Commit Graph

4978 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Matt Arsenault 2458393104 Fix using wrong intrinsic in test
This is a leftover from renaming the intrinsic.
It's surprising the unknown llvm. intrinsic wasn't rejected.

llvm-svn: 225304
2015-01-06 23:00:33 +00:00
Rafael Espindola 83a362cde8 Change the .ll syntax for comdats and add a syntactic sugar.
In order to make comdats always explicit in the IR, we decided to make
the syntax a bit more compact for the case of a GlobalObject in a
comdat with the same name.

Just dropping the $name causes problems for

@foo = globabl i32 0, comdat
$bar = comdat ...

and

declare void @foo() comdat
$bar = comdat ...

So the syntax is changed to

@g1 = globabl i32 0, comdat($c1)
@g2 = globabl i32 0, comdat

and

declare void @foo() comdat($c1)
declare void @foo() comdat

llvm-svn: 225302
2015-01-06 22:55:16 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 7c0ce26614 This patch teaches IndVarSimplify to add nuw and nsw to certain kinds
of operations that provably don't overflow. For example, we can prove
%civ.inc below does not sign-overflow. With this change,
IndVarSimplify changes %civ.inc to an add nsw.

  define i32 @foo(i32* %array, i32* %length_ptr, i32 %init) {
   entry:
    %length = load i32* %length_ptr, !range !0
    %len.sub.1 = sub i32 %length, 1
    %upper = icmp slt i32 %init, %len.sub.1
    br i1 %upper, label %loop, label %exit
  
   loop:
    %civ = phi i32 [ %init, %entry ], [ %civ.inc, %latch ]
    %civ.inc = add i32 %civ, 1
    %cmp = icmp slt i32 %civ.inc, %length
    br i1 %cmp, label %latch, label %break
  
   latch:
    store i32 0, i32* %array
    %check = icmp slt i32 %civ.inc, %len.sub.1
    br i1 %check, label %loop, label %break
  
   break:
    ret i32 %civ.inc
  
   exit:
    ret i32 42
  }

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6748

llvm-svn: 225282
2015-01-06 19:02:56 +00:00
Matt Arsenault 55e7312cd8 Convert fcmp with 0.0 from casted integers to icmp
This is already handled in general when it is known the
conversion can't lose bits with smaller integer types
casted into wider floating point types.

This pattern happens somewhat often in GPU programs that cast
workitem intrinsics to float, which are often compared with 0.

Specifically handle the special case of compares with zero which
should also be known to not lose information. I had a more general
version of this which allows equality compares if the casted float is
exactly representable in the integer, but I'm not 100% confident that
is always correct.

Also fold cases that aren't integers to true / false.

llvm-svn: 225265
2015-01-06 15:50:59 +00:00
David Majnemer 9b6b822814 InstCombine: Bitcast call arguments from/to pointer/integer type
Try harder to get rid of bitcast'd calls by ptrtoint/inttoptr'ing
arguments and return values when DataLayout says it is safe to do so.

llvm-svn: 225254
2015-01-06 08:41:31 +00:00
Michael Kuperstein 6ae456b0d7 Fix broken test from r225159.
llvm-svn: 225164
2015-01-05 12:34:01 +00:00
Jiangning Liu 40c1b35292 Fixed a bug in memory dependence checking module of loop vectorization. The following loop should not be vectorized with current algorithm.
{code}
// loop body
   ... = a[i]          (1)
    ... = a[i+1]       (2)
 .......
a[i+1] = ....          (3)
   a[i] = ...          (4)
{code}

The algorithm tries to collect memory access candidates from AliasSetTracker, and then check memory dependences one another. The memory accesses are unique in AliasSetTracker, and a single memory access in AliasSetTracker may map to multiple entries in AccessAnalysis, which could cover both 'read' and 'write'. Originally the algorithm only checked 'write' entry in Accesses if only 'write' exists. This is incorrect and the consequence is it ignored all read access, and finally some RAW and WAR dependence are missed.

For the case given above, if we ignore two reads, the dependence between (1) and (3) would not be able to be captured, and finally this loop will be incorrectly vectorized.

The fix simply inserts a new loop to find all entries in Accesses. Since it will skip most of all other memory accesses by checking the Value pointer at the very beginning of the loop, it should not increase compile-time visibly.

llvm-svn: 225159
2015-01-05 10:08:58 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 73b0164fe5 [SROA] Apply a somewhat heavy and unpleasant hammer to fix PR22093, an
assert out of the new pre-splitting in SROA.

