSimplify. This fixes an infinite InstCombine loop, with the
test case taken from D59378.
Relative to the previous iteration, this contains some adjustments for
AMDGPU med3 tests: The AMDGPU target runs InstSimplify prior to codegen,
which ends up constant folding some existing med3 tests after this
change. To preserve these tests a hidden -amdgpu-scalar-ir-passes option
is added, which allows disabling scalar IR passes (that use InstSimplify)
for testing purposes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59506
llvm-svn: 357870
This adds ConstantRange::getFull(BitWidth) and
ConstantRange::getEmpty(BitWidth) named constructors as more readable
alternatives to the current ConstantRange(BitWidth, /* full */ false)
and similar. Additionally private getFull() and getEmpty() member
functions are added which return a full/empty range with the same bit
width -- these are commonly needed inside ConstantRange.cpp.
The IsFullSet argument in the ConstantRange(BitWidth, IsFullSet)
constructor is now mandatory for the few usages that still make use of it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59716
llvm-svn: 356852
We're already computing the known bits of the operands here. If the
known bits of the operands can determine the sign bit of the result,
we'll already catch this in signedAddMayOverflow(). The only other
way (and as the comment already indicates) we'll get new information
from computing known bits on the whole add, is if there's an assumption
on it.
As such, we change the code to only compute known bits from assumptions,
instead of computing full known bits on the add (which would unnecessarily
recompute the known bits of the operands as well).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59473
llvm-svn: 356785
This is D59450, but for signed sub. This case is not NFC, because
the overflow logic in ConstantRange is more powerful than the existing
check. This resolves the TODO in the function.
I've added two tests to show that this indeed catches more cases than
the previous logic, but the main correctness test coverage here is in
the existing ConstantRange unit tests.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59617
llvm-svn: 356685
This is a small followup to D59511. The code that was moved into
computeConstantRange() there is a bit overly conversative: If the
abs is not nsw, it does not compute any range. However, abs without
nsw still has a well-defined contiguous unsigned range from 0 to
SIGNED_MIN. This is a lot less useful than the usual 0 to SIGNED_MAX
range, but if we're already here we might as well specify it...
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59563
llvm-svn: 356586
Improve computeOverflowForUnsignedAdd/Sub in ValueTracking by
intersecting the computeConstantRange() result into the ConstantRange
created from computeKnownBits(). This allows us to detect some
additional never/always overflows conditions that can't be determined
from known bits.
This revision also adds basic handling for constants to
computeConstantRange(). Non-splat vectors will be handled in a followup.
The signed case will also be handled in a followup, as it needs some
more groundwork.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59386
llvm-svn: 356489
These changes are related to PR37743 and include:
SelectionDAGBuilder::visitSelect handles the unary SelectPatternFlavor::SPF_ABS case to build ABS node.
Delete the redundant recognizer of the integer ABS pattern from the DAGCombiner.
Add promoting the integer ABS node in the LegalizeIntegerType.
Expand-based legalization of integer result for the ABS nodes.
Expand-based legalization of ABS vector operations.
Add some integer abs testcases for different typesizes for Thumb arch
Add the custom ABS expanding and change the SAD pattern recognizer for X86 arch: The i64 result of the ABS is expanded to:
tmp = (SRA, Hi, 31)
Lo = (UADDO tmp, Lo)
Hi = (XOR tmp, (ADDCARRY tmp, hi, Lo:1))
Lo = (XOR tmp, Lo)
The "detectZextAbsDiff" function is changed for the recognition of pattern with the ABS node. Given a ABS node, detect the following pattern:
(ABS (SUB (ZERO_EXTEND a), (ZERO_EXTEND b))).
Change integer abs testcases for codegen with the ABS node support for AArch64.
Indicate that the ABS is legal for the i64 type when the NEON is supported.
Change the integer abs testcases to show changing of codegen.
Add combine and legalization of ABS nodes for Thumb arch.
Extend 'matchSelectPattern' to recognize the ABS patterns with ICMP_SGE condition.
