[llvm] [VPlan] Constant-fold ActiveLaneMask intrinsics (PR #208852)

[Florian Hahn via llvm-commits]

================
@@ -1120,6 +1120,32 @@ VPIRValue *vputils::tryToFoldLiveIns(VPSingleDefRecipe &R,
     case Instruction::ExtractElement:
       assert(!Ops[0]->getType()->isVectorTy() && "Live-ins should be scalar");
       return Ops[0];
+    case VPInstruction::ActiveLaneMask:
+    case VPInstruction::WideActiveLaneMask: {
+      uint64_t Multiplier = 1;
+      if (Opcode == VPInstruction::WideActiveLaneMask) {
+        Multiplier = cast<ConstantInt>(Ops[2])->getZExtValue();
+        Ops.pop_back();
+      }
+      Type *I1Ty = IntegerType::getInt1Ty(Plan.getContext());
+      ElementCount MaxVF =
+          max_element(Plan.vectorFactors(), ElementCount::isKnownLT)
+              ->multiplyCoefficientBy(Multiplier);
+
+      // We rely on the fact that there is one VPlan for fixed-vectors and
+      // another for scalable-vectors: we can only proceed with the scalable
+      // VPlan if a vscale_range function attribute was found.
+      if (MaxVF.isScalable() && !Plan.getMaxVScale())
+        return nullptr;
+      uint64_t MaxVFScaled = MaxVF.getKnownMinValue() *
+                             (MaxVF.isScalable() ? *Plan.getMaxVScale() : 1);
+      if (auto *C = dyn_cast_if_present<Constant>(
+              Folder.FoldIntrinsic(Intrinsic::get_active_lane_mask, Ops,
+                                   FixedVectorType::get(I1Ty, MaxVFScaled))))
----------------
fhahn wrote:

Thanks! Do we need a similar guard in `ConstantFoldFixedVectorCall` for a test case which already has the problematic `@llvm.get.active.lane.mask` form in the IR?

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/208852