[PATCH] D92128: [RISCV][LegalizeTypes] Teach type legalizer that it can promote UMIN/UMAX using SExtPromotedInteger if that's better for the target.

[Craig Topper via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

craig.topper created this revision.
craig.topper added reviewers: asb, spatel, RKSimon, efriedma, lenary, luismarques, frasercrmck.
Herald added subscribers: NickHung, evandro, apazos, sameer.abuasal, pzheng, s.egerton, Jim, benna, psnobl, jocewei, PkmX, the_o, brucehoult, MartinMosbeck, rogfer01, edward-jones, zzheng, shiva0217, kito-cheng, niosHD, sabuasal, simoncook, johnrusso, rbar, hiraditya.
Herald added a project: LLVM.
craig.topper requested review of this revision.
Herald added a subscriber: MaskRay.

If Sext is cheaper than Zext for a target, we can use that to promote the operands of UMIN/UMAX. Using sext just makes numbers with the sign bit set even larger when treated as an unsigned number and it has no effect on number without the sign bit set. So the relative order doesn't change. This is similar to what we already do for promoting SETCC.

This is helpful on RISCV where i32 arguments are sign extended on RV64 and many instructions are able to produce results with 33 sign bits.


https://reviews.llvm.org/D92128

Files:
  llvm/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/LegalizeIntegerTypes.cpp
  llvm/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/LegalizeTypes.h
  llvm/test/CodeGen/RISCV/rv64Zbb.ll


Index: llvm/test/CodeGen/RISCV/rv64Zbb.ll
===================================================================
--- llvm/test/CodeGen/RISCV/rv64Zbb.ll
+++ llvm/test/CodeGen/RISCV/rv64Zbb.ll
@@ -856,18 +856,12 @@
 ;
 ; RV64IB-LABEL: minu_i32:
 ; RV64IB:       # %bb.0:
-; RV64IB-NEXT:    zext.w a1, a1
-; RV64IB-NEXT:    zext.w a0, a0
 ; RV64IB-NEXT:    minu a0, a0, a1
-; RV64IB-NEXT:    sext.w a0, a0
 ; RV64IB-NEXT:    ret
 ;
 ; RV64IBB-LABEL: minu_i32:
 ; RV64IBB:       # %bb.0:
-; RV64IBB-NEXT:    zext.w a1, a1
-; RV64IBB-NEXT:    zext.w a0, a0
 ; RV64IBB-NEXT:    minu a0, a0, a1
-; RV64IBB-NEXT:    sext.w a0, a0
 ; RV64IBB-NEXT:    ret
   %cmp = icmp ult i32 %a, %b
   %cond = select i1 %cmp, i32 %a, i32 %b
@@ -908,18 +902,12 @@
 ;
 ; RV64IB-LABEL: maxu_i32:
 ; RV64IB:       # %bb.0:
-; RV64IB-NEXT:    zext.w a1, a1
-; RV64IB-NEXT:    zext.w a0, a0
 ; RV64IB-NEXT:    maxu a0, a0, a1
-; RV64IB-NEXT:    sext.w a0, a0
 ; RV64IB-NEXT:    ret
 ;
 ; RV64IBB-LABEL: maxu_i32:
 ; RV64IBB:       # %bb.0:
-; RV64IBB-NEXT:    zext.w a1, a1
-; RV64IBB-NEXT:    zext.w a0, a0
 ; RV64IBB-NEXT:    maxu a0, a0, a1
-; RV64IBB-NEXT:    sext.w a0, a0
 ; RV64IBB-NEXT:    ret
   %cmp = icmp ugt i32 %a, %b
   %cond = select i1 %cmp, i32 %a, i32 %b
Index: llvm/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/LegalizeTypes.h
===================================================================
--- llvm/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/LegalizeTypes.h
+++ llvm/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/LegalizeTypes.h
@@ -329,8 +329,9 @@
   SDValue PromoteIntRes_SETCC(SDNode *N);
   SDValue PromoteIntRes_SHL(SDNode *N);
   SDValue PromoteIntRes_SimpleIntBinOp(SDNode *N);
-  SDValue PromoteIntRes_ZExtIntBinOp(SDNode *N);
   SDValue PromoteIntRes_SExtIntBinOp(SDNode *N);
+  SDValue PromoteIntRes_ZExtIntBinOp(SDNode *N);
+  SDValue PromoteIntRes_UMINUMAX(SDNode *N);
   SDValue PromoteIntRes_SIGN_EXTEND_INREG(SDNode *N);
   SDValue PromoteIntRes_SRA(SDNode *N);
   SDValue PromoteIntRes_SRL(SDNode *N);
Index: llvm/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/LegalizeIntegerTypes.cpp
===================================================================
--- llvm/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/LegalizeIntegerTypes.cpp
+++ llvm/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/LegalizeIntegerTypes.cpp
@@ -82,7 +82,7 @@
   case ISD::SMIN:
   case ISD::SMAX:        Res = PromoteIntRes_SExtIntBinOp(N); break;
   case ISD::UMIN:
-  case ISD::UMAX:        Res = PromoteIntRes_ZExtIntBinOp(N); break;
+  case ISD::UMAX:        Res = PromoteIntRes_UMINUMAX(N); break;
 
   case ISD::SHL:         Res = PromoteIntRes_SHL(N); break;
   case ISD::SIGN_EXTEND_INREG:
@@ -1101,6 +1101,15 @@
                      LHS.getValueType(), LHS, RHS);
 }
 
+SDValue DAGTypeLegalizer::PromoteIntRes_UMINUMAX(SDNode *N) {
+  // It doesn't matter if we sign extend or zero extend in the inputs. So do
+  // whatever is best for the target.
+  SDValue LHS = SExtOrZExtPromotedInteger(N->getOperand(0));
+  SDValue RHS = SExtOrZExtPromotedInteger(N->getOperand(1));
+  return DAG.getNode(N->getOpcode(), SDLoc(N),
+                     LHS.getValueType(), LHS, RHS);
+}
+
 SDValue DAGTypeLegalizer::PromoteIntRes_SRA(SDNode *N) {
   // The input value must be properly sign extended.
   SDValue LHS = SExtPromotedInteger(N->getOperand(0));


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: D92128.307698.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 3216 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20201125/a8b94399/attachment.bin>