For discussion, see https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37743
Patch by: @ikulagin (Ivan Kulagin)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D49837
llvm-svn: 356468
Add support for min/max flavor selects in computeConstantRange(),
which allows us to fold comparisons of a min/max against a constant
in InstSimplify. This was suggested by spatel as an alternative
approach to D59378. I've also added the infinite looping test from
that revision here.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59506
llvm-svn: 356415
This is preparation for D59506. The InstructionSimplify abs handling
is moved into computeConstantRange(), which is the general place for
such calculations. This is NFC and doesn't affect the existing tests
in test/Transforms/InstSimplify/icmp-abs-nabs.ll.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59511
llvm-svn: 356409
This is the same change as rL356290, but for signed add. It replaces
the existing ripple logic with the overflow logic in ConstantRange.
This is NFC in that it should return NeverOverflow in exactly the
same cases as the previous implementation. However, it does make
computeOverflowForSignedAdd() more powerful by now also determining
AlwaysOverflows conditions. As none of its consumers handle this yet,
this has no impact on optimization. Making use of AlwaysOverflows
in with.overflow folding will be handled as a followup.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59450
llvm-svn: 356345
Following the suggestion in D59450, I'm moving the code for constructing
a ConstantRange from KnownBits out of ValueTracking, which also allows us
to test this code independently.
I'm adding this method to ConstantRange rather than KnownBits (which
would have been a bit nicer API wise) to avoid creating a dependency
from Support to IR, where ConstantRange lives.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59475
llvm-svn: 356339
Use the methods introduced in rL356276 to implement the
computeOverflowForUnsigned(Add|Sub) functions in ValueTracking, by
converting the KnownBits into a ConstantRange.
This is NFC: The existing KnownBits based implementation uses the same
logic as the the ConstantRange based one. This is not the case for the
signed equivalents, so I'm only changing unsigned here.
This is in preparation for D59386, which will also intersect the
computeConstantRange() result into the range determined from KnownBits.
llvm-svn: 356290
InstructionSimplify currently has some code to determine the constant
range of integer instructions for some simple cases. It is used to
simplify icmps.
This change moves the relevant code into ValueTracking as
llvm::computeConstantRange(), so it can also be reused for other
purposes.
In particular this is with the optimization of overflow checks in
mind (ref D59071), where constant ranges cover some cases that
known bits don't.
llvm-svn: 355781
There are no tests for this case, and I'm not sure how it could ever work,
so I'm just removing this option from the matcher. This should fix PR40940:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40940
llvm-svn: 355292
We have two sources of known bits:
1. For adds leading ones of either operand are preserved. For sub
leading zeros of LHS and leading ones of RHS become leading zeros in
the result.
2. The saturating math is a select between add/sub and an all-ones/
zero value. As such we can carry out the add/sub known bits
calculation, and only preseve the known one/zero bits respectively.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58329
llvm-svn: 355223
Second part of D58593.
Compute precise overflow conditions based on all known bits, rather
than just the sign bits. Unsigned a - b overflows iff a < b, and we
can determine whether this always/never happens based on the minimal
and maximal values achievable for a and b subject to the known bits
constraint.
llvm-svn: 355109
Summary:
The description of KnownBits::zext() and
KnownBits::zextOrTrunc() has confusingly been telling
that the operation is equivalent to zero extending the
value we're tracking. That has not been true, instead
the user has been forced to explicitly set the extended
bits as known zero afterwards.
This patch adds a second argument to KnownBits::zext()
and KnownBits::zextOrTrunc() to control if the extended
bits should be considered as known zero or as unknown.
Reviewers: craig.topper, RKSimon
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Subscribers: javed.absar, hiraditya, jdoerfert, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58650
llvm-svn: 355099
Part of D58593.
Compute precise overflow conditions based on all known bits, rather
than just the sign bits. Unsigned a + b overflows iff a > ~b, and we
can determine whether this always/never happens based on the minimal
and maximal values achievable for a and ~b subject to the known bits
constraint.
llvm-svn: 355072
This patch accompanies the RFC posted here:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-October/127239.html
This patch adds a new CallBr IR instruction to support asm-goto
inline assembly like gcc as used by the linux kernel. This
instruction is both a call instruction and a terminator
instruction with multiple successors. Only inline assembly
usage is supported today.
This also adds a new INLINEASM_BR opcode to SelectionDAG and
MachineIR to represent an INLINEASM block that is also
considered a terminator instruction.
There will likely be more bug fixes and optimizations to follow
this, but we felt it had reached a point where we would like to
switch to an incremental development model.
