According to IR LangRef, the FMF flag:
contract
Allow floating-point contraction (e.g. fusing a multiply followed by an
addition into a fused multiply-and-add).
reassoc
Allow reassociation transformations for floating-point instructions.
This may dramatically change results in floating-point.
My understanding is that these two flags shouldn't imply each other,
as we might have a SDNode that can be reassociated with others, but
not contractble.
eg: We may want following fmul/fad/fsub to freely reassoc, but don't
want fma being generated here.
%F = fmul reassoc double %A, %B ; <double> [#uses=1]
%G = fmul reassoc double %C, %D ; <double> [#uses=1]
%H = fadd reassoc double %F, %G ; <double> [#uses=1]
%I = fsub reassoc double %H, %E ; <double> [#uses=1]
Before https://reviews.llvm.org/D45710, `reassoc` flag actually
did not imply isContratable either.
The current implementation also only check the flag in fadd node,
ignoring fmul node, this patch update that as well.
Reviewed By: spatel, qiucf
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104247
6e5628354e22f3ca40b04295bac540843b8e6482 regressed the Windows build as
the return type no longer matched in both branches for the return value
type deduction. This uses a bit more compiler magic to deal with that.
The sorting, obviously, must be stable, else we will have random assembly fluctuations.
Apparently there was no test coverage that would benefit from that,
so i've added one test.
The sorting consists of two parts - just sort the input vectors,
and recompute the shuffle mask -> input vector mapping.
I don't believe we need to do anything else.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104187
When reducing vector builds to shuffles it possible that
the DAG combiner may try to extract invalid subvectors.
This happens as the existing code assumes vectors will be power
of 2 sizes, which is already untrue, but becomes more noticable
with v6 and v7 types.
Specifically the existing code assumes that half PowerOf2Ceil of
a given vector index will fit twice into a given vector.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103880
This change implements new DAG notes GLOBAL_GET/GLOBAL_SET, and
lowering methods for load and stores of reference types from IR
globals. Once the lowering creates the new nodes, tablegen pattern
matches those and converts them to Wasm global.get/set.
Reviewed By: tlively
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D95425
As shown in:
https://llvm.org/PR50623
...and the similar tests here, we were not accounting for
store merging of different sizes that do not cover the
entire range of the wide value to be stored.
This is the easy fix: just make sure that all of the
original stores are the same size, so when we calculate
the wide width, it's a simple N * M check.
This still allows all of the motivating optimizations from:
D86420 / 54a5dd485c4d
D87112 / 7a06b166b1af
We could enhance this code to track individual bytes and
allow merging multiple sizes.
shuffle(concat(x,undef),concat(y,undef)) -> concat(shuffle(x,y),shuffle(x,y))
If the original shuffle references any of the upper (undef) subvector elements, ensure the split shuffle masks uses undef instead of an out-of-bounds value.
Fixes PR50609
This extends 434c8e013a2c and ede3982792df to handle signed
predicates by sign-extending the setcc operands.
This is not shown directly in https://llvm.org/PR50055 ,
but the pattern is visible by changing the unsigned convert
to signed in the source code.
This is a follow-up to D103280 that eases the use restrictions,
so we can handle the motivating case from:
https://llvm.org/PR50055
The loop code is adapted from similar use checks in
ExtendUsesToFormExtLoad() and SliceUpLoad(). I did not see an
easier way to filter out non-chain uses of load values.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103462
I accidentaly pushed a draft of D103280 that was discussed
during the review, but it was not supposed to be the final
version.
Rather than revert and recommit, I'm updating the existing
code. This way we have a record of the codegen diff that
would result if we decide to remove this predicate in the
future.
sext (vsetcc X, Y) --> vsetcc (zext X), (zext Y) --
(when the zexts are free and a bunch of other conditions)
We have a couple of similar folds to this already for vector selects,
but this pattern slips through because it is only a setcc.
The tests are based on the motivating case from:
https://llvm.org/PR50055
...but we need extra logic to get that example, so I've left that as
a TODO for now.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103280
extractelement is poison if the index is out-of-bounds, so just
scalarizing the load may introduce an out-of-bounds load, which is UB.
To avoid introducing new UB, we can mask the index so it only contains
valid indices.
Fixes PR50382.
Reviewed By: efriedma
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103077
DAGCombine's `mergeStoresOfConstantsOrVecElts` optimization is told
whether it's to use vector types and also whether it's to issue a
truncating store. However, the truncating store code path assumes a
scalar integer `ConstantSDNode`, and when using vector types it creates
either a `BUILD_VECTOR` or `CONCAT_VECTORS` to store: neither of which
is a constant.
The `riscv64` target is able to expose a crash here because it switches
on both code paths at the same time. The `f32` is stored as `i32` which
must be promoted to `i64`, necessitating a truncating store.
It also decides later that it prefers a vector store of `v2f32`.
While vector truncating stores are legal, this combine is not able to
emit them. We also don't have a test case. This patch adds an assert to
catch this case more gracefully, and updates one of the caller functions
to the function to turn off the use of truncating stores when preferring
vectors.
Reviewed By: craig.topper
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103173
The select-of-constants transform was asserting that its constant vector
inputs did not implicitly truncate their input without that as an
explicit precondition to the function. This patch relaxes that assertion
into an early return to skip the optimization.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102393
Fixes a bug in the DAG combiner that eliminates the stores because it missed
to inspect the address space of the pointers.
%v = load %ptr_as1
// no chain side effect
store %v, %ptr_as2
As well as
store %v, %ptr_as1
store %v, %ptr_as2
Fixes a test for above in X86.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102096
Expanding a fixed length operation involves wrapping the operation in an
insert/extract subvector pair, as such, when this is done to bitcast we
end up with an extract_subvector of a bitcast. DAGCombine tries to
convert this into a bitcast of an extract_subvector which restores the
initial fixed length bitcast, causing an infinite loop of legalization.
