Skip to content
Commit 29fe3fe6 authored by Xavier Denis's avatar Xavier Denis Committed by Nikita Popov
Browse files

[InstSimplify] Peephole optimization for icmp (urem X, Y), X

This revision adds the following peephole optimization
and it's negation:

    %a = urem i64 %x, %y
    %b = icmp ule i64 %a, %x
    ====>
    %b = true

With John Regehr's help this optimization was checked with Alive2
which suggests it should be valid.

This pattern occurs in the bound checks of Rust code, the program

    const N: usize = 3;
    const T = u8;

    pub fn split_mutiple(slice: &[T]) -> (&[T], &[T]) {
        let len = slice.len() / N;
        slice.split_at(len * N)
    }

the method call slice.split_at will check that len * N is within
the bounds of slice, this bounds check is after some transformations
turned into the urem seen above and then LLVM fails to optimize it
any further. Adding this optimization would cause this bounds check
to be fully optimized away.

ref: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/74938

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85092
parent b778b04b
Loading
Loading
Loading
Loading
0% Loading or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment