diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'llvm/test/Transforms/LoopUnroll/full-unroll-heuristics-cmp.ll')
| -rw-r--r-- | llvm/test/Transforms/LoopUnroll/full-unroll-heuristics-cmp.ll | 129 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 129 deletions
diff --git a/llvm/test/Transforms/LoopUnroll/full-unroll-heuristics-cmp.ll b/llvm/test/Transforms/LoopUnroll/full-unroll-heuristics-cmp.ll index f7758fa2200..2804848d8ef 100644 --- a/llvm/test/Transforms/LoopUnroll/full-unroll-heuristics-cmp.ll +++ b/llvm/test/Transforms/LoopUnroll/full-unroll-heuristics-cmp.ll @@ -3,39 +3,6 @@ target datalayout = "e-m:o-i64:64-f80:128-n8:16:32:64-S128" @known_constant = internal unnamed_addr constant [10 x i32] [i32 1, i32 1, i32 1, i32 1, i32 1, i32 1, i32 1, i32 1, i32 1, i32 1], align 16 -; We should be able to propagate constant data through comparisons. -; For example, in this test we have a load, which becomes constant after -; unrolling, making comparison with 0 also known to be 0 (false) - and that -; will trigger further simplifications. -; -; We expect this loop to be unrolled, because in this case load would become -; constant, which is always 1, and which, in its turn, helps to simplify -; following comparison, zero-extension, and addition. In total, unrolling should help to -; optimize more than 50% of all instructions in this case. -; -; CHECK-LABEL: @const_compare -; CHECK-NOT: br i1 % -; CHECK: ret i32 -define i32 @const_compare(i32* noalias nocapture readonly %b) { -entry: - br label %for.body - -for.body: ; preds = %for.inc, %entry - %iv.0 = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %iv.1, %for.body ] - %r.0 = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %r.1, %for.body ] - %arrayidx1 = getelementptr inbounds [10 x i32], [10 x i32]* @known_constant, i64 0, i64 %iv.0 - %x1 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx1, align 4 - %cmp = icmp eq i32 %x1, 0 - %cast = zext i1 %cmp to i32 - %iv.1 = add nuw nsw i64 %iv.0, 1 - %r.1 = add i32 %r.0, %cast - %exitcond = icmp eq i64 %iv.1, 10 - br i1 %exitcond, label %for.end, label %for.body - -for.end: ; preds = %for.inc - ret i32 %r.1 -} - ; If we can figure out result of comparison on each iteration, we can resolve ; the depending branch. That means, that the unrolled version of the loop would ; have less code, because we don't need not-taken basic blocks there. @@ -73,70 +40,6 @@ for.end: ; preds = %for.inc ret i32 %r.1 } -; This test is similar to the previous one, but in this we use IV in comparison -; (not a loaded value as we did there). -; CHECK-LABEL: @branch_iv -; CHECK-NOT: br i1 % -; CHECK: ret i64 -define i64 @branch_iv(i64* noalias nocapture readonly %b) { -entry: - br label %for.body - -for.body: ; preds = %for.inc, %entry - %indvars.iv = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %tmp3, %for.inc ] - %r.030 = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %r.1, %for.inc ] - %cmp3 = icmp eq i64 %indvars.iv, 5 - %tmp3 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv, 1 - br i1 %cmp3, label %if.then, label %for.inc - -if.then: ; preds = %for.body - %arrayidx2 = getelementptr inbounds i64, i64* %b, i64 %tmp3 - %tmp1 = load i64, i64* %arrayidx2, align 4 - %add = add nsw i64 %tmp1, %r.030 - br label %for.inc - -for.inc: ; preds = %if.then, %for.body - %r.1 = phi i64 [ %add, %if.then ], [ %r.030, %for.body ] - %exitcond = icmp eq i64 %tmp3, 20 - br i1 %exitcond, label %for.end, label %for.body - -for.end: ; preds = %for.inc - ret i64 %r.1 -} - -; Induction variables are often casted to another type, and that shouldn't -; prevent us from folding branches. Tthis test specifically checks if we can -; handle this. Other than thatm it's similar to the previous test. -; CHECK-LABEL: @branch_iv_trunc -; CHECK-NOT: br i1 % -; CHECK: ret i32 -define i32 @branch_iv_trunc(i32* noalias nocapture readonly %b) { -entry: - br label %for.body - -for.body: ; preds = %for.inc, %entry - %indvars.iv = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %tmp3, %for.inc ] - %r.030 = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %r.1, %for.inc ] - %tmp2 = trunc i64 %indvars.iv to i32 - %cmp3 = icmp eq i32 %tmp2, 5 - %tmp3 = add nuw nsw i64 %indvars.iv, 1 - br i1 %cmp3, label %if.then, label %for.inc - -if.then: ; preds = %for.body - %arrayidx2 = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %b, i64 %tmp3 - %tmp1 = load i32, i32* %arrayidx2, align 4 - %add = add nsw i32 %tmp1, %r.030 - br label %for.inc - -for.inc: ; preds = %if.then, %for.body - %r.1 = phi i32 [ %add, %if.then ], [ %r.030, %for.body ] - %exitcond = icmp eq i64 %tmp3, 10 - br i1 %exitcond, label %for.end, label %for.body - -for.end: ; preds = %for.inc - ret i32 %r.1 -} - ; Check that we don't crash when we analyze icmp with pointer-typed IV and a ; pointer. ; CHECK-LABEL: @ptr_cmp_crash @@ -173,35 +76,3 @@ loop.body: loop.exit: ret void } - -; Loop unroller should be able to predict that a comparison would become -; constant if the operands are pointers with the same base and constant -; offsets. -; We expect this loop to be unrolled, since most of its instructions would -; become constant after it. -; CHECK-LABEL: @ptr_cmp -; CHECK-NOT: br i1 % -; CHECK: ret i64 -define i64 @ptr_cmp(i8 * %a) { -entry: - %limit = getelementptr i8, i8* %a, i64 40 - %start.iv2 = getelementptr i8, i8* %a, i64 7 - br label %loop.body - -loop.body: - %iv.0 = phi i8* [ %a, %entry ], [ %iv.1, %loop.body ] - %iv2.0 = phi i8* [ %start.iv2, %entry ], [ %iv2.1, %loop.body ] - %r.0 = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ %r.1, %loop.body ] - %cast = ptrtoint i8* %iv.0 to i64 - %cmp = icmp eq i8* %iv2.0, %iv.0 - %sub = sext i1 %cmp to i64 - %mul = mul i64 %sub, %cast - %r.1 = add i64 %r.0, %mul - %iv.1 = getelementptr inbounds i8, i8* %iv.0, i64 1 - %iv2.1 = getelementptr inbounds i8, i8* %iv2.0, i64 1 - %exitcond = icmp ne i8* %iv.1, %limit - br i1 %exitcond, label %loop.body, label %loop.exit - -loop.exit: - ret i64 %r.1 -} |
