search for: cvtfdivconsttoreciproc

...00000e+00, %d %mul = fmul fast double %div, %a %mul1 = fmul fast double %div, %b %call = tail call i32 @foo(double %mul, double %mul1) ret void } Is such a transformation best done as a (target-specific) DAG combine? A similar instcombine already exists for the X/C->X*1/C case (see the CvtFDivConstToReciprocal function in InstCombineMlDivRem.cpp), but I don't believe the above can be done as an instcombine as it creates a new instruction (in addition to replacing the original). Also, I only want to perform the transformation if there are multiple uses of 1/Y (like in my test case). Otherwise, the...

...uble %div, %b >> %call = tail call i32 @foo(double %mul, double %mul1) >> ret void >> } >> >> Is such a transformation best done as a (target-specific) DAG combine? >> >> A similar instcombine already exists for the X/C->X*1/C case (see the >> CvtFDivConstToReciprocal function in InstCombineMlDivRem.cpp), but I >> don't believe the above can be done as an instcombine as it creates a >> new instruction (in addition to replacing the original). Also, I >> only want to perform the transformation if there are multiple uses of >> 1/Y...

..., %a > %mul1 = fmul fast double %div, %b > %call = tail call i32 @foo(double %mul, double %mul1) > ret void > } > > Is such a transformation best done as a (target-specific) DAG combine? > > A similar instcombine already exists for the X/C->X*1/C case (see the > CvtFDivConstToReciprocal function in InstCombineMlDivRem.cpp), but I > don't believe the above can be done as an instcombine as it creates a > new instruction (in addition to replacing the original). Also, I only > want to perform the transformation if there are multiple uses of 1/Y > (like in my tes...

...%div, %a > %mul1 = fmul fast double %div, %b > %call = tail call i32 @foo(double %mul, double %mul1) > ret void > } > > Is such a transformation best done as a (target-specific) DAG combine? > > A similar instcombine already exists for the X/C->X*1/C case (see the CvtFDivConstToReciprocal function in InstCombineMlDivRem.cpp), but I don't believe the above can be done as an instcombine as it creates a new instruction (in addition to replacing the original). Also, I only want to perform the transformation if there are multiple uses of 1/Y (like in my test case). Otherwise, the...

...%div, %a > %mul1 = fmul fast double %div, %b > %call = tail call i32 @foo(double %mul, double %mul1) > ret void > } > > Is such a transformation best done as a (target-specific) DAG combine? > > A similar instcombine already exists for the X/C->X*1/C case (see the CvtFDivConstToReciprocal function in InstCombineMlDivRem.cpp), but I don't believe the above can be done as an instcombine as it creates a new instruction (in addition to replacing the original). Also, I only want to perform the transformation if there are multiple uses of 1/Y (like in my test case). Otherwise, the...

...t;> %call = tail call i32 @foo(double %mul, double %mul1) >>> ret void >>> } >>> >>> Is such a transformation best done as a (target-specific) DAG combine? >>> >>> A similar instcombine already exists for the X/C->X*1/C case (see the CvtFDivConstToReciprocal function in InstCombineMlDivRem.cpp), but I don't believe the above can be done as an instcombine as it creates a new instruction (in addition to replacing the original). Also, I only want to perform the transformation if there are multiple uses of 1/Y (like in my test case). Otherwise, the...

...fast double %div, %b >> %call = tail call i32 @foo(double %mul, double %mul1) >> ret void >> } >> >> Is such a transformation best done as a (target-specific) DAG combine? >> >> A similar instcombine already exists for the X/C->X*1/C case (see the CvtFDivConstToReciprocal function in InstCombineMlDivRem.cpp), but I don't believe the above can be done as an instcombine as it creates a new instruction (in addition to replacing the original). Also, I only want to perform the transformation if there are multiple uses of 1/Y (like in my test case). Otherwise, the...

...%a > %mul1 = fmul fast double %div, %b > %call = tail call i32 @foo(double %mul, double %mul1) > ret void > } > > Is such a transformation best done as a (target-specific) DAG combine? > > A similar instcombine already exists for the X/C->X*1/C case (see the > CvtFDivConstToReciprocal function in InstCombineMlDivRem.cpp), but I > don't believe the above can be done as an instcombine as it creates a > new instruction (in addition to replacing the original). Also, I only > want to perform the transformation if there are multiple uses of 1/Y > (like in my test ca...

...v, %a > %mul1 = fmul fast double %div, %b > %call = tail call i32 @foo(double %mul, double %mul1) > ret void > } > > Is such a transformation best done as a (target-specific) DAG combine? > > A similar instcombine already exists for the X/C->X*1/C case (see the > CvtFDivConstToReciprocal function in InstCombineMlDivRem.cpp), but I don't > believe the above can be done as an instcombine as it creates a new > instruction (in addition to replacing the original). Also, I only want to > perform the transformation if there are multiple uses of 1/Y (like in my > test ca...