-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15.6k
[LV] Add extra check for signed overflow for SDiv/SRem #170818
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
arcbbb
wants to merge
10
commits into
llvm:main
Choose a base branch
from
arcbbb:safe-dividend
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+1,015
−40
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
10 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
5f81156
[LV] Add extra check for signed oveflow for SDiv/SRem
arcbbb b3771fd
Address comments
arcbbb d80f3df
Use SCEV to detect LHS range
arcbbb 9b71a7f
Use isMinSignedValue to check
arcbbb 0e2403a
Add more tests
arcbbb 0f46a3b
Refine comments
arcbbb 292a510
Fix typos
arcbbb 52766e2
Replace SCEVAddRecExpr check with isInductionVariable
arcbbb 2de392d
Be conservative to predicate
arcbbb 06b81a5
Adopt the most conservative solution
arcbbb File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
390 changes: 381 additions & 9 deletions
390
llvm/test/Transforms/LoopVectorize/RISCV/tail-folding-div.ll
Large diffs are not rendered by default.
Oops, something went wrong.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Meta comment: I think your change might be trying to do too much. It looks like you're trying to handle some of the loop varying cases where the udiv case doesn't. My suggestion would be something like the following:
In particular, I think the poison comments may be a red herring as the udiv case doesn't ensure the invariant RHS is non-poison either.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
My understanding: we check the SCEV range only when no lanes can be poison.
If any poison is present, the range is considered full.
Based on this, udiv case needs to ensure the invariant RHS is non-poison, otherwise zero is possible.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Based on yesterday’s discussion, I’ve updated this to predicate conservatively.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Wouldn't the conservative to always predicate them?