This fix makes the code do what was originally intended -- when we have
a store of a load both dealing in the same alloca, we force them to both
be pre-split with identical offsets. This is really quite hard to do
because we can keep discovering problems as we go along. We have to
track every load over the current alloca which for any resaon becomes
invalid for pre-splitting, and go back to remove all stores of those
loads. I've included a couple of test cases derived from PR22093 that
cover the different ways this can happen. While that PR only really
triggered the first of these two, its the same fundamental issue.

The other challenge here is documented in a FIXME now. We end up being
quite a bit more aggressive for pre-splitting when loads and stores
don't refer to the same alloca. This aggressiveness comes at the cost of
introducing potentially redundant loads. It isn't clear that this is the
right balance. It might be considerably better to require that we only
do pre-splitting when we can presplit every load and store involved in
the entire operation. That would give more consistent if conservative
results. Unfortunately, it requires a non-trivial change to the actual
pre-splitting operation in order to correctly handle cases where we end
up pre-splitting stores out-of-order. And it isn't 100% clear that this
is the right direction, although I'm starting to suspect that it is.

llvm-svn: 225149
2015-01-05 04:17:53 +00:00
David Majnemer 087dc8b831 InstCombine: match can find ConstantExprs, don't assume we have a Value
We assumed the output of a match was a Value, this would cause us to
assert because we would fail a cast<>.  Instead, use a helper in the
Operator family to hide the distinction between Value and Constant.

This fixes PR22087.

llvm-svn: 225127
2015-01-04 07:36:02 +00:00
David Majnemer 6ee8d17bc6 ValueTracking: ComputeNumSignBits should tolerate misshapen phi nodes
PHI nodes can have zero operands in the middle of a transform.  It is
expected that utilities in Analysis don't freak out when this happens.

Note that it is considered invalid to allow these misshapen phi nodes to
make it to another pass.

This fixes PR22086.

llvm-svn: 225126
2015-01-04 07:06:53 +00:00
David Majnemer c8a576b5c0 InstCombine: Detect when llvm.umul.with.overflow always overflows
We know overflow always occurs if both ~LHSKnownZero * ~RHSKnownZero
and LHSKnownOne * RHSKnownOne overflow.

llvm-svn: 225077
2015-01-02 07:29:47 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 24ac830d7c [SROA] Teach SROA to be more aggressive in splitting now that we have
a pre-splitting pass over loads and stores.

Historically, splitting could cause enough problems that I hamstrung the
entire process with a requirement that splittable integer loads and
stores must cover the entire alloca. All smaller loads and stores were
unsplittable to prevent chaos from ensuing. With the new pre-splitting
logic that does load/store pair splitting I introduced in r225061, we
can now very nicely handle arbitrarily splittable loads and stores. In
order to fully benefit from these smarts, we need to mark all of the
integer loads and stores as splittable.

However, we don't actually want to rewrite partitions with all integer
loads and stores marked as splittable. This will fail to extract scalar
integers from aggregates, which is kind of the point of SROA. =] In
order to resolve this, what we really want to do is only do
pre-splitting on the alloca slices with integer loads and stores fully
splittable. This allows us to uncover all non-integer uses of the alloca
that would benefit from a split in an integer load or store (and where
introducing the split is safe because it is just memory transfer from
a load to a store). Once done, we make all the non-whole-alloca integer
loads and stores unsplittable just as they have historically been,
repartition and rewrite.

The result is that when there are integer loads and stores anywhere
within an alloca (such as from a memcpy of a sub-object of a larger
object), we can split them up if there are non-integer components to the
aggregate hiding beneath. I've added the challenging test cases to
demonstrate how this is able to promote to scalars even a case where we
have even *partially* overlapping loads and stores.

This restores the single-store behavior for small arrays of i8s which is
really nice. I've restored both the little endian testing and big endian
testing for these exactly as they were prior to r225061. It also forced
me to be more aggressive in an alignment test to actually defeat SROA.
=] Without the added volatiles there, we actually split up the weird i16
loads and produce nice double allocas with better alignment.

