Summary:
Fold cases such as:
(v8i8 truncate (v8i32 extract_subvector (v16i32 sext (v16i8 V), Idx)))
->
(v8i8 extract_subvector (v16i8 V), Idx)
This can be generalized to cases where the truncate and extend do not
fully cancel each other out, but it may require querying the target
about profitability.
Reviewers: RKSimon, craig.topper, spatel, efriedma
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41927
llvm-svn: 322300
Currently we infer the scale at isel time by analyzing whether the base is a constant 0 or not. If it is we assume scale is 1, else we take it from the element size of the pass thru or stored value. This seems a little weird and I think it makes more sense to make it explicit in the DAG rather than doing tricky things in the backend.
Most of this patch is just making sure we copy the scale around everywhere.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40055
llvm-svn: 322210
Handle this in DAGCombiner::visitEXTRACT_VECTOR_ELT the same as we already do in SelectionDAG::getNode and use APInt instead of getZExtValue.
This should also fix oss-fuzz #4910
llvm-svn: 321767
Our internal testing has revealed has discovered bugs in PPC builds.
I have forward reproduction instructions to the original author (Nirav).
llvm-svn: 321649
For example, float operations may fail to constant fold under certain circumstances (inf/nan/denormal creation etc.)
Reduced from oss-fuzz #4802 test case
llvm-svn: 321488
This moves the combine for turning ANDs into shuffle with zero out of SimplifyVBinOps and places it only in visitAND below the reassociate handling. This fixes the specific case I noticed where we failed to combine two ands with constants.
llvm-svn: 321417
getOperand returns an SDValue that contains the node and the result number. There is no guarantee that the result number if 0. By using the -> operator we are calling SDNode::getValueType rather than SDValue::getValueType. This requires supplying a result number and we shouldn't assume it was 0.
I don't have a test case. Just noticed while cleaning up some other code and saw that it occurred in other places.
llvm-svn: 321397
BaseIndexOffset supercedes findBaseOffset analysis save only Constant
Pool addresses. Migrate analysis to BaseIndexOffset.
Relanding after correcting base address matching check.
llvm-svn: 321389
The knownbits_mask_or_shuffle_uitofp change is interesting - shuffle combines manage to kick in, removing the AND constant mask load. For targets with fast-variable-shuffle this should reduce further to VPOR+VPSHUFB+VCVTDQ2PS.
llvm-svn: 321279
If the SRL node is only used by an AND, we may be able to set the
ExtVT to the width of the mask, making the AND redundant. To support
this, another check has been added in isLegalNarrowLoad which queries
whether the load is valid.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41350
llvm-svn: 321259
Summary:
Extend overlapping store elision to handle overwrites of stores by
larger stores.
Nontemporal tests have been modified to add memory dependencies to
prevent store elision.
Reviewers: craig.topper, rnk, t.p.northover
Subscribers: javed.absar, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40969
llvm-svn: 321089
Search from AND nodes to find whether they can be propagated back to
loads, so that the AND and load can be combined into a narrow load.
We search through OR, XOR and other AND nodes and all bar one of the
leaves are required to be loads or constants. The exception node then
needs to be masked off meaning that the 'and' isn't removed, but the
loads(s) are narrowed still.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41177
llvm-svn: 320962
Recommitting rL319773, which was reverted due to a recursive issue
causing timeouts. This happened because I failed to check whether
the discovered loads could be narrowed further. In the case of a tree
with one or more narrow loads, that could not be further narrowed, as
well as a node that would need masking, an AND could be introduced
which could then be visited and recombined again with the same load.
This could again create the masking load, with would be combined
again... We now check that the load can be narrowed so that this
process stops.
Original commit message:
Search from AND nodes to find whether they can be propagated back to
loads, so that the AND and load can be combined into a narrow load.
We search through OR, XOR and other AND nodes and all bar one of the
leaves are required to be loads or constants. The exception node then
needs to be masked off meaning that the 'and' isn't removed, but the
loads(s) are narrowed still.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41177
llvm-svn: 320679
At first, I tried to thread the x86 needle and use a target hook (isVectorShiftByScalarCheap())
to disable the transform only for non-splat pow-of-2 constants, but not AVX2, but only some
element types, but...it's difficult.
Here we just avoid the loop with the x86 vector transform that conflicts with the general DAG
combine and preserve all of the existing behavior AFAICT otherwise.
Some tests that will probably fail if someone does try to restrict this in a more targeted way
for x86-only may be found in:
test/CodeGen/X86/combine-mul.ll
test/CodeGen/X86/vector-mul.ll
test/CodeGen/X86/widen_arith-5.ll
This should prevent the infinite looping seen with:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35579
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41040
llvm-svn: 320374
This commit is the first part of https://reviews.llvm.org/D40348.
