mirror of
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project.git
synced 2025-05-15 16:26:05 +00:00

This patch introduces a new KnownBits struct that wraps the two APInt used by computeKnownBits. This allows us to treat them as more of a unit. Initially I've just altered the signatures of computeKnownBits and InstCombine's simplifyDemandedBits to pass a KnownBits reference instead of two separate APInt references. I'll do similar to the SelectionDAG version of computeKnownBits/simplifyDemandedBits as a separate patch. I've added a constructor that allows initializing both APInts to the same bit width with a starting value of 0. This reduces the repeated pattern of initializing both APInts. Once place default constructed the APInts so I added a default constructor for those cases. Going forward I would like to add more methods that will work on the pairs. For example trunc, zext, and sext occur on both APInts together in several places. We should probably add a clear method that can be used to clear both pieces. Maybe a method to check for conflicting information. A method to return (Zero|One) so we don't write it out everywhere. Maybe a method for (Zero|One).isAllOnesValue() to determine if all bits are known. I'm sure there are many other methods we can come up with. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32376 llvm-svn: 301432
Analysis Opportunities: //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// In test/Transforms/LoopStrengthReduce/quadradic-exit-value.ll, the ScalarEvolution expression for %r is this: {1,+,3,+,2}<loop> Outside the loop, this could be evaluated simply as (%n * %n), however ScalarEvolution currently evaluates it as (-2 + (2 * (trunc i65 (((zext i64 (-2 + %n) to i65) * (zext i64 (-1 + %n) to i65)) /u 2) to i64)) + (3 * %n)) In addition to being much more complicated, it involves i65 arithmetic, which is very inefficient when expanded into code. //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===// In formatValue in test/CodeGen/X86/lsr-delayed-fold.ll, ScalarEvolution is forming this expression: ((trunc i64 (-1 * %arg5) to i32) + (trunc i64 %arg5 to i32) + (-1 * (trunc i64 undef to i32))) This could be folded to (-1 * (trunc i64 undef to i32)) //===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//