This also uncovered a number of bugs where we failed to handle
splittable load and store slices which didn't have a begininng offset of
zero. Those fixes are included, and without them the existing test cases
explode in glorious fireworks. =]

I've kept support for leaving whole-alloca integer loads and stores as
splittable even for the purpose of rewriting, but I think that's likely
no longer needed. With the new pre-splitting, we might be able to remove
all the splitting support for loads and stores from the rewriter. Not
doing that in this patch to try to isolate any performance regressions
that causes in an easy to find and revert chunk.

llvm-svn: 225074
2015-01-02 03:55:54 +00:00
Chandler Carruth e65ae89327 [SROA] Add a test case for r225068 / PR22080.
llvm-svn: 225070
2015-01-02 00:34:29 +00:00
Chandler Carruth 0715cba02d [SROA] Teach SROA how to much more intelligently handle split loads and
stores.

When there are accesses to an entire alloca with an integer
load or store as well as accesses to small pieces of the alloca, SROA
splits up the large integer accesses. In order to do that, it uses bit
math to merge the small accesses into large integers. While this is
effective, it produces insane IR that can cause significant problems in
the rest of the optimizer:

- It can cause load and store mismatches with GVN on the non-alloca side
  where we end up loading an i64 (or some such) rather than loading
  specific elements that are stored.
- We can't always get rid of the integer bit math, which is why we can't
  always fix the loads and stores to work well with GVN.
- This is especially bad when we have operations that mix poorly with
  integer bit math such as floating point operations.
- It will block things like the vectorizer which might be able to handle
  the scalar stores that underly the aggregate.

At the same time, we can't just directly split up these loads and stores
in all cases. If there is actual integer arithmetic involved on the
values, then using integer bit math is actually the perfect lowering
because we can often combine it heavily with the surrounding math.

The solution this patch provides is to find places where SROA is
partitioning aggregates into small elements, and look for splittable
loads and stores that it can split all the way to some other adjacent
load and store. These are uniformly the cases where failing to split the
loads and stores hurts the optimizer that I have seen, and I've looked
extensively at the code produced both from more and less aggressive
approaches to this problem.

However, it is quite tricky to actually do this in SROA. We may have
loads and stores to the same alloca, or other complex patterns that are
hard to handle. This complexity leads to the somewhat subtle algorithm
implemented here. We have to do this entire process as a separate pass
over the partitioning of the alloca, and split up all of the loads prior
to splitting the stores so that we can handle safely the cases of
overlapping, including partially overlapping, loads and stores to the
same alloca. We also have to reconstitute the post-split slice
configuration so we can avoid iterating again over all the alloca uses
(the slow part of SROA). But we also have to ensure that when we split
up loads and stores to *other* allocas, we *do* re-iterate over them in
SROA to adapt to the more refined partitioning now required.

With this, I actually think we can fix a long-standing TODO in SROA
where I avoided splitting as many loads and stores as probably should be
splittable. This limitation historically mitigated the fallout of all
the bad things mentioned above. Now that we have more intelligent
handling, I plan to remove the FIXME and more aggressively mark integer
loads and stores as splittable. I'll do that in a follow-up patch to
help with bisecting any fallout.

The net result of this change should be more fine-grained and accurate
scalars being formed out of aggregates. At the very least, Clang now
generates perfect code for this high-level test case using
std::complex<float>:

  #include <complex>

  void g1(std::complex<float> &x, float a, float b) {
    x += std::complex<float>(a, b);
  }
  void g2(std::complex<float> &x, float a, float b) {
    x -= std::complex<float>(a, b);
  }

  void foo(const std::complex<float> &x, float a, float b,
           std::complex<float> &x1, std::complex<float> &x2) {
    std::complex<float> l1 = x;
    g1(l1, a, b);
    std::complex<float> l2 = x;
    g2(l2, a, b);
    x1 = l1;
    x2 = l2;
  }

This code isn't just hypothetical either. It was reduced out of the hot
inner loops of essentially every part of the Eigen math library when
using std::complex<float>. Those loops would consistently and
pervasively hop between the floating point unit and the integer unit due
to bit math extraction and insertion of floating point values that were
"stored" in a 64-bit integer register around the loop backedge.

So far, this change has passed a bootstrap and I have done some other
testing and so far, no issues. That doesn't mean there won't be though,
so I'll be prepared to help with any fallout. If you performance swings
in particular, please let me know. I'm very curious what all the impact
of this change will be. Stay tuned for the follow-up to also split more
integer loads and stores.

llvm-svn: 225061
2015-01-01 11:54:38 +00:00
Sanjay Patel e68f71574f InstCombine: fsub nsz 0, X ==> fsub nsz -0.0, X
Some day the backend may handle instruction-level fast math flags and make
this transform unnecessary, but it's still better practice to use the canonical
representation of fneg when possible (use a -0.0).