As part of this patch, we must make sure the above DAGCombine does not
trigger after legalization if the created bitcast would not be legal.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D101990
This replaces D98479.
This allows type legalization to form SPLAT_VECTOR_PARTS so we don't
lose the splattedness when the scalar type is split.
I'm handling SPLAT_VECTOR_PARTS for fixed vectors separately so
we can continue using non-VL nodes for scalable vectors.
I limited to RV32+vXi64 because DAGCombiner::visitBUILD_VECTOR likes
to form SPLAT_VECTOR before seeing if it can replace the BUILD_VECTOR
with other operations. Especially interesting is a splat BUILD_VECTOR of
the extract_vector_elt which can become a splat shuffle, but won't if
we form SPLAT_VECTOR first. We either need to reorder visitBUILD_VECTOR
or add visitSPLAT_VECTOR.
Reviewed By: frasercrmck
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100803
It is proper to relax non-negative limitation of step_vector.
Also this patch adds more combines for step_vector:
(sub X, step_vector(C)) -> (add X, step_vector(-C))
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100812
This patch adds incrementally-better support for SPLAT_VECTOR in a
handful of vector combines by changing a few more
isBuildVectorAllOnes/isBuildVectorAllZeros to the equivalent
isConstantSplatVectorAllOnes/Zeros calls.
Reviewed By: paulwalker-arm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100851
This patch changes ISD::isBuildVectorAllZeros to
ISD::isConstantSplatVectorAllZeros which handles zero sclar vector.
TestPlan: check-llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100813
When trying to clamp a constant index into a scalable vector we can
test if the index is less than the minimum number of elements in the
vector. If so, we can simply return the index because we know it is
guaranteed to fit inside the vector.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100639
Main reason is preparation to transform AliasResult to class that contains
offset for PartialAlias case.
Reviewed By: asbirlea
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98027
If the inner shuffle already contains undef elements, then accept them in the merged shuffle as well.
This helps some X86 HADD/SUB patterns where slow targets were ending up with HADD/SUB because the (un)merged shuffles were stuck either side of the ADD/SUB - meaning we ended up with a total cost much higher than the "2*shuffle+add" that a slow target usually expands a HADD/SUB to.
This patch adds a new isIntOrFPConstant helper function to check if a
SDValue is a integer of FP constant. This pattern is used in various
places.
There also are places that incorrectly just check for integer constants,
e.g. D99384, so hopefully this helper will help people avoid that issue.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99428
Don't bother calling ComputeNumSignBits if N00Bits < ExtVTBits. No
matter what answer we get back this will be true:
(N00Bits - DAG.ComputeNumSignBits(N00, DemandedSrcElts)) < ExtVTBits)
So we might as well save the computation. This makes the code more
consistent with the similar (sext_in_reg (sext x)) handling above.
As commented by @craig.topper on rG1ba5c550d418, we can't guarantee that we'll be extending zero bits, just sign bit. So, revert to the old code for zero_extend_vector_inreg cases.
Followup to D96345, handle unary shuffles of binops (as well as binary shuffles) if we can merge the shuffle with inner operand shuffles.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98646
Extend this to support ComputeNumSignBits of the (used) source vector elements so that we can handle more than just the case where we're sext_in_reg from the source element signbit.
Noticed while investigating the poor codegen in D98587.
A 1-bit smulo overflows is both inputs are -1 since the result
should be +1 which can't be represented in a signed 1 bit value.
We can detect this with an AND and a setcc. The multiply result
can also use the same AND.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D97634
This prepares codegen for a change that will remove the identical
folds from IR because they are not poison-safe. See
D93065 / D97360
for details.
We already generically support scalar types, and there are various
target-specific transforms that overlap the vector folds. For example,
x86 recognizes the and patterns, but not or. We can end up with 1
extra instruction there, but I think that is still preferred over the
blendv alternative that loads a constant vector.
If this is not optimal, then it should be fixed with a later transform
(this change is not expected to result in any regressions because
InstCombine currently does the same thing).
Removing custom code and supporting undefs in constant-pattern-matching
can be follow-up changes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D97730
Peeking through AND is only valid if the input to both shifts is
the same. If the inputs are different, then the original pattern
ORs the two values when the masked shift amount is 0. This is ok
if the values are the same since the OR would be a NOP which is
why its ok for rotate.
Fixes PR49365 and reverts PR34641
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D97637
Even if the first computeKnownBits call doesn't have any zero
bits it is possible the other operand has bitwidth-1 leading zero.
In that case overflow is still impossible. So always call computeKnownBits
for both operands.
Using ComputeNumSignBits or computeKnownBits we might be able
to determine that overflow is impossible.
This especially helps after type legalization if the type was
promoted from a type with half the bits or more. Type legalization
conservatively creates a promoted smulo/umulo and an overflow
check for the promoted bits. The overflow from the promoted
smulo/umulo is ORed with the result of the promoted bits
overflow check. Proving that the promoted smulo/umulo can never
overflow will leave us with just the promoted bits overflow check.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D97160
This patch handles usubsat patterns hidden through zext/trunc and uses the getTruncatedUSUBSAT helper to determine if the USUBSAT can be correctly performed in the truncated form:
zext(x) >= y ? x - trunc(y) : 0 --> usubsat(x,trunc(umin(y,SatLimit)))
zext(x) > y ? x - trunc(y) : 0 --> usubsat(x,trunc(umin(y,SatLimit)))
Based on original examples:
void foo(unsigned short *p, int max, int n) {
int i;
unsigned m;
for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
m = *--p;
*p = (unsigned short)(m >= max ? m-max : 0);
}
}
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25987
