[clang] [CIR] Split cir.binop into separate per-operation binary ops (PR #184227)

[Andy Kaylor via cfe-commits]

================
@@ -2119,76 +2119,261 @@ def CIR_BinOpOverflowOp : CIR_Op<"binop.overflow", [Pure, SameTypeOperands]> {
 
 
 //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-// BinOp
-//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
-
-// FIXME: represent Commutative, Idempotent traits for appropriate binops
-def CIR_BinOpKind : CIR_I32EnumAttr<
-  "BinOpKind", "binary operation (arith and logic) kind", [
-    I32EnumAttrCase<"Mul", 0, "mul">,
-    I32EnumAttrCase<"Div", 1, "div">,
-    I32EnumAttrCase<"Rem", 2, "rem">,
-    I32EnumAttrCase<"Add", 3, "add">,
-    I32EnumAttrCase<"Sub", 4, "sub">,
-    I32EnumAttrCase<"And", 5, "and">,
-    I32EnumAttrCase<"Xor", 6, "xor">,
-    I32EnumAttrCase<"Or", 7, "or">,
-    I32EnumAttrCase<"Max", 8, "max">
-]>;
+// Binary Arithmetic and Logic Operations
+//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
 
-def CIR_BinOp : CIR_Op<"binop", [
-  Pure, SameTypeOperands, SameOperandsAndResultType
-]> {
-  let summary = "Binary operations (arith and logic)";
+// Base class for all CIR binary arithmetic/logic operations.
+// `type` constrains the lhs/rhs/result type.
+class CIR_BinaryOp<string mnemonic, Type type, list<Trait> traits = []>
+    : CIR_Op<mnemonic, !listconcat([
+        NoMemoryEffect, SameOperandsAndResultType,
+        DeclareOpInterfaceMethods<CIR_BinaryOpInterface>
+      ], traits)>
+{
+  let arguments = (ins
+    type:$lhs,
+    type:$rhs
+  );
+
+  let results = (outs type:$result);
+
+  let assemblyFormat = [{
+    $lhs `,` $rhs `:` type($lhs) attr-dict
+  }];
+}
+
+// Base class for binary ops that support integer overflow flags (nsw/nuw)
+// and saturated arithmetic.
+class CIR_BinaryOverflowOp<string mnemonic, Type type, list<Trait> traits = []>
----------------
andykaylor wrote:

We already have `CIR_BinOpOverflowOp`, which does something different than this. The naming of either in isolation would be appropriate, but together it's problematic. What would you think of `CIR_BinaryOpWithOverflowFlags` here and `CIR_BinaryOpWithOverflowChecks` for the other (which I assume we'll also want to split into separate ops)? Given that this is a base class, the extra verbosity isn't really a problem.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/184227