[PatternMatch] Add matchers for m_{I,F,}Cmp and m_{I,F,}SpecificCmp; NFC
#98282
+212
−1
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
@llvm/pr-subscribers-llvm-ir Author: None (goldsteinn) ChangesThese matchers either take no predicate argument or match a specific We have a lot of cases where the Pred argument is either unused and Likewise we have a lot of cases where we only pass in Pred to test Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/98282.diff 2 Files Affected:
diff --git a/llvm/include/llvm/IR/PatternMatch.h b/llvm/include/llvm/IR/PatternMatch.h
index d4e355431a27a..f9f473fb4276e 100644
--- a/llvm/include/llvm/IR/PatternMatch.h
+++ b/llvm/include/llvm/IR/PatternMatch.h
@@ -1548,25 +1548,38 @@ template <typename T> inline Exact_match<T> m_Exact(const T &SubPattern) {
//
template <typename LHS_t, typename RHS_t, typename Class, typename PredicateTy,
- bool Commutable = false>
+ bool Commutable = false, bool MatchExistingPred = false>
struct CmpClass_match {
- PredicateTy &Predicate;
+ static_assert(!Commutable || !MatchExistingPred,
+ "Can't match predicate when using commutable matcher");
+
+ // Make predicate ty const ref if we are matching. Not strictly necessary but
+ // will cause a compilation warning if we accidentally try to set it with
+ // MatchExistingPred enabled.
+ using InternalPredTy =
+ std::conditional_t<MatchExistingPred, const PredicateTy &, PredicateTy &>;
+ InternalPredTy Predicate;
LHS_t L;
RHS_t R;
// The evaluation order is always stable, regardless of Commutability.
// The LHS is always matched first.
- CmpClass_match(PredicateTy &Pred, const LHS_t &LHS, const RHS_t &RHS)
+ CmpClass_match(InternalPredTy Pred, const LHS_t &LHS, const RHS_t &RHS)
: Predicate(Pred), L(LHS), R(RHS) {}
template <typename OpTy> bool match(OpTy *V) {
if (auto *I = dyn_cast<Class>(V)) {
if (L.match(I->getOperand(0)) && R.match(I->getOperand(1))) {
- Predicate = I->getPredicate();
- return true;
+ if constexpr (MatchExistingPred)
+ return I->getPredicate() == Predicate;
+ else {
+ Predicate = I->getPredicate();
+ return true;
+ }
} else if (Commutable && L.match(I->getOperand(1)) &&
R.match(I->getOperand(0))) {
- Predicate = I->getSwappedPredicate();
+ if constexpr (!MatchExistingPred)
+ Predicate = I->getSwappedPredicate();
return true;
}
}
@@ -1592,6 +1605,50 @@ m_FCmp(FCmpInst::Predicate &Pred, const LHS &L, const RHS &R) {
return CmpClass_match<LHS, RHS, FCmpInst, FCmpInst::Predicate>(Pred, L, R);
}
+template <typename LHS, typename RHS>
+inline CmpClass_match<LHS, RHS, CmpInst, CmpInst::Predicate>
+m_Cmp(const LHS &L, const RHS &R) {
+ CmpInst::Predicate Unused;
+ return CmpClass_match<LHS, RHS, CmpInst, CmpInst::Predicate>(Unused, L, R);
+}
+
+template <typename LHS, typename RHS>
+inline CmpClass_match<LHS, RHS, ICmpInst, ICmpInst::Predicate>
+m_ICmp(const LHS &L, const RHS &R) {
+ ICmpInst::Predicate Unused;
+ return CmpClass_match<LHS, RHS, ICmpInst, ICmpInst::Predicate>(Unused, L, R);
+}
+
+template <typename LHS, typename RHS>
+inline CmpClass_match<LHS, RHS, FCmpInst, FCmpInst::Predicate>
+m_FCmp(const LHS &L, const RHS &R) {
+ FCmpInst::Predicate Unused;
+ return CmpClass_match<LHS, RHS, FCmpInst, FCmpInst::Predicate>(Unused, L, R);
+}
+
+template <typename LHS, typename RHS>
+inline CmpClass_match<LHS, RHS, CmpInst, CmpInst::Predicate, false, true>
+m_SpecificCmp(const CmpInst::Predicate &MatchPred, const LHS &L, const RHS &R) {
+ return CmpClass_match<LHS, RHS, CmpInst, CmpInst::Predicate, false, true>(
+ MatchPred, L, R);
+}
+
+template <typename LHS, typename RHS>
+inline CmpClass_match<LHS, RHS, ICmpInst, ICmpInst::Predicate, false, true>
+m_SpecificICmp(const ICmpInst::Predicate &MatchPred, const LHS &L,
+ const RHS &R) {
+ return CmpClass_match<LHS, RHS, ICmpInst, ICmpInst::Predicate, false, true>(
+ MatchPred, L, R);
+}
+
+template <typename LHS, typename RHS>
+inline CmpClass_match<LHS, RHS, FCmpInst, FCmpInst::Predicate, false, true>
+m_SpecificFCmp(const FCmpInst::Predicate &MatchPred, const LHS &L,
+ const RHS &R) {
+ return CmpClass_match<LHS, RHS, FCmpInst, FCmpInst::Predicate, false, true>(
+ MatchPred, L, R);
+}
+
//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
// Matchers for instructions with a given opcode and number of operands.
