Commit Graph

9 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Philip Reames 2ca8a3f213 [SCEV] Stop blindly propagating flags from inbound geps to SCEV nodes
This fixes a violation of the wrap flag rules introduced in c4048d8f. This was also noted in the (very old) PR23527.

The issue being fixed is that we assume the inbound flag on any GEP assumes that all users of *any* gep (or add) which happens to map to that SCEV would also be UB if the (other) gep overflowed. That's simply not true.

In terms of the test diffs, I don't see anything seriously problematic. The lost flags are expected (given the semantic restriction on when its legal to tag the SCEV), and there are several cases where the previously inferred flags are unsound per the new semantics.

The only common trend I noticed when looking at the deltas is that by not considering branch on poison as immediate UB in ValueTracking, we do miss a few cases we could reclaim. We may be able to claw some of these back with the follow ideas mentioned in PR51817.

It's worth noting that most of the changes are analysis result only changes. The two transform changes are pretty minimal. In one case, we miss the opportunity to infer a nuw (correctly). In the other, we fail to fold an exit and produce a loop invariant form instead. This one is probably over-reduced as the program appears to be undefined in practice, and neither before or after exploits that.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109789
2021-10-01 16:30:44 -07:00
Arthur Eubanks 50153213c8 [test][NewPM] Remove RUN lines using -analyze
Only tests in llvm/test/Analysis.

-analyze is legacy PM-specific.

This only touches files with `-passes`.

I looked through everything and made sure that everything had a new PM equivalent.

Reviewed By: MaskRay

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109040
2021-09-02 11:38:14 -07:00
Nikita Popov f3124a46c1 [SCEV] Fix nsw flags for GEP expressions
The SCEV code for constructing GEP expressions currently assumes
that the addition of the base and all the offsets is nsw if the GEP
is inbounds. While the addition of the offsets is indeed nsw, the
addition to the base address is not, as the base address is
interpreted as an unsigned value.

Fix the GEP expression code to not assume nsw for the base+offset
calculation. However, do assume nuw if we know that the offset is
non-negative. With this, we use the same behavior as the
construction of GEP addrecs does. (Modulo the fact that we
disregard SCEV unification, as the pre-existing FIXME points out).

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90648
2020-11-13 18:19:32 +01:00
Arthur Eubanks 9adbb5cb3a [SCEV] Fix ScalarEvolution tests under NPM
Many tests use opt's -analyze feature, which does not translate well to
NPM and has better alternatives. The alternative here is to explicitly
add a pass that calls ScalarEvolution::print().

The legacy pass manager RUNs aren't changing, but they are now pinned to
the legacy pass manager.  For each legacy pass manager RUN, I added a
corresponding NPM RUN using the 'print<scalar-evolution>' pass. For
compatibility with update_analyze_test_checks.py and existing test
CHECKs, 'print<scalar-evolution>' now prints what -analyze prints per
function.

This was generated by the following Python script and failures were
manually fixed up:

import sys
for i in sys.argv:
    with open(i, 'r') as f:
        s = f.read()
    with open(i, 'w') as f:
        for l in s.splitlines():
            if "RUN:" in l and ' -analyze ' in l and '\\' not in l:
                f.write(l.replace(' -analyze ', ' -analyze -enable-new-pm=0 '))
                f.write('\n')
                f.write(l.replace(' -analyze ', ' -disable-output ').replace(' -scalar-evolution ', ' "-passes=print<scalar-evolution>" ').replace(" | ", " 2>&1 | "))
                f.write('\n')
            else:
                f.write(l)

There are a couple failures still in ScalarEvolution under NPM, but
those are due to other unrelated naming conflicts.

Reviewed By: asbirlea

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83798
2020-07-16 11:24:07 -07:00
Roman Lebedev a2619a60e4
Reland "[ScalarEvolution] createSCEV(): recognize `udiv`/`urem` disguised as an `sdiv`/`srem`"
This reverts commit d3e3f36ff1,
which reverter the original commit 2c16100e6f,
but with polly tests now actually passing.
2020-07-06 18:00:22 +03:00
Mikhail Goncharov d3e3f36ff1
Revert "[ScalarEvolution] createSCEV(): recognize `udiv`/`urem` disguised as an `sdiv`/`srem`"
Summary:
This reverts commit 2c16100e6f.

ninja check-polly fails:
  Polly :: Isl/CodeGen/MemAccess/generate-all.ll
  Polly :: ScopInfo/multidim_srem.ll

Reviewers: kadircet, bollu

Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits

Tags: #llvm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83230
2020-07-06 16:41:59 +02:00
Roman Lebedev 2c16100e6f
[ScalarEvolution] createSCEV(): recognize `udiv`/`urem` disguised as an `sdiv`/`srem`
Summary:
While InstCombine trivially converts that `srem` into a `urem`,
it might happen later than wanted, in particular i'd like
for that to happen on  https://godbolt.org/z/bwuEmJ test case
early in pipeline, before first instcombine run, just before `-mem2reg`.

SCEV should recognize this case natively.

Reviewers: mkazantsev, efriedma, nikic, reames

Reviewed By: efriedma

Subscribers: clementval, hiraditya, javed.absar, llvm-commits

Tags: #llvm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D82721
2020-07-02 13:22:12 +03:00
Roman Lebedev e7da7d9428
[NFCI] Actually provide correct check lines in sdiv.ll 2020-07-02 02:00:02 +03:00
Roman Lebedev 51ff7642a3
[NFC][ScalarEvolution] Add udiv-disguised-as-sdiv test
Much like 25521150d7,
but with division instead of remainder.

See https://reviews.llvm.org/D82721
2020-07-02 01:44:19 +03:00