[Reassociate] replace fake binop queries with 'match' API
We need to update this code before introducing an 'fneg' instruction in IR,
so we might as well kill off the integer neg/not queries too.
This is no-functional-change-intended for scalar code and most vector code.
For vectors, we can see that the 'match' API allows for undef elements in
constants, so we optimize those cases better.
Ideally, there would be a test for each code diff, but I don't see evidence
of that for the existing code, so I didn't try very hard to come up with new
vector tests for each code change.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53533
llvm-svn: 345042
diff --git a/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/Reassociate.cpp b/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/Reassociate.cpp
index 78e0fe4..c4faab7 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/Reassociate.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/Reassociate.cpp
@@ -205,9 +205,9 @@
for (unsigned i = 0, e = I->getNumOperands(); i != e && Rank != MaxRank; ++i)
Rank = std::max(Rank, getRank(I->getOperand(i)));
- // If this is a not or neg instruction, do not count it for rank. This
+ // If this is a 'not' or 'neg' instruction, do not count it for rank. This
// assures us that X and ~X will have the same rank.
- if (!BinaryOperator::isNot(I) && !BinaryOperator::isNeg(I) &&
+ if (!match(I, m_Not(m_Value())) && !match(I, m_Neg(m_Value())) &&
!BinaryOperator::isFNeg(I))
++Rank;
@@ -574,7 +574,7 @@
// If this is a multiply expression, turn any internal negations into
// multiplies by -1 so they can be reassociated.
if (BinaryOperator *BO = dyn_cast<BinaryOperator>(Op))
- if ((Opcode == Instruction::Mul && BinaryOperator::isNeg(BO)) ||
+ if ((Opcode == Instruction::Mul && match(BO, m_Neg(m_Value()))) ||
(Opcode == Instruction::FMul && BinaryOperator::isFNeg(BO))) {
LLVM_DEBUG(dbgs()
<< "MORPH LEAF: " << *Op << " (" << Weight << ") TO ");
@@ -855,7 +855,7 @@
// Okay, we need to materialize a negated version of V with an instruction.
// Scan the use lists of V to see if we have one already.
for (User *U : V->users()) {
- if (!BinaryOperator::isNeg(U) && !BinaryOperator::isFNeg(U))
+ if (!match(U, m_Neg(m_Value())) && !BinaryOperator::isFNeg(U))
continue;
// We found one! Now we have to make sure that the definition dominates
@@ -900,7 +900,7 @@
/// Return true if we should break up this subtract of X-Y into (X + -Y).
static bool ShouldBreakUpSubtract(Instruction *Sub) {
// If this is a negation, we can't split it up!
- if (BinaryOperator::isNeg(Sub) || BinaryOperator::isFNeg(Sub))
+ if (match(Sub, m_Neg(m_Value())) || BinaryOperator::isFNeg(Sub))
return false;
// Don't breakup X - undef.
@@ -1114,8 +1114,8 @@
for (unsigned i = 0, e = Ops.size(); i != e; ++i) {
// First, check for X and ~X in the operand list.
assert(i < Ops.size());
- if (BinaryOperator::isNot(Ops[i].Op)) { // Cannot occur for ^.
- Value *X = BinaryOperator::getNotArgument(Ops[i].Op);
+ Value *X;
+ if (match(Ops[i].Op, m_Not(m_Value(X)))) { // Cannot occur for ^.
unsigned FoundX = FindInOperandList(Ops, i, X);
if (FoundX != i) {
if (Opcode == Instruction::And) // ...&X&~X = 0
@@ -1461,15 +1461,13 @@
}
// Check for X and -X or X and ~X in the operand list.
- if (!BinaryOperator::isNeg(TheOp) && !BinaryOperator::isFNeg(TheOp) &&
- !BinaryOperator::isNot(TheOp))
+ Value *X;
+ if (!match(TheOp, m_Neg(m_Value(X))) && !match(TheOp, m_Not(m_Value(X))) &&
+ !BinaryOperator::isFNeg(TheOp))
continue;
- Value *X = nullptr;
- if (BinaryOperator::isNeg(TheOp) || BinaryOperator::isFNeg(TheOp))
- X = BinaryOperator::getNegArgument(TheOp);
- else if (BinaryOperator::isNot(TheOp))
- X = BinaryOperator::getNotArgument(TheOp);
+ if (BinaryOperator::isFNeg(TheOp))
+ X = BinaryOperator::getFNegArgument(TheOp);
unsigned FoundX = FindInOperandList(Ops, i, X);
if (FoundX == i)
@@ -1477,11 +1475,11 @@
// Remove X and -X from the operand list.
if (Ops.size() == 2 &&
- (BinaryOperator::isNeg(TheOp) || BinaryOperator::isFNeg(TheOp)))
+ (match(TheOp, m_Neg(m_Value())) || BinaryOperator::isFNeg(TheOp)))
return Constant::getNullValue(X->getType());
// Remove X and ~X from the operand list.
- if (Ops.size() == 2 && BinaryOperator::isNot(TheOp))
+ if (Ops.size() == 2 && match(TheOp, m_Not(m_Value())))
return Constant::getAllOnesValue(X->getType());
Ops.erase(Ops.begin()+i);
@@ -1495,7 +1493,7 @@
e -= 2; // Removed two elements.
// if X and ~X we append -1 to the operand list.
- if (BinaryOperator::isNot(TheOp)) {
+ if (match(TheOp, m_Not(m_Value()))) {
Value *V = Constant::getAllOnesValue(X->getType());
Ops.insert(Ops.end(), ValueEntry(getRank(V), V));
e += 1;
@@ -2059,7 +2057,7 @@
RedoInsts.insert(I);
MadeChange = true;
I = NI;
- } else if (BinaryOperator::isNeg(I)) {
+ } else if (match(I, m_Neg(m_Value()))) {
// Otherwise, this is a negation. See if the operand is a multiply tree
// and if this is not an inner node of a multiply tree.
if (isReassociableOp(I->getOperand(1), Instruction::Mul) &&