This is a partial fix for PR20870 ( http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=20870 ).
See also http://reviews.llvm.org/D6723.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6731

llvm-svn: 225050
2014-12-31 22:14:05 +00:00
David Majnemer f89dc3edc9 InstCombine: try to transform A-B < 0 into A < B
We are allowed to move the 'B' to the right hand side if we an prove
there is no signed overflow and if the comparison itself is signed.

llvm-svn: 225034
2014-12-31 04:21:41 +00:00
Philip Reames 9db26ffc9a Carry facts about nullness and undef across GC relocation
This change implements four basic optimizations:

    If a relocated value isn't used, it doesn't need to be relocated.
    If the value being relocated is null, relocation doesn't change that. (Technically, this might be collector specific. I don't know of one which it doesn't work for though.)
    If the value being relocated is undef, the relocation is meaningless.
    If the value being relocated was known nonnull, the relocated pointer also isn't null. (Since it points to the same source language object.)

I outlined other planned work in comments.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6600

llvm-svn: 224968
2014-12-29 23:27:30 +00:00
Philip Reames b35f46ce06 Refine the notion of MayThrow in LICM to include a header specific version
In LICM, we have a check for an instruction which is guaranteed to execute and thus can't introduce any new faults if moved to the preheader. To handle a function which might unconditionally throw when first called, we check for any potentially throwing call in the loop and give up.

This is unfortunate when the potentially throwing condition is down a rare path. It prevents essentially all LICM of potentially faulting instructions where the faulting condition is checked outside the loop. It also greatly diminishes the utility of loop unswitching since control dependent instructions - which are now likely in the loops header block - will not be lifted by subsequent LICM runs.

define void @nothrow_header(i64 %x, i64 %y, i1 %cond) {
; CHECK-LABEL: nothrow_header
; CHECK-LABEL: entry
; CHECK: %div = udiv i64 %x, %y
; CHECK-LABEL: loop
; CHECK: call void @use(i64 %div)
entry:
  br label %loop
loop: ; preds = %entry, %for.inc
  %div = udiv i64 %x, %y
  br i1 %cond, label %loop-if, label %exit
loop-if:
  call void @use(i64 %div)
  br label %loop
exit:
  ret void
}

The current patch really only helps with non-memory instructions (i.e. divs, etc..) since the maythrow call down the rare path will be considered to alias an otherwise hoistable load.  The one exception is that it does kick in for loads which are known to be invariant without regard to other possible stores, i.e. those marked with either !invarant.load metadata of tbaa 'is constant memory' metadata.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6725

llvm-svn: 224965
2014-12-29 23:00:57 +00:00
Philip Reames 5ad26c353c Loading from null is valid outside of addrspace 0
This patches fixes a miscompile where we were assuming that loading from null is undefined and thus we could assume it doesn't happen.  This transform is perfectly legal in address space 0, but is not neccessarily legal in other address spaces.

We really should introduce a hook to control this property on a per target per address space basis.  We may be loosing valuable optimizations in some address spaces by being too conservative.

Original patch by Thomas P Raoux (submitted to llvm-commits), tests and formatting fixes by me.

llvm-svn: 224961
2014-12-29 22:46:21 +00:00
David Majnemer b1296ec0fd InstCombine: Infer nuw for multiplies
A multiply cannot unsigned wrap if there are bitwidth, or more, leading
zero bits between the two operands.

llvm-svn: 224849
2014-12-26 09:50:35 +00:00
David Majnemer 54c2ca2539 InstCombe: Infer nsw for multiplies
We already utilize this logic for reducing overflow intrinsics, it makes
sense to reuse it for normal multiplies as well.

llvm-svn: 224847
2014-12-26 09:10:14 +00:00
Michael Kuperstein be8032c875 [ValueTracking] Move GlobalAlias handling to be after the max depth check in computeKnownBits()
GlobalAlias handling used to be after GlobalValue handling, which meant it was, in practice, dead code. r220165 moved GlobalAlias handling to be before GlobalValue handling, but also moved it to be before the max depth check, causing an assert due to a recursion depth limit violation. 

