We already offer zextOrTrunc and it seems natural to offer the
same capability for sign extension.
This patch is a preparatory addition useful for future computeKnownBits
developments.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D88937
This patch refactors the logic in ValueTracking.cpp so that
computeKnownBitsForMul now uses a helper function from KnownBits.
NFC
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D88935
The current demand propagator for addition will mark all input bits at and right of the alive output bit as alive. But carry won't propagate beyond a bit for which both operands are zero (or one/zero in the case of subtraction) so a more accurate answer is possible given known bits.
I derived a propagator by working through truth tables and using a bit-reversed addition to make demand ripple to the right, but I'm not sure how to make a convincing argument for its correctness in the comments yet. Nevertheless, here's a minimal implementation and test to get feedback.
This would help in a situation where, for example, four bytes (<128) packed into an int are added with four others SIMD-style but only one of the four results is actually read.
Known A: 0_______0_______0_______0_______
Known B: 0_______0_______0_______0_______
AOut: 00000000001000000000000000000000
AB, current: 00000000001111111111111111111111
AB, patch: 00000000001111111000000000000000
Committed on behalf of: @rrika (Erika)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D72423
Summary:
There are at least three clients for KnownBits calculations:
ValueTracking, SelectionDAG and GlobalISel. To reduce duplication the
common logic should be moved out of these clients and into KnownBits
itself.
This patch does this for AND, OR and XOR calculations by implementing
and using appropriate operator overloads KnownBits::operator& etc.
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74060
As it can be seen from accompanying cleanup, it is not unheard of
to write `~Known.Zero` meaning "what maximal value can this KnownBits
produce". But i think `~Known.Zero` isn't *that* self-explanatory,
as compared to a method with a name.
Note that not all `~Known.Zero` places were cleaned up,
only those where this arguably improves things.
This is for D60460. computeForAddSub() essentially already supports
carries because it has to deal with subtractions. This revision
extracts a lower-level computeForAddCarry() function, which allows
computing the known bits for add (carry known zero), sub (carry known
one) and addcarry (carry unknown).
As we don't seem to have any yet, I've added a unit test file for
KnownBits and exhaustive tests for the new computeForAddCarry()
functionality, as well the existing computeForAddSub() function.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60522
llvm-svn: 358297
