Commit Graph

24 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Sanjay Patel 9650c95b7e [InstCombine] allow unordered preds when canonicalizing to fabs()
We have a known-never-nan value via 'nnan', so an unordered predicate
is the same as its ordered sibling.

Similar to:
rL362937

llvm-svn: 362954
2019-06-10 15:39:00 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 07bba68889 [InstCombine] add tests for fabs() with unordered preds; NFC
llvm-svn: 362949
2019-06-10 15:08:22 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 85de9634e6 [InstCombine] fix bug in canonicalization to fabs()
Forgot to translate the predicate clauses in rL362943.

llvm-svn: 362945
2019-06-10 14:57:45 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 8b6d9f60ed [InstCombine] change canonicalization to fabs() to use FMF on fsub
Similar to rL362909:
This isn't the ideal fix (use FMF on the select), but it's still an
improvement until we have better FMF propagation to selects and other
FP math operators.

I don't think there's much risk of regression from this change by
not including the FMF on the fcmp any more. The nsz/nnan FMF
should be the same on the fcmp and the fsub because they have the
same operand.

llvm-svn: 362943
2019-06-10 14:46:36 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 8cd8c5784b [InstCombine] allow unordered preds when canonicalizing to fabs()
PR42179:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42179

llvm-svn: 362937
2019-06-10 14:14:51 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 4cdd3ceb57 [InstCombine] add tests for fcmp unordered pred -> fabs (PR42179); NFC
llvm-svn: 362936
2019-06-10 14:04:10 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 87cd16a86e [InstCombine] change canonicalization to fabs() to use FMF on fneg
This isn't the ideal fix (use FMF on the select), but it's still an
improvement until we have better FMF propagation to selects and other
FP math operators.

I don't think there's much risk of regression from this change by
not including the FMF on the fcmp any more. The nsz/nnan FMF
should be the same on the fcmp and the fneg (fsub) because they
have the same operand.

This works around the most glaring FMF logical inconsistency cited
in PR38086:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38086

llvm-svn: 362909
2019-06-09 16:22:01 +00:00
Cameron McInally 8ff009a461 [NFC][InstCombine] Add unary FNeg tests to fabs.ll
llvm-svn: 362238
2019-05-31 16:17:04 +00:00
Eric Christopher cee313d288 Revert "Temporarily Revert "Add basic loop fusion pass.""
The reversion apparently deleted the test/Transforms directory.

Will be re-reverting again.

llvm-svn: 358552
2019-04-17 04:52:47 +00:00
Eric Christopher a863435128 Temporarily Revert "Add basic loop fusion pass."
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).

This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.

llvm-svn: 358546
2019-04-17 02:12:23 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 93e64dd9a1 [PatternMatch] allow undef elements when matching vector FP +0.0
This continues the FP constant pattern matching improvements from:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL327627
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL327339
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL327307

Several integer constant matchers also have this ability. I'm
separating matching of integer/pointer null from FP positive zero
and renaming/commenting to make the functionality clearer.

llvm-svn: 328461
2018-03-25 21:16:33 +00:00
Sanjay Patel c84b48ec29 [InstSimplify, InstCombine] add/update tests with FP +0.0 vector with undef; NFC
llvm-svn: 328455
2018-03-25 17:48:20 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 0ce3086777 [InstCombine] canonicalize fcmp+select to fabs
This is complicated by -0.0 and nan. This is based on the DAG patterns 
as shown in D44091. I'm hoping that we can just remove those DAG folds 
and always rely on IR canonicalization to handle the matching to fabs.

We would still need to delete the broken code from DAGCombiner to fix 
PR36600:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36600

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44550

llvm-svn: 327858
2018-03-19 15:14:30 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 2b94927f0d [InstCombine] add nnan requirement to potential fabs folds tests; NFC
As noted in D44550, we can't guarantee preserving the sign-bit of NaN 
if we convert these to fabs().

llvm-svn: 327718
2018-03-16 15:27:39 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 728269c10d [InstCombine] add more tests for fcmp+select -> fabs; NFC
This should correspond to the patterns in D44091 and might
make handling these in the DAG unnecessary.

llvm-svn: 327689
2018-03-16 01:06:33 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 2d568ec0e4 [InstCombine] add tests for fcmp+select -> fabs; NFC
llvm-svn: 327680
2018-03-15 22:48:23 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 8d7d1db294 [InstCombine] regenerate test checks; NFC
llvm-svn: 318416
2017-11-16 16:36:48 +00:00
Matt Arsenault 7233344c28 SimplifyLibCalls: Replace fabs libcalls with intrinsics
Add missing fabs(fpext) optimzation that worked with the call,
and also fixes it creating a second fpext when there were multiple
uses.

llvm-svn: 292172
2017-01-17 00:10:40 +00:00
Matt Arsenault 1e0edbf03c InstSimplify: Eliminate fabs on known positive
llvm-svn: 291624
2017-01-11 00:33:24 +00:00
Matt Arsenault a7d2194168 SimplifyLibCalls: Remove incorrect optimization of fabs
fabs(x * x) is not generally safe to assume x is positive if x is a NaN.
This is also less general than it could be, so this will be replaced
with a transformation on the intrinsic.

llvm-svn: 291359
2017-01-07 19:55:12 +00:00
Matt Arsenault 56ff4839ae InstCombine: Fold fabs on select of constants
llvm-svn: 290913
2017-01-03 22:40:34 +00:00
Sanjay Patel dba8b4c04d transform obscured FP sign bit ops into a fabs/fneg using TLI hook
This is effectively a revert of:
http://reviews.llvm.org/rL249702 - [InstCombine] transform masking off of an FP sign bit into a fabs() intrinsic call (PR24886)
and:
http://reviews.llvm.org/rL249701 - [ValueTracking] teach computeKnownBits that a fabs() clears sign bits
and a reimplementation as a DAG combine for targets that have IEEE754-compliant fabs/fneg instructions.

This is intended to resolve the objections raised on the dev list:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-April/098154.html
and:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24886#c4

In the interest of patch minimalism, I've only partly enabled AArch64. PowerPC, MIPS, x86 and others can enable later.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19391

llvm-svn: 271573
2016-06-02 20:01:37 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 9115cf8c9d [ValueTracking] teach computeKnownBits that a fabs() clears sign bits
This was requested in D13076: if we're going to canonicalize to fabs(), ValueTracking
should know that fabs() clears sign bits.

In this patch (as in D13076), we're not handling vectors yet even though computeKnownBits'
fabs() case itself should be vector-ready via the splat in this patch. 
Fixing this will require follow-on patches to correct other logic that uses 'getScalarType'.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13222

llvm-svn: 249701
2015-10-08 16:56:55 +00:00
Sanjay Patel 0ca42bb5a8 Optimize away fabs() calls when input is squared (known positive).
Eliminate library calls and intrinsic calls to fabs when the input 
is a squared value.

Note that no unsafe-math / fast-math assumptions are needed for
this optimization.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5777

llvm-svn: 219717
2014-10-14 20:43:11 +00:00