This moves GlobalAlias handling forward to where it's safe, and changes the GlobalValue handling to only look at GlobalObjects.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6758

llvm-svn: 224765
2014-12-23 11:33:41 +00:00
Michael Liao 5313da3263 [SimplifyCFG] Revise common code sinking
- Fix the case where more than 1 common instructions derived from the same
  operand cannot be sunk. When a pair of value has more than 1 derived values
  in both branches, only 1 derived value could be sunk.
- Replace BB1 -> (BB2, PN) map with joint value map, i.e.
  map of (BB1, BB2) -> PN, which is more accurate to track common ops.

llvm-svn: 224757
2014-12-23 08:26:55 +00:00
Bruno Cardoso Lopes bad65c3b70 [LCSSA] Handle PHI insertion in disjoint loops
Take two disjoint Loops L1 and L2.

LoopSimplify fails to simplify some loops (e.g. when indirect branches
are involved). In such situations, it can happen that an exit for L1 is
the header of L2. Thus, when we create PHIs in one of such exits we are
also inserting PHIs in L2 header.

This could break LCSSA form for L2 because these inserted PHIs can also
have uses in L2 exits, which are never handled in the current
implementation. Provide a fix for this corner case and test that we
don't assert/crash on that.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6624

rdar://problem/19166231

llvm-svn: 224740
2014-12-22 22:35:46 +00:00
David Majnemer 6eed0e0d20 This should have been part of r224676.
llvm-svn: 224677
2014-12-20 04:48:34 +00:00
David Majnemer b0362e4ee6 InstCombine: Squash an icmp+select into bitwise arithmetic
(X & INT_MIN) == 0 ? X ^ INT_MIN : X  into  X | INT_MIN
(X & INT_MIN) != 0 ? X ^ INT_MIN : X  into  X & INT_MAX

This fixes PR21993.

llvm-svn: 224676
2014-12-20 04:45:35 +00:00
David Majnemer 0b6a0b0257 InstSimplify: Optimize away pointless comparisons
(X & INT_MIN) ? X & INT_MAX : X  into  X & INT_MAX
(X & INT_MIN) ? X : X & INT_MAX  into  X
(X & INT_MIN) ? X | INT_MIN : X  into  X
(X & INT_MIN) ? X : X | INT_MIN  into  X | INT_MIN

llvm-svn: 224669
2014-12-20 03:04:38 +00:00
Bruno Cardoso Lopes f6cf8ad4e5 Reapply: [InstCombine] Fix visitSwitchInst to use right operand types for sub cstexpr
The visitSwitchInst generates SUB constant expressions to recompute the
switch condition. When truncating the condition to a smaller type, SUB
expressions should use the previous type (before trunc) for both
operands. Also, fix code to also return the modified switch when only
the truncation is performed.

This fixes an assertion crash.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6644

rdar://problem/19191835

llvm-svn: 224588
2014-12-19 17:12:35 +00:00
Sanjay Patel ea3c802887 use -0.0 when creating an fneg instruction
Backends recognize (-0.0 - X) as the canonical form for fneg
and produce better code. Eg, ppc64 with 0.0:

   lis r2, ha16(LCPI0_0)
   lfs f0, lo16(LCPI0_0)(r2)
   fsubs f1, f0, f1
   blr

vs. -0.0:

   fneg f1, f1
   blr

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6723

llvm-svn: 224583
2014-12-19 16:44:08 +00:00
Bruno Cardoso Lopes 3be15b2fa6 Revert "[InstCombine] Fix visitSwitchInst to use right operand types for sub cstexpr"
Reverts commit r224574 to appease buildbots:

The visitSwitchInst generates SUB constant expressions to recompute the
switch condition. When truncating the condition to a smaller type, SUB
expressions should use the previous type (before trunc) for both
operands. This fixes an assertion crash.

llvm-svn: 224576
2014-12-19 14:36:24 +00:00
Bruno Cardoso Lopes c9005f2f2b [InstCombine] Fix visitSwitchInst to use right operand types for sub cstexpr
The visitSwitchInst generates SUB constant expressions to recompute the
switch condition. When truncating the condition to a smaller type, SUB
expressions should use the previous type (before trunc) for both
operands. This fixes an assertion crash.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6644

rdar://problem/19191835

llvm-svn: 224574
2014-12-19 14:23:15 +00:00
David Majnemer 824e011ad7 ConstantFold: Shifting undef by zero results in undef
llvm-svn: 224553
2014-12-18 23:54:43 +00:00
Suyog Sarda 43fae93da8 Revert 224119 "This patch recognizes (+ (+ v0, v1) (+ v2, v3)), reorders them for bundling into vector of loads,
and vectorizes it." 