In order to allow target combines to be performed on newly combined
indexed loads, add them back to the worklist. The remainder of the
above patch will be committed in subsequent revisions and will use
this. Test cases will be included with those follow-up commits.
llvm-svn: 320365
This is a preparatory step for D34515.
This change:
- makes nodes ISD::ADDCARRY and ISD::SUBCARRY legal for i32
- lowering is done by first converting the boolean value into the carry flag
using (_, C) ← (ARMISD::ADDC R, -1) and converted back to an integer value
using (R, _) ← (ARMISD::ADDE 0, 0, C). An ARMISD::ADDE between the two
operations does the actual addition.
- for subtraction, given that ISD::SUBCARRY second result is actually a
borrow, we need to invert the value of the second operand and result before
and after using ARMISD::SUBE. We need to invert the carry result of
ARMISD::SUBE to preserve the semantics.
- given that the generic combiner may lower ISD::ADDCARRY and
ISD::SUBCARRYinto ISD::UADDO and ISD::USUBO we need to update their lowering
as well otherwise i64 operations now would require branches. This implies
updating the corresponding test for unsigned.
- add new combiner to remove the redundant conversions from/to carry flags
to/from boolean values (ARMISD::ADDC (ARMISD::ADDE 0, 0, C), -1) → C
- fixes PR34045
- fixes PR34564
- fixes PR35103
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35192
llvm-svn: 320355
I noticed this pattern in D38316 / D38388. We failed to combine a shuffle that is either
repeating a scalar insertion at the same position in a vector or translated to a different
element index.
Like the earlier patch, this could be an instcombine too, but since we opted to make this
a DAG transform earlier, I've made this one a DAG patch too.
We do not need any legality checking because the new insert is identical to the existing
insert except that it may have a different constant insertion operand.
The constant insertion test in test/CodeGen/X86/vector-shuffle-combining.ll was the
motivation for D38756.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40209
llvm-svn: 320050
Search from AND nodes to find whether they can be propagated back to
loads, so that the AND and load can be combined into a narrow load.
We search through OR, XOR and other AND nodes and all bar one of the
leaves are required to be loads or constants. The exception node then
needs to be masked off meaning that the 'and' isn't removed, but the
loads(s) are narrowed still.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39604
llvm-svn: 319773
Summary:
Found out, at code inspection, that there was a fault in
DAGCombiner::CombineConsecutiveLoads for big-endian targets.
A BUILD_PAIR is always having the least significant bits of
the composite value in element 0. So when we are doing the checks
for consecutive loads, for big endian targets, we should check
if the load to elt 1 is at the lower address and the load
to elt 0 is at the higher address.
Normally this bug only resulted in missed oppurtunities for
doing the load combine. I guess that in some rare situation it
could lead to faulty combines, but I've not seen that happen.
Note that this patch actually will trigger load combine for
some big endian regression tests.
One example is test/CodeGen/PowerPC/anon_aggr.ll where we now get
t76: i64,ch = load<LD8[FixedStack-9]
instead of
t37: i32,ch = load<LD4[FixedStack-10]>
t35: i32,ch = load<LD4[FixedStack-9]>
t41: i64 = build_pair t37, t35
before legalization. Then the legalization will split the LD8
into two loads, so the end result is the same. That should
verify that the transfomation is correct now.
Reviewers: niravd, hfinkel
Reviewed By: niravd
Subscribers: nemanjai, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40444
llvm-svn: 319771
Pull the checks upon the load out from ReduceLoadWidth into their own
function.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40833
llvm-svn: 319766
MatchRotate assumes the types of the types of LHS and RHS are equal,
which is always the case then they come from an OR node, but here
we're getting them from two different TRUNC nodes, so we have to check
the types.
llvm-svn: 319695
If the truncation has been pushed past the or-node, look through it and
truncate afterwards.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40792
llvm-svn: 319692
Both LoadedVT and NarrowLoad are passed as references and neither
of them are used by any of its callers.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40713
llvm-svn: 319645
visitAND attempts to narrow the width of extending loads that are
then masked off. ReduceLoadWidth already exists for a similar purpose
and handles shifts, so I've moved the code to handle AND nodes there.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39595
llvm-svn: 319421
This is needed for cases when the memory access is not as big as the width of
the data type. For instance, storing i1 (1 bit) would be done in a byte (8
bits).
Using 'BitSize >> 3' (or '/ 8') would e.g. give the memory access of an i1 a
size of 0, which for instance makes alias analysis return NoAlias even when
it shouldn't.
There are no tests as this was done as a follow-up to the bugfix for the case
where this was discovered (r318824). This handles more similar cases.
Review: Björn Petterson
https://reviews.llvm.org/D40339
llvm-svn: 319173
