mirror of
https://github.com/RPCSX/llvm.git
synced 2025-05-13 10:56:01 +00:00
772fb1e0b6
Summary: This change adds a framework for adding more smarts to `isImpliedCondition` around inequalities. Informally, `isImpliedCondition` will now try to prove "A < B ==> C < D" by proving "C <= A && B <= D", since then it follows "C <= A < B <= D". While this change is in principle NFC, I could not think of a way to not handle cases like "i +_nsw 1 < L ==> i < L +_nsw 1" (that ValueTracking did not handle before) while keeping the change understandable. I've added tests for these cases. Reviewers: reames, majnemer, hfinkel Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D14368 git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@252331 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Analysis Opportunities:
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
In test/Transforms/LoopStrengthReduce/quadradic-exit-value.ll, the
ScalarEvolution expression for %r is this:
{1,+,3,+,2}<loop>
Outside the loop, this could be evaluated simply as (%n * %n), however
ScalarEvolution currently evaluates it as
(-2 + (2 * (trunc i65 (((zext i64 (-2 + %n) to i65) * (zext i64 (-1 + %n) to i65)) /u 2) to i64)) + (3 * %n))
In addition to being much more complicated, it involves i65 arithmetic,
which is very inefficient when expanded into code.
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//
In formatValue in test/CodeGen/X86/lsr-delayed-fold.ll,
ScalarEvolution is forming this expression:
((trunc i64 (-1 * %arg5) to i32) + (trunc i64 %arg5 to i32) + (-1 * (trunc i64 undef to i32)))
This could be folded to
(-1 * (trunc i64 undef to i32))
//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//