aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/lib/Transforms/Scalar/Reassociate.cpp
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorChad Rosier <mcrosier@codeaurora.org>2017-02-23 18:49:03 +0000
committerChad Rosier <mcrosier@codeaurora.org>2017-02-23 18:49:03 +0000
commitb81558a8e11d49fc2af954bae2c122ccfeee39eb (patch)
tree94bf623bffd784ffd81d1378311cddaeea0cccdf /lib/Transforms/Scalar/Reassociate.cpp
parentaa262b8b29da0a1e45723b6f89aa39560bf63a7a (diff)
[Reassociate] Add negated value of negative constant to the Duplicates list.
In OptimizeAdd, we scan the operand list to see if there are any common factors between operands that can be factored out to reduce the number of multiplies (e.g., 'A*A+A*B*C+D' -> 'A*(A+B*C)+D'). For each operand of the operand list, we only consider unique factors (which is tracked by the Duplicate set). Now if we find a factor that is a negative constant, we add the negated value as a factor as well, because we can percolate the negate out. However, we mistakenly don't add this negated constant to the Duplicates set. Consider the expression A*2*-2 + B. Obviously, nothing to factor. For the added value A*2*-2 we over count 2 as a factor without this change, which causes the assert reported in PR30256. The problem is that this code is assuming that all the multiply operands of the add are already reassociated. This change avoids the issue by making OptimizeAdd tolerate multiplies which haven't been completely optimized; this sort of works, but we're doing wasted work: we'll end up revisiting the add later anyway. Another possible approach would be to enforce RPO iteration order more strongly. If we have RedoInsts, we process them immediately in RPO order, rather than waiting until we've finished processing the whole function. Intuitively, it seems like the natural approach: reassociation works on expression trees, so the optimization only works in one direction. That said, I'm not sure how practical that is given the current Reassociate; the "optimal" form for an expression depends on its use list (see all the uses of "user_back()"), so Reassociate is really an iterative optimization of sorts, so any changes here would probably get messy. PR30256 Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30228 git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@296003 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Diffstat (limited to 'lib/Transforms/Scalar/Reassociate.cpp')
-rw-r--r--lib/Transforms/Scalar/Reassociate.cpp8
1 files changed, 4 insertions, 4 deletions
diff --git a/lib/Transforms/Scalar/Reassociate.cpp b/lib/Transforms/Scalar/Reassociate.cpp
index dc03c5c33d1..3dcab609078 100644
--- a/lib/Transforms/Scalar/Reassociate.cpp
+++ b/lib/Transforms/Scalar/Reassociate.cpp
@@ -1520,8 +1520,8 @@ Value *ReassociatePass::OptimizeAdd(Instruction *I,
if (ConstantInt *CI = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(Factor)) {
if (CI->isNegative() && !CI->isMinValue(true)) {
Factor = ConstantInt::get(CI->getContext(), -CI->getValue());
- assert(!Duplicates.count(Factor) &&
- "Shouldn't have two constant factors, missed a canonicalize");
+ if (!Duplicates.insert(Factor).second)
+ continue;
unsigned Occ = ++FactorOccurrences[Factor];
if (Occ > MaxOcc) {
MaxOcc = Occ;
@@ -1533,8 +1533,8 @@ Value *ReassociatePass::OptimizeAdd(Instruction *I,
APFloat F(CF->getValueAPF());
F.changeSign();
Factor = ConstantFP::get(CF->getContext(), F);
- assert(!Duplicates.count(Factor) &&
- "Shouldn't have two constant factors, missed a canonicalize");
+ if (!Duplicates.insert(Factor).second)
+ continue;
unsigned Occ = ++FactorOccurrences[Factor];
if (Occ > MaxOcc) {
MaxOcc = Occ;