1
0
mirror of https://github.com/RPCS3/llvm-mirror.git synced 2024-10-23 13:02:52 +02:00
llvm-mirror/test/Analysis/ScalarEvolution/pr27315.ll
Sanjoy Das 9baaae9344 [SCEV] Don't always add no-wrap flags to post-inc add recs
Fixes PR27315.

The post-inc version of an add recurrence needs to "follow the same
rules" as a normal add or subtract expression.  Otherwise we miscompile
programs like

```
int main() {
  int a = 0;
  unsigned a_u = 0;
  volatile long last_value;
  do {
    a_u += 3;
    last_value = (long) ((int) a_u);
    if (will_add_overflow(a, 3)) {
      // Leave, and don't actually do the increment, so no UB.
      printf("last_value = %ld\n", last_value);
      exit(0);
    }
    a += 3;
  } while (a != 46);
  return 0;
}
```

This patch changes SCEV to put no-wrap flags on post-inc add recurrences
only when the poison from a potential overflow will go ahead to cause
undefined behavior.

To avoid regressing performance too much, I've assumed infinite loops
without side effects is undefined behavior to prove poison<->UB
equivalence in more cases.  This isn't ideal, but is not new to LLVM as
a whole, and far better than the situation I'm trying to fix.

llvm-svn: 271151
2016-05-29 00:32:17 +00:00

32 lines
901 B
LLVM

; RUN: opt -analyze -scalar-evolution < %s | FileCheck %s
declare i1 @use(i64)
define void @f_0() {
; CHECK-LABEL: Classifying expressions for: @f_0
; CHECK: %iv = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %iv.inc.nowrap, %be ]
; CHECK-NEXT: --> {0,+,1}<nuw><nsw><%loop>
; CHECK: %iv.inc.maywrap = add i32 %iv, 1
; CHECK-NEXT: --> {1,+,1}<nuw><%loop>
; CHECK: %iv.inc.maywrap.sext = sext i32 %iv.inc.maywrap to i64
; CHECK-NEXT: --> (sext i32 {1,+,1}<nuw><%loop> to i64)
entry:
br label %loop
loop:
%iv = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %iv.inc.nowrap, %be ]
%iv.inc.maywrap = add i32 %iv, 1
%iv.inc.maywrap.sext = sext i32 %iv.inc.maywrap to i64
%cond0 = call i1 @use(i64 %iv.inc.maywrap.sext)
br i1 %cond0, label %be, label %leave
be:
%iv.inc.nowrap = add nsw i32 %iv, 1
%be.cond = call i1 @use(i64 0) ;; Get an unanalyzable value
br i1 %be.cond, label %loop, label %leave
leave:
ret void
}