summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/llvm/test/Transforms/InstCombine/minnum.ll
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* [NFC][InstCombine] Add unary fneg tests to maxnum.ll/minnum.llCameron McInally2019-05-221-0/+71
| | | | llvm-svn: 361415
* [InstCombine] regenerate test checks; NFCSanjay Patel2019-05-061-12/+18
| | | | llvm-svn: 360052
* Revert "Temporarily Revert "Add basic loop fusion pass.""Eric Christopher2019-04-171-0/+318
| | | | | | | | The reversion apparently deleted the test/Transforms directory. Will be re-reverting again. llvm-svn: 358552
* Temporarily Revert "Add basic loop fusion pass."Eric Christopher2019-04-171-318/+0
| | | | | | | | As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton). This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda. llvm-svn: 358546
* [InstCombine] Combine nested min/max intrinsics with constantsVolkan Keles2018-10-311-12/+6
| | | | | | | | | | | | Reviewers: arsenm, spatel Reviewed By: spatel Subscribers: lebedev.ri, wdng, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53774 llvm-svn: 345751
* [InstCombine] Add preliminary tests for nested min/max combines. NFCVolkan Keles2018-10-301-1/+61
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Summary: As requested in D53774. Reviewers: spatel Reviewed By: spatel Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53875 llvm-svn: 345616
* [InstSimplify] move minnum/maxnum with Inf folds from instcombineSanjay Patel2018-08-091-17/+0
| | | | llvm-svn: 339396
* [InstSimplify] move minnum/maxnum with common op fold from instcombineSanjay Patel2018-08-071-42/+0
| | | | llvm-svn: 339144
* [InstSimplify] move misplaced minnum/maxnum tests; NFCSanjay Patel2018-08-071-8/+0
| | | | llvm-svn: 339141
* [InstSimplify] move minnum/maxnum with undef fold from instcombineSanjay Patel2018-08-021-16/+0
| | | | llvm-svn: 338719
* [InstSimplify] move minnum/maxnum with same arg fold from instcombineSanjay Patel2018-08-011-8/+0
| | | | llvm-svn: 338652
* [InstCombine] add folds for minnum(-a, -b) --> -maxnum(a, b)Sanjay Patel2018-05-101-10/+8
| | | | | | | | | | | This is similar to what we do for integer min/max with 'not' ops (rL321882). This should fix: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37404 https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37405 llvm-svn: 332031
* [InstCombine] add minnum/maxnum tests (PR37404, PR37405); NFCSanjay Patel2018-05-101-0/+82
| | | | llvm-svn: 332025
* [InstCombine] regenerate full checks; NFCSanjay Patel2018-05-101-148/+179
| | | | llvm-svn: 331998
* Fix using wrong intrinsic in testMatt Arsenault2015-01-061-9/+9
| | | | | | | This is a leftover from renaming the intrinsic. It's surprising the unknown llvm. intrinsic wasn't rejected. llvm-svn: 225304
* Add minnum / maxnum intrinsicsMatt Arsenault2014-10-211-0/+244
These are named following the IEEE-754 names for these functions, rather than the libm fmin / fmax to avoid possible ambiguities. Some languages may implement something resembling fmin / fmax which return NaN if either operand is to propagate errors. These implement the IEEE-754 semantics of returning the other operand if either is a NaN representing missing data. llvm-svn: 220341
OpenPOWER on IntegriCloud