[llvm-bugs] [Bug 27151] New: InstructionSimplify turns NaN to 0.0
via llvm-bugs
llvm-bugs at lists.llvm.org
Wed Mar 30 19:48:41 PDT 2016
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=27151
Bug ID: 27151
Summary: InstructionSimplify turns NaN to 0.0
Product: new-bugs
Version: trunk
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P
Component: new bugs
Assignee: unassignedbugs at nondot.org
Reporter: davemm at cs.rutgers.edu
CC: llvm-bugs at lists.llvm.org,
santosh.nagarakatte at gmail.com
Classification: Unclassified
LLVM optimizes this code:
define float @foo(float %x) #0 {
entry:
%0 = fsub nnan ninf float 0.0, %x
%1 = fadd float %0, %x
ret float %1
}
to this:
define float @foo(float %x) #0 {
entry:
ret float 0.000000e+00
}
My reading of the language reference is that the original program will return
NaN when %x is NaN (or +/-infinity). Specifically, the nnan flag on %0 means
that it will return an undefined value when %x is NaN, but it is required to
have defined behavior. That means %1 is calculated as normal, which means it
must return NaN, since %x is NaN.
>From the reference:
---
No NaNs - Allow optimizations to assume the arguments and result are not NaN.
Such optimizations are required to retain defined behavior over NaNs, but the
value of the result is undefined.
---
Counter argument: Since this is described in terms of optimizations instead of
instructions, it could be argued that the nnan in %0 is sufficient to allow the
optimization, even though %1 does not have nnan. This would mean adding nnan to
%0 affects every instruction that uses %x.
Here is the relevant code from InstructionSimplify.cpp:
// fadd [nnan ninf] X, (fsub [nnan ninf] 0, X) ==> 0
// where nnan and ninf have to occur at least once somewhere in this
// expression
Value *SubOp = nullptr;
if (match(Op1, m_FSub(m_AnyZero(), m_Specific(Op0))))
SubOp = Op1;
else if (match(Op0, m_FSub(m_AnyZero(), m_Specific(Op1))))
SubOp = Op0;
if (SubOp) {
Instruction *FSub = cast<Instruction>(SubOp);
if ((FMF.noNaNs() || FSub->hasNoNaNs()) &&
(FMF.noInfs() || FSub->hasNoInfs()))
return Constant::getNullValue(Op0->getType());
}
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-bugs/attachments/20160331/0738e4f1/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the llvm-bugs
mailing list