Sanjoy Das 0afc9b33fe Bugfix: SCEV incorrectly marks certain expressions as nsw
I could not come up with a test case for this one; but I don't think
`getPreStartForSignExtend` can assume `AR` is `nsw` -- there is one
place in scalar evolution that calls `getSignExtendAddRecStart(AR,
...)` without proving that `AR` is `nsw`

(line 1564)

   OperandExtendedAdd =
     getAddExpr(WideStart,
                getMulExpr(WideMaxBECount,
                           getZeroExtendExpr(Step, WideTy)));
   if (SAdd == OperandExtendedAdd) {
     // If AR wraps around then
     //
     //    abs(Step) * MaxBECount > unsigned-max(AR->getType())
     // => SAdd != OperandExtendedAdd
     //
     // Thus (AR is not NW => SAdd != OperandExtendedAdd) <=>
     // (SAdd == OperandExtendedAdd => AR is NW)

     const_cast<SCEVAddRecExpr *>(AR)->setNoWrapFlags(SCEV::FlagNW);

     // Return the expression with the addrec on the outside.
     return getAddRecExpr(getSignExtendAddRecStart(AR, Ty, this),
                          getZeroExtendExpr(Step, Ty),
                          L, AR->getNoWrapFlags());
   }

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7640



git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@229594 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2015-02-18 00:43:19 +00:00
..

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))

//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//