[PATCH] D106362: [FPEnv][InstSimplify] Enable more folds for constrained fadd

[Serge Pavlov via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

sepavloff added a comment.

In D106362#3032900 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D106362#3032900>, @lebedev.ri wrote:

> `fadd X, -0 ==> X` is *NOT* a miscompile, at least given the current LLVM IR semantics: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/TuTiSQ
> I would personally strongly suggest to not reason about semantics via hand-waving, but to actually model them in alive2, if it isn't already.
> Honestly, i'm quite worried that this is repeating the same approach as in isnan threads.
> Some might interpret it as being dismissive/intentionally ignoring documented semantics.

Here is the sample program: https://godbolt.org/z/ssYs6ez91
Hardware converts `SNaN + 0` into QNaN.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D106362/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D106362