This was re-ordering floating point data types resulting in mismatch in output.

llvm-svn: 224424
2014-12-17 10:34:27 +00:00
Elena Demikhovsky 028e966a54 Added 5 more tests related to sink store revision 224247
- by Ella Bolshinsky

http://reviews.llvm.org/D6420

llvm-svn: 224418
2014-12-17 08:12:59 +00:00
Erik Eckstein a451b9b0b5 Strength reduce intrinsics with overflow into regular arithmetic operations if possible.
Some intrinsics, like s/uadd.with.overflow and umul.with.overflow, are already strength reduced.
This change adds other arithmetic intrinsics: s/usub.with.overflow, smul.with.overflow.
It completes the work on PR20194.

llvm-svn: 224417
2014-12-17 07:29:19 +00:00
David Majnemer 65c52ae8ca InstSimplify: shl nsw/nuw undef, %V -> undef
We can always choose an value for undef which might cause %V to shift
out an important bit except for one case, when %V is zero.

However, shl behaves like an identity function when the right hand side
is zero.

llvm-svn: 224405
2014-12-17 01:54:33 +00:00
Elena Demikhovsky f5b72afff4 Masked Load and Store Intrinsics in loop vectorizer.
The loop vectorizer optimizes loops containing conditional memory
accesses by generating masked load and store intrinsics.
This decision is target dependent.

http://reviews.llvm.org/D6527

llvm-svn: 224334
2014-12-16 11:50:42 +00:00
Sanjoy Das 4555b6d870 Teach ScalarEvolution to exploit min and max expressions when proving
isKnownPredicate.

The motivation for this change is to optimize away checks in loops
like this:

    limit = min(t, len)
    for (i = 0 to limit)
      if (i >= len || i < 0) throw_array_of_of_bounds();
      a[i] = ...

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6635

llvm-svn: 224285
2014-12-15 22:50:15 +00:00
Duncan P. N. Exon Smith be7ea19b58 IR: Make metadata typeless in assembly
Now that `Metadata` is typeless, reflect that in the assembly.  These
are the matching assembly changes for the metadata/value split in
r223802.

  - Only use the `metadata` type when referencing metadata from a call
    intrinsic -- i.e., only when it's used as a `Value`.

  - Stop pretending that `ValueAsMetadata` is wrapped in an `MDNode`
    when referencing it from call intrinsics.

So, assembly like this:

    define @foo(i32 %v) {
      call void @llvm.foo(metadata !{i32 %v}, metadata !0)
      call void @llvm.foo(metadata !{i32 7}, metadata !0)
      call void @llvm.foo(metadata !1, metadata !0)
      call void @llvm.foo(metadata !3, metadata !0)
      call void @llvm.foo(metadata !{metadata !3}, metadata !0)
      ret void, !bar !2
    }
    !0 = metadata !{metadata !2}
    !1 = metadata !{i32* @global}
    !2 = metadata !{metadata !3}
    !3 = metadata !{}

turns into this:

    define @foo(i32 %v) {
      call void @llvm.foo(metadata i32 %v, metadata !0)
      call void @llvm.foo(metadata i32 7, metadata !0)
      call void @llvm.foo(metadata i32* @global, metadata !0)
      call void @llvm.foo(metadata !3, metadata !0)
      call void @llvm.foo(metadata !{!3}, metadata !0)
      ret void, !bar !2
    }
    !0 = !{!2}
    !1 = !{i32* @global}
    !2 = !{!3}
    !3 = !{}

I wrote an upgrade script that handled almost all of the tests in llvm
and many of the tests in cfe (even handling many `CHECK` lines).  I've
attached it (or will attach it in a moment if you're speedy) to PR21532
to help everyone update their out-of-tree testcases.

This is part of PR21532.

llvm-svn: 224257
2014-12-15 19:07:53 +00:00
Elena Demikhovsky bf74736290 Added a test related to 224247 revision
llvm-svn: 224248
2014-12-15 14:14:10 +00:00
Suyog Sarda 2b27fc78a2 Typo Correction in Test Case. NFC.
llvm-svn: 224244
2014-12-15 12:19:46 +00:00
Ahmed Bougacha 0cb861634b Reapply "[ARM] Combine base-updating/post-incrementing vector load/stores."
r223862 tried to also combine base-updating load/stores.
r224198 reverted it, as "it created a regression on the test-suite
on test MultiSource/Benchmarks/Ptrdist/anagram by scrambling the order
in which the words are shown."
Reapply, with a fix to ignore non-normal load/stores.
Truncstores are handled elsewhere (you can actually write a pattern for
those, whereas for postinc loads you can't, since they return two values),
but it should be possible to also combine extloads base updates, by checking
that the memory (rather than result) type is of the same size as the addend.

