A program may contain llvm.assume info that disagrees with other analysis.
This may be caused by UB in the program, so we must not crash because of that.
As noted in the code comments:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=31809
...we can do better, but this at least avoids the assert/crash in the bug report.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29395
llvm-svn: 293773
Summary:
CannotBeOrderedLessThanZero(powi(x, exp)) returns true if
CannotBeOrderedLessThanZero(x). But powi(-0, exp) is negative if exp is
odd, so we actually want to return SignBitMustBeZero(x).
Except that also isn't right, because we want to return true if x is
NaN, even if x has a negative sign bit.
What we really need in order to fix this is a consistent approach in
this function to handling the sign bit of NaNs. Without this it's very
difficult to say what the correct behavior here is.
Reviewers: hfinkel, efriedma, sanjoy
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28927
llvm-svn: 293243
Summary:
Previously we assumed that the result of sqrt(x) always had 0 as its
sign bit. But sqrt(-0) == -0.
Reviewers: hfinkel, efriedma, sanjoy
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28928
llvm-svn: 293115
Floating point intrinsics in LLVM are generally not speculatively
executed, since most of them are defined to behave the same as libm
functions, which set errno.
However, the @llvm.powi.* intrinsics do not correspond to any libm
function, and lacks any defined error handling semantics in LangRef.
It most certainly does not alter errno.
llvm-svn: 293041
Summary:
The LibFunc::Func enum holds enumerators named for libc functions.
Unfortunately, there are real situations, including libc implementations, where
function names are actually macros (musl uses "#define fopen64 fopen", for
example; any other transitively visible macro would have similar effects).
Strictly speaking, a conforming C++ Standard Library should provide any such
macros as functions instead (via <cstdio>). However, there are some "library"
functions which are not part of the standard, and thus not subject to this
rule (fopen64, for example). So, in order to be both portable and consistent,
the enum should not use the bare function names.
The old enum naming used a namespace LibFunc and an enum Func, with bare
enumerators. This patch changes LibFunc to be an enum with enumerators prefixed
with "LibFFunc_". (Unfortunately, a scoped enum is not sufficient to override
macros.)
There are additional changes required in clang.
Reviewers: rsmith
Subscribers: mehdi_amini, mzolotukhin, nemanjai, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28476
llvm-svn: 292848
This is similar to what the caller (matchSelectPattern()) does. In all
cases where we succeed in matching a min/max pattern, the values in
that pattern will be the values of the 'select', so hoist that and
remove a bunch of duplicated code.
llvm-svn: 292725
Also, add the corresponding match to the AssumptionCache's 'Affected Values' list.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28485
llvm-svn: 292239
Here's my second try at making @llvm.assume processing more efficient. My
previous attempt, which leveraged operand bundles, r289755, didn't end up
working: it did make assume processing more efficient but eliminating the
assumption cache made ephemeral value computation too expensive. This is a
more-targeted change. We'll keep the assumption cache, but extend it to keep a
map of affected values (i.e. values about which an assumption might provide
some information) to the corresponding assumption intrinsics. This allows
ValueTracking and LVI to find assumptions relevant to the value being queried
without scanning all assumptions in the function. The fact that ValueTracking
started doing O(number of assumptions in the function) work, for every
known-bits query, has become prohibitively expensive in some cases.
As discussed during the review, this is a pragmatic fix that, longer term, will
likely be replaced by a more-principled solution (perhaps based on an extended
SSA form).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28459
llvm-svn: 291671
I'm not sure if this was intentional, but today
isGuaranteedToTransferExecutionToSuccessor returns true for readonly and
argmemonly calls that may throw. This commit changes the function to
not implicitly infer nounwind this way.
Even if we eventually specify readonly calls as not throwing,
isGuaranteedToTransferExecutionToSuccessor is not the best place to
infer that. We should instead teach FunctionAttrs or some other such
pass to tag readonly functions / calls as nounwind instead.
llvm-svn: 290794
I don't think this hole is currently exposed, but I crashed regression tests for
jump-threading and loop-vectorize after I added calls to isKnownNonNullAt() in
InstSimplify as part of trying to solve PR28430:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=28430
That's because they call into value tracking with a context instruction, but no
other parts of the query structure filled in.
For more background, see the discussion in:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D27855
llvm-svn: 290786
After r289755, the AssumptionCache is no longer needed. Variables affected by
assumptions are now found by using the new operand-bundle-based scheme. This
new scheme is more computationally efficient, and also we need much less
code...
llvm-svn: 289756
There was an efficiency problem with how we processed @llvm.assume in
ValueTracking (and other places). The AssumptionCache tracked all of the
assumptions in a given function. In order to find assumptions relevant to
computing known bits, etc. we searched every assumption in the function. For
ValueTracking, that means that we did O(#assumes * #values) work in InstCombine
and other passes (with a constant factor that can be quite large because we'd
repeat this search at every level of recursion of the analysis).
Several of us discussed this situation at the last developers' meeting, and
this implements the discussed solution: Make the values that an assume might
affect operands of the assume itself. To avoid exposing this detail to
frontends and passes that need not worry about it, I've used the new
operand-bundle feature to add these extra call "operands" in a way that does
not affect the intrinsic's signature. I think this solution is relatively
clean. InstCombine adds these extra operands based on what ValueTracking, LVI,
etc. will need and then those passes need only search the users of the values
under consideration. This should fix the computational-complexity problem.
