[llvm-dev] IR canonicalization: shufflevector or vector trunc?

[Sanjay Patel via llvm-dev]

It's time for another round of "What is the canonical IR?"

Credit for this episode to Zvi and PR31551. :)
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=31551


define <4 x i16> @shuffle(<16 x i16> %x) {
  %shuf = shufflevector <16 x i16> %x, <16 x i16> undef, <4 x i32>
<i32 0, i32 4, i32 8, i32 12>
  ret <4 x i16> %shuf
}

define <4 x i16> @trunc(<16 x i16> %x) {
  %bc = bitcast <16 x i16> %x to <4 x i64>
  %tr = trunc <4 x i64> %bc to <4 x i16>
  ret <4 x i16> %tr
}

Potential reasons to prefer one or the other:
1. Shuffle is the most compact.
2. Trunc is easier to read.
3. One of these is easier for value tracking.
4. Compatibility with existing IR transforms (eg, InterleavedAccess
recognizes the shuffle form).
5. We don't create arbitrary shuffle masks in IR because that's bad for a
lot of targets (but maybe this mask pattern should always be recognized as
special?).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170112/feacca26/attachment.html>