[llvm] [SeparateConstOffsetFromGEP] Decompose constant xor operand if possible (PR #135788)
Jeffrey Byrnes via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Sat Apr 19 09:56:31 PDT 2025
================
@@ -1162,6 +1168,162 @@ bool SeparateConstOffsetFromGEP::splitGEP(GetElementPtrInst *GEP) {
return true;
}
+bool SeparateConstOffsetFromGEP::decomposeXor(Function &F) {
+ bool FunctionChanged = false;
+ SmallVector<std::pair<Instruction *, Value *>, 16> ReplacementsToMake;
+
+ for (BasicBlock &BB : F) {
+ for (Instruction &I : BB) {
+ if (I.getOpcode() == Instruction::Xor) {
+ if (Value *Replacement = tryFoldXorToOrDisjoint(I)) {
+ ReplacementsToMake.push_back({&I, Replacement});
+ FunctionChanged = true;
+ }
+ }
+ }
+ }
+
+ if (!ReplacementsToMake.empty()) {
+ LLVM_DEBUG(dbgs() << "Applying " << ReplacementsToMake.size()
+ << " XOR->OR Disjoint replacements in " << F.getName()
+ << "\n");
+ for (auto &Pair : ReplacementsToMake) {
+ Pair.first->replaceAllUsesWith(Pair.second);
+ }
+ for (auto &Pair : ReplacementsToMake) {
+ Pair.first->eraseFromParent();
+ }
+ }
+
+ return FunctionChanged;
+}
+
+static llvm::Instruction *findClosestSequentialXor(Value *A, Instruction &I) {
+ llvm::Instruction *ClosestUser = nullptr;
+ for (llvm::User *User : A->users()) {
+ if (auto *UserInst = llvm::dyn_cast<llvm::Instruction>(User)) {
+ if (UserInst->getOpcode() != Instruction::Xor || UserInst == &I)
+ continue;
+ if (!ClosestUser) {
+ ClosestUser = UserInst;
+ } else {
+ // Compare instruction positions.
+ if (UserInst->comesBefore(ClosestUser)) {
+ ClosestUser = UserInst;
+ }
+ }
+ }
+ }
+ return ClosestUser;
+}
+
+/// Try to transform I = xor(A, C1) into or disjoint(Y, C2)
+/// where Y = xor(A, C0) is another existing instruction dominating I,
+/// C2 = C0 ^ C1, and A is known to be disjoint with C2.
+///
+/// @param I The XOR instruction being visited.
+/// @return The replacement Value* if successful, nullptr otherwise.
+Value *SeparateConstOffsetFromGEP::tryFoldXorToOrDisjoint(Instruction &I) {
+ assert(I.getOpcode() == Instruction::Xor && "Instruction must be XOR");
+
+ // Check if I has at least one GEP user.
+ bool HasGepUser = false;
+ for (User *U : I.users()) {
+ if (isa<GetElementPtrInst>(U)) {
+ HasGepUser = true;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+ // If no user is a GEP instruction, abort the transformation.
+ if (!HasGepUser) {
+ LLVM_DEBUG(
+ dbgs() << "SeparateConstOffsetFromGEP: Skipping XOR->OR DISJOINT for "
+ << I << " because it has no GEP users.\n");
+ return nullptr;
+ }
+
+ Value *Op0 = I.getOperand(0);
+ Value *Op1 = I.getOperand(1);
+ ConstantInt *C1 = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(Op1);
+ Value *A = Op0;
+
+ // Bail out of there is not constant operand.
+ if (!C1) {
+ C1 = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(Op0);
+ if (!C1)
+ return nullptr;
+ A = Op1;
+ }
+
+ if (isa<UndefValue>(A))
+ return nullptr;
+
+ APInt C1_APInt = C1->getValue();
+ unsigned BitWidth = C1_APInt.getBitWidth();
+ Type *Ty = I.getType();
+
+ // --- Step 2: Find Dominating Y = xor A, C0 ---
+ Instruction *FoundUserInst = nullptr; // Instruction Y
+ APInt C0_APInt;
+
+ auto UserInst = findClosestSequentialXor(A, I);
----------------
jrbyrnes wrote:
It seems to me that we should still decompose the xor (if it can be made disjoint) -- even if there is no preexisting compatible xor
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135788
More information about the llvm-commits
mailing list