search for: satmin

...;> >>> Is there some reason why pattern-matching this in an ARM-specific >>> DAGCombine doesn't work? >> >> It's not possible to look beyond a single BB at isel time. > > Anything that we can match to ssat should be of the form max(min(x, > SATMAX), SATMIN) (where max and min are icmp+select pairs).  If the > min and max aren't in the same block, and we don't have an IR > transformation to put them in the same block, we should fix that > rather than introducing an instrinsic for this special case, I > think... Okay, thinking abou...

...gt; >>> Comments? >> >> Is there some reason why pattern-matching this in an ARM-specific >> DAGCombine doesn't work? > > It's not possible to look beyond a single BB at isel time. Anything that we can match to ssat should be of the form max(min(x, SATMAX), SATMIN) (where max and min are icmp+select pairs). If the min and max aren't in the same block, and we don't have an IR transformation to put them in the same block, we should fix that rather than introducing an instrinsic for this special case, I think... -Eli

...e some reason why pattern-matching this in an ARM-specific >>>> DAGCombine doesn't work? >>> >>> It's not possible to look beyond a single BB at isel time. >> >> Anything that we can match to ssat should be of the form max(min(x, >> SATMAX), SATMIN) (where max and min are icmp+select pairs). If the >> min and max aren't in the same block, and we don't have an IR >> transformation to put them in the same block, we should fix that >> rather than introducing an instrinsic for this special case, I >> think... >...

...ern-matching this in an ARM-specific >>>>> DAGCombine doesn't work? >>>> >>>> It's not possible to look beyond a single BB at isel time. >>> >>> Anything that we can match to ssat should be of the form max(min(x, >>> SATMAX), SATMIN) (where max and min are icmp+select pairs).  If the >>> min and max aren't in the same block, and we don't have an IR >>> transformation to put them in the same block, we should fix that >>> rather than introducing an instrinsic for this special case, I >>&g...

On Jun 17, 2011, at 3:42 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I'm proposing integer saturation intrinsics. >> >> def int_ssat : Intrinsic<[llvm_anyint_ty], [LLVMMatchType<0>, llvm_i32_ty]>; >> def int_usat : Intrinsic<[llvm_anyint_ty],