Patch by Craig Topper, Alexander Ivchenko, Mikhail Dvoretckii
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53765
llvm-svn: 353563
Bitcast and certain Ptr2Int/Int2Ptr instructions will not alter the
value of their operand and can therefore be looked through when we
determine non-nullness.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54956
llvm-svn: 352293
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
minted `CallBase` class instead of the `CallSite` wrapper.
This moves the largest interwoven collection of APIs that traffic in
`CallSite`s. While a handful of these could have been migrated with
a minorly more shallow migration by converting from a `CallSite` to
a `CallBase`, it hardly seemed worth it. Most of the APIs needed to
migrate together because of the complex interplay of AA APIs and the
fact that converting from a `CallBase` to a `CallSite` isn't free in its
current implementation.
Out of tree users of these APIs can fairly reliably migrate with some
combination of `.getInstruction()` on the `CallSite` instance and
casting the resulting pointer. The most generic form will look like `CS`
-> `cast_or_null<CallBase>(CS.getInstruction())` but in most cases there
is a more elegant migration. Hopefully, this migrates enough APIs for
users to fully move from `CallSite` to the base class. All of the
in-tree users were easily migrated in that fashion.
Thanks for the review from Saleem!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55641
llvm-svn: 350503
GetPointerBaseWithConstantOffset include this code, where ByteOffset
and GEPOffset are both of type llvm::APInt :
ByteOffset += GEPOffset.getSExtValue();
The problem with this line is that getSExtValue() returns an int64_t, but
the += matches an overload for uint64_t. The problem is that the resulting
APInt is no longer considered to be signed. That in turn causes assertion
failures later on if the relevant pointer type is > 64 bits in width and
the GEPOffset was negative.
Changing it to
ByteOffset += GEPOffset.sextOrTrunc(ByteOffset.getBitWidth());
resolves the issue and explicitly performs the sign-extending
or truncation. Additionally, instead of asserting later if the result
is > 64 bits, it breaks out of the loop in that case.
See also
https://reviews.llvm.org/D24729https://reviews.llvm.org/D24772
This commit must be merged after D38662 in order for the test to pass.
Patch by Michael Ferguson <mpfergu@gmail.com>.
Reviewers: reames, sanjoy, hfinkel
Reviewed By: hfinkel
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38501
llvm-svn: 350395
Instruction::isLifetimeStartOrEnd() checks whether an Instruction is an
llvm.lifetime.start or an llvm.lifetime.end intrinsic.
This was suggested as a cleanup in D55967.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56019
llvm-svn: 349964
If the shift amount is known, we can determine the known bits of the
output based on the known bits of two inputs.
This is essentially the same functionality as implemented in D54869,
but for ValueTracking rather than InstCombine SimplifyDemandedBits.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55140
llvm-svn: 348091
We were duplicating code around the existing isImpliedCondition() that
checks for a predecessor block/dominating condition, so make that a
wrapper call.
llvm-svn: 348088
Always-overflow was already determined for unsigned addition, but
not subtraction. This patch establishes parity.
This allows us to perform some additional simplifications for
signed saturating subtractions.
This change is part of https://reviews.llvm.org/D54534.
llvm-svn: 347771
In PR39475:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39475
..we may fail to recognize/simplify fabs() in some cases because we do not
canonicalize fcmp with a -0.0 operand.
Adding that canonicalization can cause regressions on min/max FP tests, so
that's this patch: for the purpose of determining whether something is min/max,
let the value returned by the select determine how we treat a 0.0 operand in the fcmp.
This patch doesn't actually change the -0.0 to +0.0. It just changes the analysis, so
we don't fail to recognize equivalent min/max patterns that only differ in the
signbit of 0.0.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54001
llvm-svn: 346097
This patch gives the IR ComputeNumSignBits the same functionality as the
DAG version (the code is derived from the existing code).
This an extension of the single input shuffle analysis added with D53659.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53987
llvm-svn: 346071
The motivating case is from PR37549:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37549
The analysis improvement allows us to form a vector 'select' out of
bitwise logic (the use of ComputeNumSignBits was added at rL345149).
