Summary:
When forming expressions for phi nodes having an incoming value from
outside the loop A and a value coming from the previous iteration B
we were forming an AddRec if:
- B was an AddRec
- the value A was equal to the value for B at iteration -1 (or equal
to the value of B shifted by one iteration, at iteration 0)
In this case, we were computing the expression to be the expression of
B, shifted by one iteration.
This changes generalizes the logic above by removing the restriction that
B needs to be an AddRec. For this we introduce two expression rewriters
that allow us to
- shift an expression by one iteration
- get the value of an expression at iteration 0
This allows us to get SCEV expressions for PHI nodes when these expressions
are not AddRecExprs.
Reviewers: sanjoy
Subscribers: llvm-commits, sanjoy
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D14175
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@251700 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This teaches SCEV to compute //max// backedge taken counts for loops
like
for (int i = k; i != 0; i >>>= 1)
whatever();
SCEV yet cannot represent the exact backedge count for these loops, and
this patch does not change that. This is really geared towards teaching
SCEV that loops like the above are *not* infinite.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@251558 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
The loop idiom creating a ConstantRange is repeated twice in the
codebase, time to give it a name and a home.
The loop is also repeated in `rangeMetadataExcludesValue`, but using
`getConstantRangeFromMetadata` there would not be an NFC -- the range
returned by `getConstantRangeFromMetadata` may contain a value that none
of the subranges did.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@251180 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Instead of checking `(FlagsPresent & ExpectedFlags) != 0`, check
`(FlagsPresent & ExpectedFlags) == ExpectedFlags`. Right now they're
equivalent since `ExpectedFlags` can only be either `FlagNUW` or
`FlagNSW`, but if we ever pass in `ExpectedFlags` as `FlagNUW | FlagNSW`
then checking `(FlagsPresent & ExpectedFlags) != 0` would be wrong.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@251142 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
I could not come up a way to test this -- I think this bug is latent
today, and will not actually result in a miscompile.
In `getPreStartForExtend`, SCEV constructs `PreStart` as a sum of all of
`SA`'s operands except `Op`. It also uses `SA`'s no-wrap flags, and
this is problematic because removing an element from an add expression
can make it signed-wrap. E.g. if `SA` was `(127 + 1 + -1)`, then it
could safely be `<nsw>` (since `sext(127) + sext(1) + sext(-1)` ==
`sext(127 + 1 + -1)`), but `(127 + 1)` (== `PreStart` if `Op` is `-1`)
is not `<nsw>`.
Transferring `<nuw>` from `SA` to `PreStart` is safe, as far as I can
tell.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@251097 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
An unsigned comparision is equivalent to is corresponding signed version
if both the operands being compared are positive. Teach SCEV to use
this fact when profitable.
Reviewers: atrick, hfinkel, reames, nlewycky
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13687
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@251051 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
- A s< (A + C)<nsw> if C > 0
- A s<= (A + C)<nsw> if C >= 0
- (A + C)<nsw> s< A if C < 0
- (A + C)<nsw> s<= A if C <= 0
Right now `C` needs to be a constant, but we can later generalize it to
be a non-constant if needed.
Reviewers: atrick, hfinkel, reames, nlewycky
Subscribers: sanjoy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13686
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@251050 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
This uses `ScalarEvolution::getRange` and not potentially control
dependent `nsw` and `nuw` bits on the arithmetic instruction.
Reviewers: atrick, hfinkel, nlewycky
Subscribers: llvm-commits, sanjoy
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13613
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@251048 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
In a later commit, `SplitBinaryAdd` will be used outside `IsConstDiff`,
so lift that out. And lift out `IsConstDiff` as
`computeConstantDifference` to keep things clean and to avoid playing
C++ access specifier games.
NFC.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@250143 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This patch also allows the -delinearize pass to delinearize expressions that do
not have an outermost SCEVAddRec expression. The SCEV::delinearize
infrastructure allowed this since r240952, but the -delinearize pass was not
updated yet.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@250018 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
The current implementation of `StrengthenNoWrapFlags` is agnostic to the
order of `Ops`, so this commit should not change anything semantic. An
upcoming change will make `StrengthenNoWrapFlags` sensitive to the order
of `Ops`.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@249802 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
`getConstantEvolutionLoopExitValue` and `ComputeExitCountExhaustively`
assumed all phi nodes in the loop header have the same order of incoming
values. This is not correct, and this commit changes
`getConstantEvolutionLoopExitValue` and `ComputeExitCountExhaustively`
to lookup the backedge value of a phi node using the loop's latch block.