Original commit message:
We used to only combine intrinsics, and turn them into VLD1_UPD/VST1_UPD
when the base pointer is incremented after the load/store.

We can do the same thing for generic load/stores.

Note that we can only combine the first load/store+adds pair in
a sequence (as might be generated for a v16f32 load for instance),
because other combines turn the base pointer addition chain (each
computing the address of the next load, from the address of the last
load) into independent additions (common base pointer + this load's
offset).

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6585

llvm-svn: 224203
2014-12-13 23:22:12 +00:00
Renato Golin df8f9b6dc9 Revert "[ARM] Combine base-updating/post-incrementing vector load/stores."
This reverts commit r223862, as it created a regression on the test-suite
on test MultiSource/Benchmarks/Ptrdist/anagram by scrambling the order
in which the words are shown. We'll investigate the issue and re-apply
when safe.

llvm-svn: 224198
2014-12-13 20:23:18 +00:00
David Majnemer 9b6097586c ValueTracking: Don't recurse too deeply in computeKnownBitsFromAssume
Respect the MaxDepth recursion limit, doing otherwise will trigger an
assert in computeKnownBits.

This fixes PR21891.

llvm-svn: 224168
2014-12-12 23:59:29 +00:00
Suyog Sarda 384095e65c This patch recognizes (+ (+ v0, v1) (+ v2, v3)), reorders them for bundling into vector of loads,
and vectorizes it. 
 
 Test case :
 
       float hadd(float* a) {
           return (a[0] + a[1]) + (a[2] + a[3]);
        }
 
 
 AArch64 assembly before patch :
 
        ldp	s0, s1, [x0]
 	ldp	s2, s3, [x0, #8]
 	fadd	s0, s0, s1
 	fadd	s1, s2, s3
 	fadd	s0, s0, s1
 	ret
 
 AArch64 assembly after patch :
 
        ldp	d0, d1, [x0]
 	fadd	v0.2s, v0.2s, v1.2s
 	faddp	s0, v0.2s
 	ret

Reviewed Link : http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20141208/248531.html

llvm-svn: 224119
2014-12-12 12:53:44 +00:00
Steven Wu 881916dea5 Fix another infinite loop in InstCombine
Summary:
InstCombine infinite-loops for the testcase added
It is because InstCombine is generating instructions that can be
optimized by itself. Fix by not optimizing frem if the optimized
type is the same as original type.
rdar://problem/19150820

Reviewers: majnemer

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6634

llvm-svn: 224097
2014-12-12 04:34:07 +00:00
Andrea Di Biagio 72b05aa59c [InstCombine][X86] Improved folding of calls to Intrinsic::x86_sse4a_insertqi.
This patch teaches the instruction combiner how to fold a call to 'insertqi' if
the 'length field' (3rd operand) is set to zero, and if the sum between
field 'length' and 'bit index' (4th operand) is bigger than 64.

From the AMD64 Architecture Programmer's Manual:
1. If the sum of the bit index + length field is greater than 64, then the
   results are undefined;
2. A value of zero in the field length is defined as a length of 64.

This patch improves the existing combining logic for intrinsic 'insertqi'
adding extra checks to address both point 1. and point 2.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6583

llvm-svn: 224054
2014-12-11 20:44:59 +00:00
David Majnemer f532fcb889 InstSimplify: Remove usesless %a parameter from tests
No functional change intended.

llvm-svn: 224016
2014-12-11 12:56:17 +00:00
Michael Kuperstein fffb6996c9 The inliner needs to fix up debug information for llvm.dbg.declare, not only for llvm.dbg.value.
Patch by Amjad Aboud

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6525

llvm-svn: 224015
2014-12-11 12:41:10 +00:00
David Majnemer 5a7717e498 ConstantFold, InstSimplify: undef >>a x can be either -1 or 0, choose 0
Zero is usually a nicer constant to have than -1.

llvm-svn: 223969
2014-12-10 21:58:15 +00:00