[llvm] [CGP]: Optimize mul.overflow. (PR #148343)

[David Green via llvm-commits]

================
@@ -6389,6 +6395,303 @@ bool CodeGenPrepare::optimizeGatherScatterInst(Instruction *MemoryInst,
   return true;
 }
 
+// Rewrite the mul_with_overflow intrinsic by checking if both of the
+// operands' value range is within the legal type. If so, we can optimize the
+// multiplication algorithm. This code is supposed to be written during the step
+// of type legalization, but given that we need to reconstruct the IR which is
+// not doable there, we do it here.
+bool CodeGenPrepare::optimizeMulWithOverflow(Instruction *I, bool IsSigned,
+                                             ModifyDT &ModifiedDT) {
+  if (!TLI->shouldOptimizeMulOverflowIntrinsic(
+          I->getContext(),
+          TLI->getValueType(*DL, I->getType()->getContainedType(0))))
+    return false;
+
+  Value *LHS = I->getOperand(0);
+  Value *RHS = I->getOperand(1);
+  Type *Ty = LHS->getType();
+  unsigned VTBitWidth = Ty->getScalarSizeInBits();
+  unsigned VTHalfBitWidth = VTBitWidth / 2;
+  IntegerType *LegalTy =
+      IntegerType::getIntNTy(I->getContext(), VTHalfBitWidth);
+
+  // Skip the optimization if the type with HalfBitWidth is not legal for the
+  // target.
+  if (TLI->getTypeAction(I->getContext(), TLI->getValueType(*DL, LegalTy)) !=
+      TargetLowering::TypeLegal)
+    return false;
+
+  // Check the pattern we are interested in where there are maximum 2 uses
+  // of the intrinsic which are the extracts instructions.
+  if (I->getNumUses() > 2)
+    return false;
+  ExtractValueInst *MulExtract = nullptr;
+  ExtractValueInst *OverflowExtract = nullptr;
+  for (User *U : I->users()) {
+    auto *Extract = dyn_cast<ExtractValueInst>(U);
+    if (!Extract)
+      return false;
+
+    unsigned Index = Extract->getIndices()[0];
+    if (Index == 0)
+      MulExtract = Extract;
+    else if (Index == 1)
+      OverflowExtract = Extract;
+  }
+
+  // Keep track of the instruction to stop reoptimizing it again.
+  InsertedInsts.insert(I);
+  // ----------------------------
----------------
davemgreen wrote:

Could this ---- line be removed?

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/148343