At this point, no passes depend on the AssumptionCache, and so I'll remove
that as a follow-up change.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27259
llvm-svn: 289755
Summary:
Attaching !absolute_symbol to a global variable does two things:
1) Marks it as an absolute symbol reference.
2) Specifies the value range of that symbol's address.
Teach the X86 backend to allow absolute symbols to appear in place of
immediates by extending the relocImm and mov64imm32 matchers. Start using
relocImm in more places where it is legal.
As previously proposed on llvm-dev:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-October/105800.html
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25878
llvm-svn: 289087
Instead, expose whether the current type is an array or a struct, if an array
what the upper bound is, and if a struct the struct type itself. This is
in preparation for a later change which will make PointerType derive from
Type rather than SequentialType.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26594
llvm-svn: 288458
Currently LLVM assumes that a pointer addrspacecasted to a different addr space is equivalent to trunc or zext bitwise, which is not true. For example, in amdgcn target, when a null pointer is addrspacecasted from addr space 4 to 0, its value is changed from i64 0 to i32 -1.
This patch teaches LLVM not to assume known bits of addrspacecast instruction to its operand.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26803
llvm-svn: 287545
The smallest tests that expose this are codegen tests (because SelectionDAGBuilder::visitSelect() uses matchSelectPattern
to create UMAX/UMIN nodes), but it's also possible to see the effects in IR alone with folds of min/max pairs.
If these were written as unsigned compares in IR, InstCombine canonicalizes the unsigned compares to signed compares.
Ie, running the optimizer pessimizes the codegen for this case without this patch:
define <4 x i32> @umax_vec(<4 x i32> %x) {
%cmp = icmp ugt <4 x i32> %x, <i32 2147483647, i32 2147483647, i32 2147483647, i32 2147483647>
%sel = select <4 x i1> %cmp, <4 x i32> %x, <4 x i32> <i32 2147483647, i32 2147483647, i32 2147483647, i32 2147483647>
ret <4 x i32> %sel
}
$ ./opt umax.ll -S | ./llc -o - -mattr=avx
vpmaxud LCPI0_0(%rip), %xmm0, %xmm0
$ ./opt -instcombine umax.ll -S | ./llc -o - -mattr=avx
vpxor %xmm1, %xmm1, %xmm1
vpcmpgtd %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm1
vmovaps LCPI0_0(%rip), %xmm2 ## xmm2 = [2147483647,2147483647,2147483647,2147483647]
vblendvps %xmm1, %xmm0, %xmm2, %xmm0
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26096
llvm-svn: 286318
InstCombine should always canonicalize patterns like the one shown in the comment
when visiting 'select' insts in adjustMinMax().
Scalars were already handled there, and vector splats are handled after:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL285732
llvm-svn: 285744
Try harder to detect obfuscated min/max patterns: the initial pattern was added with D9352 / rL236202.
There was a bug fix for PR27137 at rL264996, but I think we can do better by folding the corresponding
smax pattern and commuted variants.
The codegen tests demonstrate the effect of ValueTracking on the backend via SelectionDAGBuilder. We
can't expose these differences minimally in IR because we don't have smin/smax intrinsics for IR.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26091
llvm-svn: 285499
Since this change is known to cause performance degradations in some cases it's commited under a temporary flag which is turned off by default.
Patch by Li Huang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D18777
llvm-svn: 284022
Summary:
While walking defs of pointer operands we were assuming that the pointer
size would remain constant. This is not true, because addresspacecast
instructions may cast the pointer to an address space with a different
pointer width.
This partial reverts r282612, which was a more conservative solution
to this problem.
Reviewers: reames, sanjoy, apilipenko
Subscribers: wdng, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24772
llvm-svn: 283557
Summary:
The computeKnownBits and ComputeNumSignBits functions in ValueTracking can now do a simple look-through of ExtractElement.
Reviewers: majnemer, spatel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24955
llvm-svn: 283434
Pointers in different addrspaces can have different sizes, so it's not valid to look through addrspace cast calculating base and offset for a value.
This is similar to D13008.
Reviewed By: reames
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24729
llvm-svn: 282612
There is no benefit in looking through assumptions on UndefValue to
guess known bits. Return early to avoid walking their use-lists, and
assert that all instances of ConstantData are handled here for similar
reasons (UndefValue was the only integer/pointer holdout).
llvm-svn: 282337
Check and return early for ConstantPointerNull and UndefValue
specifically in isKnownNonNullAt, and assert that ConstantData never
make it to isKnownNonNullFromDominatingCondition.
This confirms that isKnownNonNullFromDominatingCondition never walks
through the use-list of an instance of ConstantData. Given that such
use-lists cross module boundaries, it never really made sense to do so,
and was potentially very expensive.
llvm-svn: 282333
computeKnownBits() already works for integer vectors, so allow vector types when calling that from InstCombine.
I don't think the change to use m_APInt in computeKnownBits is strictly necessary because we do check for
ConstantVector later, but it's more efficient to handle the splat case without needing to loop on vector elements.
This should work with InstSimplify, but doesn't yet, so I made that a FIXME comment on the test for PR24942:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24942
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24677
llvm-svn: 281777
This change cause performance regression on MultiSource/Benchmarks/TSVC/Symbolics-flt/Symbolics-flt from LNT and some other bechmarks.
See https://reviews.llvm.org/D18777 for details.
llvm-svn: 279433
