Sanjoy Das 48fcc07856 Make ScalarEvolution less aggressive with respect to no-wrap flags.
ScalarEvolution currently lowers a subtraction recurrence to an add
recurrence with the same no-wrap flags as the subtraction.  This is
incorrect because `sub nsw X, Y` is not the same as `add nsw X, -Y`
and `sub nuw X, Y` is not the same as `add nuw X, -Y`.  This patch
fixes the issue, and adds two test cases demonstrating the bug.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7081



git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@226755 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2015-01-22 00:48:47 +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))

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