//
@@ -2617,6 +2674,14 @@ m_c_ICmp(ICmpInst::Predicate &Pred, const LHS &L, const RHS &R) {
R);
}
+template <typename LHS, typename RHS>
+inline CmpClass_match<LHS, RHS, ICmpInst, ICmpInst::Predicate, true>
+m_c_ICmp(const LHS &L, const RHS &R) {
+ ICmpInst::Predicate Unused;
+ return CmpClass_match<LHS, RHS, ICmpInst, ICmpInst::Predicate, true>(Unused,
+ L, R);
+}
+
/// Matches a specific opcode with LHS and RHS in either order.
template <typename LHS, typename RHS>
inline SpecificBinaryOp_match<LHS, RHS, true>
diff --git a/llvm/unittests/IR/PatternMatch.cpp b/llvm/unittests/IR/PatternMatch.cpp
index 9f91b4f3f9939..309fcc93996bc 100644
--- a/llvm/unittests/IR/PatternMatch.cpp
+++ b/llvm/unittests/IR/PatternMatch.cpp
@@ -2250,9 +2250,151 @@ TYPED_TEST(MutableConstTest, ICmp) {
ICmpInst::Predicate MatchPred;
EXPECT_TRUE(m_ICmp(MatchPred, m_Value(MatchL), m_Value(MatchR))
- .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
EXPECT_EQ(L, MatchL);
EXPECT_EQ(R, MatchR);
+
+ EXPECT_TRUE(m_Cmp(MatchPred, m_Value(MatchL), m_Value(MatchR))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_EQ(L, MatchL);
+ EXPECT_EQ(R, MatchR);
+
+ EXPECT_TRUE(m_ICmp(m_Specific(L), m_Specific(R))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+
+ EXPECT_TRUE(m_Cmp(m_Specific(L), m_Specific(R))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_ICmp(m_Specific(R), m_Specific(L))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_Cmp(m_Specific(R), m_Specific(L))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+
+ EXPECT_TRUE(m_c_ICmp(m_Specific(R), m_Specific(L))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_c_ICmp(m_Specific(R), m_Specific(R))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+
+ EXPECT_TRUE(m_SpecificICmp(Pred, m_Specific(L), m_Specific(R))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_TRUE(m_SpecificCmp(Pred, m_Specific(L), m_Specific(R))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_SpecificICmp(Pred, m_Specific(R), m_Specific(L))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_SpecificCmp(Pred, m_Specific(R), m_Specific(L))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+
+ MatchL = nullptr;
+ MatchR = nullptr;
+ EXPECT_TRUE(m_SpecificICmp(Pred, m_Value(MatchL), m_Value(MatchR))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_EQ(L, MatchL);
+ EXPECT_EQ(R, MatchR);
+ MatchL = nullptr;
+ MatchR = nullptr;
+ EXPECT_TRUE(m_SpecificCmp(Pred, m_Value(MatchL), m_Value(MatchR))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_EQ(L, MatchL);
+ EXPECT_EQ(R, MatchR);
+
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_SpecificICmp(Pred, m_Specific(R), m_Specific(L))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_SpecificCmp(Pred, m_Specific(R), m_Specific(L))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_SpecificICmp(ICmpInst::getInversePredicate(Pred),
+ m_Specific(L), m_Specific(R))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_SpecificCmp(ICmpInst::getInversePredicate(Pred), m_Specific(L),
+ m_Specific(R))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_SpecificICmp(ICmpInst::getInversePredicate(Pred),
+ m_Value(MatchL), m_Value(MatchR))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_SpecificCmp(ICmpInst::getInversePredicate(Pred),
+ m_Value(MatchL), m_Value(MatchR))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateICmp(Pred, L, R)));
+}
+
+TYPED_TEST(MutableConstTest, FCmp) {
+ auto &IRB = PatternMatchTest::IRB;
+
+ typedef std::tuple_element_t<0, TypeParam> ValueType;
+ typedef std::tuple_element_t<1, TypeParam> InstructionType;
+
+ Value *L = Constant::getNullValue(IRB.getFloatTy());
+ Value *R = ConstantFP::getInfinity(IRB.getFloatTy(), true);
+ FCmpInst::Predicate Pred = FCmpInst::FCMP_OGT;
+
+ ValueType MatchL;
+ ValueType MatchR;
+ FCmpInst::Predicate MatchPred;
+
+ EXPECT_TRUE(m_FCmp(MatchPred, m_Value(MatchL), m_Value(MatchR))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_EQ(L, MatchL);
+ EXPECT_EQ(R, MatchR);
+
+ EXPECT_TRUE(m_Cmp(MatchPred, m_Value(MatchL), m_Value(MatchR))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_EQ(L, MatchL);
+ EXPECT_EQ(R, MatchR);
+
+ EXPECT_TRUE(m_FCmp(m_Specific(L), m_Specific(R))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
+
