After writing a simple FPRange, I've hit a stumbling block. I don't
know what LLVM code should be extended to use it. I was initially thinking of
extending LazyValueInfo, but it appears to be used for passes that don’t address
the case that I need for Julia. I’m now wondering if I’m better off extending
SimplifyFCmpInst to handle the few cases in question instead of trying to be
more general. Here’s an example case for Julia where a trivially true domain
check should be removed:
%jl_value_t = type {}
@jl_domain_exception = external global %jl_value_t*
declare void @jl_throw_with_superfluous_argument(%jl_value_t*, i32)
declare float @llvm.sqrt.f32(float %Val)
define float @julia_f_64805(float) {
top:
%1 = fmul float %0, %0
%2 = fcmp uge float %1, 0.000000e+00
br i1 %2, label %pass, label %fail
fail: ; preds = %top
%3 = load %jl_value_t** @jl_domain_exception, align 8
call void @jl_throw_with_superfluous_argument(%jl_value_t* %3, i32 2)
unreachable
pass: ; preds = %top
%4 = call float @llvm.sqrt.f32(float %1)
ret float %4
}
I just want to fold the branch. Following Philip’s earlier suggestion, adding a
routine CannotBeOrderedLessThanZero (that’s analogous to CannotBeNegativeZero)
and making SimplifyFCmpInst use it would be enough to cover the cases of primary
interest. Comments?
- Arch
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150113/403987d3/attachment.html>
Hi Arch Yeah, that seems reasonable to me. LazyValueInfo seems to be more about what ranges of values control flow defines. Knowing that 'fmul float %0, %0’ is >= 0 is perfectly reasonable for SimplifyFCmpInst to know. Thanks, Pete> On Jan 13, 2015, at 11:27 AM, Robison, Arch <arch.robison at intel.com> wrote: > > After writing a simple FPRange, I've hit a stumbling block. I don't know what LLVM code should be extended to use it. I was initially thinking of extending LazyValueInfo, but it appears to be used for passes that don’t address the case that I need for Julia. I’m now wondering if I’m better off extending SimplifyFCmpInst to handle the few cases in question instead of trying to be more general. Here’s an example case for Julia where a trivially true domain check should be removed: > > %jl_value_t = type {} > @jl_domain_exception = external global %jl_value_t* > declare void @jl_throw_with_superfluous_argument(%jl_value_t*, i32) > declare float @llvm.sqrt.f32(float %Val) > > define float @julia_f_64805(float) { > top: > %1 = fmul float %0, %0 > %2 = fcmp uge float %1, 0.000000e+00 > br i1 %2, label %pass, label %fail > > fail: ; preds = %top > %3 = load %jl_value_t** @jl_domain_exception, align 8 > call void @jl_throw_with_superfluous_argument(%jl_value_t* %3, i32 2) > unreachable > > pass: ; preds = %top > %4 = call float @llvm.sqrt.f32(float %1) > ret float %4 > } > > I just want to fold the branch. Following Philip’s earlier suggestion, adding a routine CannotBeOrderedLessThanZero (that’s analogous to CannotBeNegativeZero) and making SimplifyFCmpInst use it would be enough to cover the cases of primary interest. Comments? > > - Arch-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150113/3c3df876/attachment.html>
----- Original Message -----> From: "Pete Cooper" <peter_cooper at apple.com> > To: "Arch Robison" <arch.robison at intel.com> > Cc: "Philip Reames" <listmail at philipreames.com>, "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>, llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 1:40:42 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Floating-point range checks > > Hi Arch > > > Yeah, that seems reasonable to me. LazyValueInfo seems to be more > about what ranges of values control flow defines. Knowing that 'fmul > float %0, %0’ is >= 0 is perfectly reasonable for SimplifyFCmpInst > to know.Agreed (at least with non-nans?). I don't want your work on an FPRange class to get lost, however, because we do need something like that generally speaking. -Hal> > > Thanks, > Pete > > > > > On Jan 13, 2015, at 11:27 AM, Robison, Arch < arch.robison at intel.com > > wrote: > > > > After writing a simple FPRange, I've hit a stumbling block. I don't > know what LLVM code should be extended to use it. I was initially > thinking of extending LazyValueInfo, but it appears to be used for > passes that don’t address the case that I need for Julia. I’m now > wondering if I’m better off extending SimplifyFCmpInst to handle the > few cases in question instead of trying to be more general. Here’s > an example case for Julia where a trivially true domain check should > be removed: > > %jl_value_t = type {} > @jl_domain_exception = external global %jl_value_t* > declare void @jl_throw_with_superfluous_argument(%jl_value_t*, i32) > declare float @llvm.sqrt.f32(float %Val) > > define float @julia_f_64805(float) { > top: > %1 = fmul float %0, %0 > %2 = fcmp uge float %1, 0.000000e+00 > br i1 %2, label %pass, label %fail > > fail: ; preds = %top > %3 = load %jl_value_t** @jl_domain_exception, align 8 > call void @jl_throw_with_superfluous_argument(%jl_value_t* %3, i32 2) > unreachable > > pass: ; preds = %top > %4 = call float @llvm.sqrt.f32(float %1) > ret float %4 > } > > I just want to fold the branch. Following Philip’s earlier > suggestion, adding a routine CannotBeOrderedLessThanZero (that’s > analogous to CannotBeNegativeZero) and making SimplifyFCmpInst use > it would be enough to cover the cases of primary interest. Comments? > > - Arch >-- Hal Finkel Assistant Computational Scientist Leadership Computing Facility Argonne National Laboratory