The existing code was inefficiently looking for 'nsz' variants.
That's unnecessary because we canonicalize those to the expected
form with -0.0.
We may also want to adjust or remove the fold that sinks negation.
We don't do that for fdiv (or integer ops?). That should be uniform?
It may also lead to missed optimization as in PR21914:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21914
...or we just have to fix other passes to avoid that problem.
llvm-svn: 325924
These are fdiv-with-constant-divisor, so they already become
reciprocal multiplies. The last gap for vector ops should be
closed with rL325590.
It's possible that we're missing folds for some edge cases
with denormal intermediate constants after deleting these,
but there are no tests for those patterns, and it would be
better to handle denormals more consistently (and less
conservatively) as noted in TODO comments.
llvm-svn: 325595
It's possible that we could allow this either 'arcp' or 'reassoc' alone, but this
should be conservatively better than what we have right now. GCC allows this with
only -freciprocal-math.
The last test is changed to show a case that is expected to fold, but we need D43398.
llvm-svn: 325533
The last fold that used to be here was not necessary. That's a
combination of 2 folds (and there's a regression test to show that).
The transforms are guarded by isFast(), but that should be loosened.
llvm-svn: 325531
...and delete the equivalent local functiona from InstCombine.
These might be useful to other InstCombine files or other passes
and makes FP queries more similar to integer constant queries.
llvm-svn: 325398
The variable name 'AllowReassociate' is a lie at this point because
it's set to 'isFast()' which is more than the 'reassoc' FMF after
rL317488.
In D41286, we showed that this transform may be valid even with strict
math by brute force checking every 32-bit float result.
There's a potential problem here because we're replacing with a tan()
libcall rather than a hypothetical LLVM tan intrinsic. So we might
set errno when we should be guaranteed not to do that. But that's
independent of this change.
llvm-svn: 325247
This keeps with our current usage of 'match' and is easier to see that
the optional NSW only applies in the non-constant operand case.
llvm-svn: 325140
This replaces the bit-tracking based fold that did the same thing,
but it only worked for scalars and not directly.
There is no evidence in existing regression tests that the greater
power of bit-tracking was needed here, but we should be aware of
this potential loss of optimization.
llvm-svn: 325062
This is both a functional improvement for vectors and an
efficiency improvement for scalars. The existing code below
the new folds does the same thing for scalars, but in an
indirect and expensive way.
llvm-svn: 325048
This is similar to the instsimplify fold added with D42385
( rL323716 )
...but this can't be in instsimplify because we're creating/morphing
a different instruction.
llvm-svn: 324927
The related cases for (X * Y) / X were handled in rL124487.
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/6k9
The division in these tests is subsequently eliminated by existing instcombines
for 1/X.
llvm-svn: 324843
Refactor getLogBase2Vector into getLogBase2 to accept all scalars/vectors. Generalize from ConstantDataVector to support all constant vectors.
llvm-svn: 324603
...when the shift is known to not overflow with the matching
signed-ness of the division.
This closes an optimization gap caused by canonicalizing mul
by power-of-2 to shl as shown in PR35709:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35709
Patch by Anton Bikineev!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42032
llvm-svn: 323068
parent function
Ideally we should merge the attributes from the functions somehow, but
this is obviously an improvement over taking random attributes from the
caller which will trip up the verifier if they're nonsensical for an
unary intrinsic call.
llvm-svn: 322284
As discussed on llvm-dev:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-November/107104.html
and again more recently:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-October/118118.html
...this is a step in cleaning up our fast-math-flags implementation in IR to better match
the capabilities of both clang's user-visible flags and the backend's flags for SDNode.
As proposed in the above threads, we're replacing the 'UnsafeAlgebra' bit (which had the
'umbrella' meaning that all flags are set) with a new bit that only applies to algebraic
reassociation - 'AllowReassoc'.
We're also adding a bit to allow approximations for library functions called 'ApproxFunc'
(this was initially proposed as 'libm' or similar).
...and we're out of bits. 7 bits ought to be enough for anyone, right? :) FWIW, I did
look at getting this out of SubclassOptionalData via SubclassData (spacious 16-bits),
but that's apparently already used for other purposes. Also, I don't think we can just
add a field to FPMathOperator because Operator is not intended to be instantiated.
We'll defer movement of FMF to another day.
We keep the 'fast' keyword. I thought about removing that, but seeing IR like this:
%f.fast = fadd reassoc nnan ninf nsz arcp contract afn float %op1, %op2
...made me think we want to keep the shortcut synonym.
Finally, this change is binary incompatible with existing IR as seen in the
compatibility tests. This statement:
"Newer releases can ignore features from older releases, but they cannot miscompile
them. For example, if nsw is ever replaced with something else, dropping it would be
a valid way to upgrade the IR."
( http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#ir-backwards-compatibility )
...provides the flexibility we want to make this change without requiring a new IR
version. Ie, we're not loosening the FP strictness of existing IR. At worst, we will
fail to optimize some previously 'fast' code because it's no longer recognized as
'fast'. This should get fixed as we audit/squash all of the uses of 'isFast()'.
Note: an inter-dependent clang commit to use the new API name should closely follow
commit.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39304
llvm-svn: 317488
There's at least one bug here - this code can fail with vector types (PR34856).
It's also being called for FREM; I'm still trying to understand how that is valid.
llvm-svn: 315127
In these cases, two selects have constant selectable operands for
both the true and false components and have the same conditional
expression.
We then create two arithmetic operations of the same type and feed a
final select operation using the result of the true arithmetic for the true
operand and the result of the false arithmetic for the false operand and reuse
the original conditionl expression.
The arithmetic operations are naturally folded as a consequence, leaving
only the newly formed select to replace the old arithmetic operation.
Patch by: Michael Berg <michael_c_berg@apple.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37019
llvm-svn: 313774