Unfortunately, there is still some code duplication
`getConstantEvolutionLoopExitValue` and `ComputeExitCountExhaustively`.
At some point in the future we should extract out a helper class /
method that can evolve constant evolution phi nodes across iterations.
Fixes 25060. Thanks to Mattias Eriksson for the spot-on analysis!
Depends on D13457.
Reviewers: atrick, hfinkel
Subscribers: materi, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13458
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@249712 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Comparing `Pred` with `ICmpInst::ICMP_ULT` is cheaper that memory access
-- do that check before loading / storing `ProvingSplitPredicate`.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@249654 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This reverts commit r249528 and reapply r249431. The fix for the
fallout has been commited in r249575.
From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com>
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@249581 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
With this patch, clang -O3 optimizes correctly providing > 1000x speedup on this artificial benchmark):
for (a=0; a<n; a++)
for (b=0; b<n; b++)
for (c=0; c<n; c++)
for (d=0; d<n; d++)
for (e=0; e<n; e++)
for (f=0; f<n; f++)
x++;
From test-suite/SingleSource/Benchmarks/Shootout/nestedloop.c
Reviewers: sanjoyd
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13390
From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com>
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@249431 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This time by lifting the lambda's in `createNodeFromSelectLikePHI` to
the file scope. Looks like there are differences in capture rules
between clang and MSVC?
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@249222 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
This change teaches SCEV that to prove `A u< B` it is sufficient to
prove each of these facts individually:
- B >= 0
- A s< B
- A >= 0
In practice, SCEV sometimes finds it easier to prove these facts
individually than to prove `A u< B` as one atomic step.
Reviewers: reames, atrick, nlewycky, hfinkel
Subscribers: sanjoy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13042
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@249168 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
`ScalarEvolution::isImpliedCondOperandsViaNoOverflow` tries to cast the
operand type of the comparison it is given to an `IntegerType`. This is
incorrect because it could actually be simplifying a comparison between
two pointers. Switch it to using `getTypeSizeInBits` instead, which
does the right thing for both pointers and integers.
Fixed PR24956.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@248743 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Before this change `HasSameValue` would return true for distinct
`alloca` instructions if they happened to be allocating the same
type (`alloca` instructions are not specified as reading memory). This
change adds an explicit whitelist of instruction types for which
"identical" instructions compute the same value.
Fixes PR24952.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@248690 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
If the trip count of a specific backedge is `N`, then we know that
backedge is effectively guarded by the condition `{0,+,1} u< N`. This
change teaches SCEV to use this condition to prove things in
`isLoopBackedgeGuardedByCond`.
Depends on D12948
Depends on D12949
The original checkin, r248608 had to be backed out due to an issue with
a ObjCXX unit test. That issue is now fixed, so re-landing.
Reviewers: atrick, reames, majnemer, hfinkel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12950
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@248638 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
This change teaches SCEV's `isImpliedCond` two new identities:
A u< B u< -C => (A + C) u< (B + C)
A s< B s< INT_MIN - C => (A + C) s< (B + C)
While these are useful on their own, they're really intended to support
D12950.
The original checkin, r248606 had to be backed out due to an issue with
a ObjCXX unit test. That issue is now fixed, so re-landing.
Reviewers: atrick, reames, majnemer, nlewycky, hfinkel
Subscribers: aadg, sanjoy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12948
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@248637 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
If the trip count of a specific backedge is `N`, then we know that
backedge is effectively guarded by the condition `{0,+,1} u< N`. This
change teaches SCEV to use this condition to prove things in
`isLoopBackedgeGuardedByCond`.
Depends on D12948
Depends on D12949
Reviewers: atrick, reames, majnemer, hfinkel
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12950
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@248608 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
This change teaches SCEV's `isImpliedCond` two new identities:
A u< B u< -C => (A + C) u< (B + C)
A s< B s< INT_MIN - C => (A + C) s< (B + C)
While these are useful on their own, they're really intended to support
D12950.
Reviewers: atrick, reames, majnemer, nlewycky, hfinkel
Subscribers: aadg, sanjoy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12948
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@248606 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
It is fairly common to call SE->getConstant(Ty, 0) or
SE->getConstant(Ty, 1); this change makes such uses a little bit
briefer.
I've refactored the call sites I could find easily to use getZero /
getOne.
Reviewers: hfinkel, majnemer, reames
Subscribers: sanjoy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12947
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@248362 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
`ClearWalkingBEDominatingCondsOnExit` is exactly `SaveAndRestore<bool>`,
so use `SaveAndRestore<bool>` instead.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@248227 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
