Skip to content

[LegalizeTypes] Preserve disjoint flag when expanding OR. #147640

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jul 9, 2025
Merged

[LegalizeTypes] Preserve disjoint flag when expanding OR. #147640

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
70af45d
Pre-commit tests.
topperc Jul 9, 2025
7c17a53
[RISCV] Select disjoint_or+not as xnor.
topperc Jul 9, 2025
727e78c
fixup! Rename or_is_add to or_disjoint to better reflect new usage.
topperc Jul 9, 2025
98cfe7a
[LegalizeTypes] Preserve disjoint flag when expanding OR.
topperc Jul 9, 2025
e968b1c
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into pr/disjoint-xor-2
topperc Jul 9, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
9 changes: 7 additions & 2 deletions llvm/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/LegalizeIntegerTypes.cpp
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -4380,8 +4380,13 @@ void DAGTypeLegalizer::ExpandIntRes_Logical(SDNode *N,
SDValue LL, LH, RL, RH;
GetExpandedInteger(N->getOperand(0), LL, LH);
GetExpandedInteger(N->getOperand(1), RL, RH);
Lo = DAG.getNode(N->getOpcode(), dl, LL.getValueType(), LL, RL);
Hi = DAG.getNode(N->getOpcode(), dl, LL.getValueType(), LH, RH);

SDNodeFlags Flags;
if (N->getOpcode() == ISD::OR)
Flags.setDisjoint(N->getFlags().hasDisjoint());
Comment on lines +4384 to +4386
Copy link
Contributor

@arsenm arsenm Jul 9, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Isn't this the same as just directly using the original value of N->getFlags

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@topperc topperc Jul 9, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It is now, but it could be wrong if a new flag is added in the future that can't be preserved.


Lo = DAG.getNode(N->getOpcode(), dl, LL.getValueType(), LL, RL, Flags);
Hi = DAG.getNode(N->getOpcode(), dl, LL.getValueType(), LH, RH, Flags);
}

void DAGTypeLegalizer::ExpandIntRes_MUL(SDNode *N,
Expand Down
20 changes: 13 additions & 7 deletions llvm/test/CodeGen/RISCV/rv32zbb-zbkb.ll
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -128,13 +128,19 @@ define i32 @disjoint_or_xnor_i32(i32 %a, i32 %b) nounwind {
}

define i64 @disjoint_or_xnor_i64(i64 %a, i64 %b) nounwind {
; CHECK-LABEL: disjoint_or_xnor_i64:
; CHECK: # %bb.0:
; CHECK-NEXT: or a1, a1, a3
; CHECK-NEXT: or a0, a0, a2
; CHECK-NEXT: not a0, a0
; CHECK-NEXT: not a1, a1
; CHECK-NEXT: ret
; RV32I-LABEL: disjoint_or_xnor_i64:
; RV32I: # %bb.0:
; RV32I-NEXT: or a1, a1, a3
; RV32I-NEXT: or a0, a0, a2
; RV32I-NEXT: not a0, a0
; RV32I-NEXT: not a1, a1
; RV32I-NEXT: ret
;
; RV32ZBB-ZBKB-LABEL: disjoint_or_xnor_i64:
; RV32ZBB-ZBKB: # %bb.0:
; RV32ZBB-ZBKB-NEXT: xnor a0, a0, a2
; RV32ZBB-ZBKB-NEXT: xnor a1, a1, a3
; RV32ZBB-ZBKB-NEXT: ret
%or = or disjoint i64 %a, %b
%not = xor i64 %or, -1
ret i64 %not
Expand Down