search for: 2select

...nvolved? That's a valid concern. The original problem is, we can't catch this kind of thing in the SelectionDAG, because we're limited by a single basic block. I guess we could (and I gather that's the alternative you're presenting?) canonicalize the control flow to the 2icmp+2select sequence, but I wasn't sure that was "workable". Truth be told, I didn't investigate this very thoroughly, as I didn't expect reluctance on adding intrinsics! I'll look into it some more: avoid adding the intrinsic, keep the codegen additions as is, match the pattern in...

...#39;s a valid concern. The original problem is, we can't catch this > kind of thing in the SelectionDAG, because we're limited by a single > basic block. I guess we could (and I gather that's the alternative > you're presenting?) canonicalize the control flow to the 2icmp+2select > sequence, but I wasn't sure that was "workable". Truth be told, I > didn't investigate this very thoroughly, as I didn't expect reluctance > on adding intrinsics! I'll look into it some more: avoid adding the > intrinsic, keep the codegen additions as is, m...

Hi all, The patches linked below introduce a new family of intrinsics, for integer saturation: @llvm.usat, and @llvm.ssat (unsigned/signed). Quoting the added documentation: %r = call i32 @llvm.ssat.i32(i32 %x, i32 %n) is equivalent to the expression min(max(x, -2^(n-1)), 2^(n-1)-1), itself implementable as the following IR: %min_sint_n = i32 ... ; the min. signed integer of