The smaller test shows another InstCombine improvement - we use
ComputeNumSignBits to add 'nsw' to shift-left. But the negative
test shows an example where we must not add 'nsw' - when the shuffle
mask contains undef elements.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53659
llvm-svn: 345429
Summary:
This CL allows constant vectors of floats to be recognized as non-NaN
and non-zero in select patterns. This change makes
`matchSelectPattern` more powerful generally, but was motivated
specifically because I wanted fminnan and fmaxnan to be created for
vector versions of the scalar patterns they are created for.
Tested with check-all on all targets. A testcase in the WebAssembly
backend that tests the non-nan codepath is in an upcoming CL.
Reviewers: aheejin, dschuff
Subscribers: sunfish, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52324
llvm-svn: 343364
Summary:
his code was in CGDecl.cpp and really belongs in LLVM's isBytewiseValue. Teach isBytewiseValue the tricks clang's isRepeatedBytePattern had, including merging undef properly, and recursing on more types.
clang part of this patch: D51752
Subscribers: dexonsmith, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51751
llvm-svn: 342709
rL340921 has been reverted by rL340923 due to linkage dependency
from Transform/Utils to Analysis which is not allowed. In this patch
this has been fixed, a new utility function moved to Analysis.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51152
llvm-svn: 341014
We have multiple places in code where we try to identify whether or not
some instruction is a guard. This patch factors out this logic into a separate
utility function which works uniformly in all places.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51152
Reviewed By: fedor.sergeev
llvm-svn: 340921
We need to allow ConstantExpr Selects in addition to SelectInst.
I'll try to put together a test case, but I wanted to fix the issues being reported.
Fixes PR38677
llvm-svn: 340546
If we have a min/max pair we can do a better job of counting sign bits if we look at them together. This is similar to what is done in the SelectionDAG version of computeNumSignBits for ISD::SMAX/SMIN.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51112
llvm-svn: 340480
NewGVN uses InstructionSimplify for simplifications of leaders of
congruence classes. It is not guaranteed that the metadata or other
flags/keywords (like nsw or exact) of the leader is available for all members
in a congruence class, so we cannot use it for simplification.
This patch adds a InstrInfoQuery struct with a boolean field
UseInstrInfo (which defaults to true to keep the current behavior as
default) and a set of helper methods to get metadata/keywords for a
given instruction, if UseInstrInfo is true. The whole thing might need a
better name, to avoid confusion with TargetInstrInfo but I am not sure
what a better name would be.
The current patch threads through InstrInfoQuery to the required
places, which is messier then it would need to be, if
InstructionSimplify and ValueTracking would share the same Query struct.
The reason I added it as a separate struct is that it can be shared
between InstructionSimplify and ValueTracking's query objects. Also,
some places do not need a full query object, just the InstrInfoQuery.
It also updates some interfaces that do not take a Query object, but a
set of optional parameters to take an additional boolean UseInstrInfo.
See https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37540.
Reviewers: dberlin, davide, efriedma, sebpop, hiraditya
Reviewed By: hiraditya
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47143
llvm-svn: 340031
The patch was reverted because of bug detected by sanitizer. The bug is fixed,
respective tests added.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50172
llvm-svn: 339005
Multiple failues reported by sanitizer-x86_64-linux, seem to be caused by this
patch. Reverting to see if they sustain without it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50172
llvm-svn: 338994
`isKnownNonNullFromDominatingCondition` is able to prove non-null basing on `br` or `guard`
by `%p != null` condition, but is unable to do so basing on `(%p != null) && %other_cond`.
This patch allows it to do so.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50172
Reviewed By: reames
llvm-svn: 338990
This adds the NAN checks suggested in PR37776:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37776
If both operands to maxnum are NAN, that should get constant folded, so we don't
have to handle that case. This is the same assumption as other FP ops in this
function. Returning 'false' is always conservatively correct.
Copying from the bug report:
Currently, we have this for "when is cannotBeOrderedLessThanZero
(mustBePositiveOrNaN) true for maxnum":
L
-------------------
| Pos | Neg | NaN |
------------------------
|Pos | x | x | x |
------------------------
R |Neg | x | | x |
------------------------
|NaN | x | x | x |
------------------------
The cases with (Neg & NaN) are wrong. We should have:
L
-------------------
| Pos | Neg | NaN |
------------------------
|Pos | x | x | x |
------------------------
R |Neg | x | | |
------------------------
|NaN | x | | x |
------------------------
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50081
llvm-svn: 338716
Hans Wennborg