From c9f72585e869e84099f8b5c58ddb2977931234c2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Philip Reames Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 03:11:49 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] [SimplifyCFG] Constant fold a branch implied by it's incoming edge The most common use case is when eliminating redundant range checks in an example like the following: c = a[i+1] + a[i]; Note that all the smarts of the transform (the implication engine) is already in ValueTracking and is tested directly through InstructionSimplify. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13040 git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@251596 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8 --- lib/Transforms/Utils/SimplifyCFG.cpp | 13 ++++ test/Transforms/SimplifyCFG/implied-cond.ll | 81 +++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 94 insertions(+) create mode 100644 test/Transforms/SimplifyCFG/implied-cond.ll diff --git a/lib/Transforms/Utils/SimplifyCFG.cpp b/lib/Transforms/Utils/SimplifyCFG.cpp index 69c08e55283..e44a04aaba6 100644 --- a/lib/Transforms/Utils/SimplifyCFG.cpp +++ b/lib/Transforms/Utils/SimplifyCFG.cpp @@ -2390,6 +2390,19 @@ static bool SimplifyCondBranchToCondBranch(BranchInst *PBI, BranchInst *BI, if (CE->canTrap()) return false; + // If BI is reached from the true path of PBI and PBI's condition implies + // BI's condition, we know the direction of the BI branch. + if (PBI->getSuccessor(0) == BI->getParent() && + isImpliedCondition(PBI->getCondition(), BI->getCondition()) && + PBI->getSuccessor(0) != PBI->getSuccessor(1) && + BB->getSinglePredecessor()) { + // Turn this into a branch on constant. + auto *OldCond = BI->getCondition(); + BI->setCondition(ConstantInt::getTrue(BB->getContext())); + RecursivelyDeleteTriviallyDeadInstructions(OldCond); + return true; // Nuke the branch on constant. + } + // If this is a conditional branch in an empty block, and if any // predecessors are a conditional branch to one of our destinations, // fold the conditions into logical ops and one cond br. diff --git a/test/Transforms/SimplifyCFG/implied-cond.ll b/test/Transforms/SimplifyCFG/implied-cond.ll new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..317adc4c347 --- /dev/null +++ b/test/Transforms/SimplifyCFG/implied-cond.ll @@ -0,0 +1,81 @@ +; RUN: opt %s -S -simplifycfg | FileCheck %s +; Check for when one branch implies the value of a successors conditional and +; it's not simply the same conditional repeated. + +define void @test(i32 %length.i, i32 %i) { +; CHECK-LABEL: @test + %iplus1 = add nsw i32 %i, 1 + %var29 = icmp slt i32 %iplus1, %length.i +; CHECK: br i1 %var29, label %in_bounds, label %out_of_bounds + br i1 %var29, label %next, label %out_of_bounds + +next: +; CHECK-LABEL: in_bounds: +; CHECK-NEXT: ret void + %var30 = icmp slt i32 %i, %length.i + br i1 %var30, label %in_bounds, label %out_of_bounds2 + +in_bounds: + ret void + +out_of_bounds: + call void @foo(i64 0) + unreachable + +out_of_bounds2: + call void @foo(i64 1) + unreachable +} + +; If the add is not nsw, it's not safe to use the fact about i+1 to imply the +; i condition since it could have overflowed. +define void @test_neg(i32 %length.i, i32 %i) { +; CHECK-LABEL: @test_neg + %iplus1 = add i32 %i, 1 + %var29 = icmp slt i32 %iplus1, %length.i +; CHECK: br i1 %var29, label %next, label %out_of_bounds + br i1 %var29, label %next, label %out_of_bounds + +next: + %var30 = icmp slt i32 %i, %length.i +; CHECK: br i1 %var30, label %in_bounds, label %out_of_bounds2 + br i1 %var30, label %in_bounds, label %out_of_bounds2 + +in_bounds: + ret void + +out_of_bounds: + call void @foo(i64 0) + unreachable + +out_of_bounds2: + call void @foo(i64 1) + unreachable +} + + +define void @test2(i32 %length.i, i32 %i) { +; CHECK-LABEL: @test2 + %iplus100 = add nsw i32 %i, 100 + %var29 = icmp slt i32 %iplus100, %length.i +; CHECK: br i1 %var29, label %in_bounds, label %out_of_bounds + br i1 %var29, label %next, label %out_of_bounds + +next: + %var30 = icmp slt i32 %i, %length.i + br i1 %var30, label %in_bounds, label %out_of_bounds2 + +in_bounds: + ret void + +out_of_bounds: + call void @foo(i64 0) + unreachable + +out_of_bounds2: + call void @foo(i64 1) + unreachable +} + +declare void @foo(i64) + -- 2.34.1