+ EXPECT_TRUE(m_Cmp(m_Specific(L), m_Specific(R))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
+
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_FCmp(m_Specific(R), m_Specific(L))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_Cmp(m_Specific(R), m_Specific(L))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
+
+ EXPECT_TRUE(m_SpecificFCmp(Pred, m_Specific(L), m_Specific(R))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_TRUE(m_SpecificCmp(Pred, m_Specific(L), m_Specific(R))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
+
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_SpecificFCmp(Pred, m_Specific(R), m_Specific(L))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_SpecificCmp(Pred, m_Specific(R), m_Specific(L))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
+
+ MatchL = nullptr;
+ MatchR = nullptr;
+ EXPECT_TRUE(m_SpecificFCmp(Pred, m_Value(MatchL), m_Value(MatchR))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_EQ(L, MatchL);
+ EXPECT_EQ(R, MatchR);
+ MatchL = nullptr;
+ MatchR = nullptr;
+ EXPECT_TRUE(m_SpecificCmp(Pred, m_Value(MatchL), m_Value(MatchR))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_EQ(L, MatchL);
+ EXPECT_EQ(R, MatchR);
+
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_SpecificFCmp(Pred, m_Specific(R), m_Specific(L))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_SpecificCmp(Pred, m_Specific(R), m_Specific(L))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
+
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_SpecificFCmp(FCmpInst::getInversePredicate(Pred),
+ m_Specific(L), m_Specific(R))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_SpecificCmp(FCmpInst::getInversePredicate(Pred), m_Specific(L),
+ m_Specific(R))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
+
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_SpecificFCmp(FCmpInst::getInversePredicate(Pred),
+ m_Value(MatchL), m_Value(MatchR))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
+ EXPECT_FALSE(m_SpecificCmp(FCmpInst::getInversePredicate(Pred),
+ m_Value(MatchL), m_Value(MatchR))
+ .match((InstructionType)IRB.CreateFCmp(Pred, L, R)));
}
TEST_F(PatternMatchTest, ConstExpr) {
|
dtcxzyw
reviewed
Jul 10, 2024
nikic
requested changes
Jul 10, 2024
…p`; NFC These matchers either take no predicate argument or match a specific predicate respectively. We have a lot of cases where the Pred argument is either unused and requiring the argument reduces code clarity. Likewise we have a lot of cases where we only pass in Pred to test equality which the new `*Specific*` helpers can simplify.
goldsteinn
force-pushed
the
goldsteinn/patternmatch-cmp
branch
from
6d74dbe
to
8842117
Compare
nikic
approved these changes
Jul 10, 2024
|
Use after scope in the new test https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/169/builds/930 |
|
Hm yeah, the way the "unused predicate" case is implemented doesn't work ... the actual match will happen later, and at that point the dummy variable is out of scope. I guess we'd need a separate matcher class for that. |
|
@goldsteinn @nikic I temporarily disabled the test-case, please take a look. |
aaryanshukla
pushed a commit
to aaryanshukla/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 14, 2024
…p`; NFC These matchers either take no predicate argument or match a specific predicate respectively. We have a lot of cases where the Pred argument is either unused and requiring the argument reduces code clarity. Likewise we have a lot of cases where we only pass in Pred to test equality which the new `*Specific*` helpers can simplify. Closes llvm#98282
aaryanshukla
pushed a commit
to aaryanshukla/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 14, 2024
Introduced with llvm#98282
aaryanshukla
pushed a commit
to aaryanshukla/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 14, 2024
Introduced with llvm#98282
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
These matchers either take no predicate argument or match a specific
predicate respectively.
We have a lot of cases where the Pred argument is either unused and
requiring the argument reduces code clarity.
Likewise we have a lot of cases where we only pass in Pred to test
equality which the new
*Specific*helpers can simplify.