us to compile oh-so-realistic stuff like this:

 vec_vperm(A, B, (vector unsigned char){14});

to:
        vspltb v0, v0, 14

instead of:

        vspltisb v0, 14
        vperm v0, v2, v1, v0

llvm-svn: 27452

        %tmp = cast <4 x uint> %tmp to <4 x int>                ; <<4 x int>> [#uses=1]
        %tmp = cast <4 x int> %tmp to <4 x float>               ; <<4 x float>> [#uses=1]

into:

        %tmp = cast <4 x uint> %tmp to <4 x float>              ; <<4 x float>> [#uses=1]

llvm-svn: 27355

        %tmp = cast <4 x uint>* %testData to <4 x int>*         ; <<4 x int>*> [#uses=1]
        %tmp = load <4 x int>* %tmp             ; <<4 x int>> [#uses=1]

to this:

        %tmp = load <4 x uint>* %testData               ; <<4 x uint>> [#uses=1]
        %tmp = cast <4 x uint> %tmp to <4 x int>                ; <<4 x int>> [#uses=1]

llvm-svn: 27353

elimination of one load from this:

int AreSecondAndThirdElementsBothNegative( vector float *in ) {
#define QNaN 0x7FC00000
const vector unsigned int testData = (vector unsigned int)( QNaN, 0, 0, QNaN );
vector float test = vec_ld( 0, (float*) &testData );
return ! vec_any_ge( test, *in );
}

Now generating:

_AreSecondAndThirdElementsBothNegative:
        mfspr r2, 256
        oris r4, r2, 49152
        mtspr 256, r4
        li r4, lo16(LCPI1_0)
        lis r5, ha16(LCPI1_0)
        addi r6, r1, -16
        lvx v0, r5, r4
        stvx v0, 0, r6
        lvx v1, 0, r3
        vcmpgefp. v0, v0, v1
        mfcr r3, 2
        rlwinm r3, r3, 27, 31, 31
        xori r3, r3, 1
        cntlzw r3, r3
        srwi r3, r3, 5
        mtspr 256, r2
        blr

llvm-svn: 27352

llvm-svn: 27330

Fold (B&A)^A == ~B & A

This implements InstCombine/xor.ll:test2[56]

llvm-svn: 27328

extract_element'd value, do so.

llvm-svn: 27323

llvm-svn: 27300

llvm-svn: 27261

llvm-svn: 27125

llvm-svn: 27052

llvm-svn: 27051

llvm-svn: 26992

llvm-svn: 26953

Transforms/CorrelatedExprs/switch.ll

Patch contributed by Eric Kidd!

llvm-svn: 26872

- Added more debugging info.
- Allow reuse of IV of negative stride. e.g. -4 stride == 2 * iv of -2 stride.

llvm-svn: 26841

for more IV reuses.

llvm-svn: 26837

of a smaller stride even if they have a common loop invariant expression part.

llvm-svn: 26828

stride. For a set of uses of the IV of a stride which is a multiple
of another stride, do not insert a new IV expression. Rather, reuse the
previous IV and rewrite the uses as uses of IV expression multiplied by
the factor.

e.g.
x = 0 ...; x ++
y = 0 ...; y += 4
then use of y can be rewritten as use of 4*x for x86.

llvm-svn: 26803

A*A*B + A*A*C   -->   A*(A*B+A*C)   -->   A*(A*(B+C))

This implements Reassociate/mul-factor3.ll

llvm-svn: 26757

llvm-svn: 26755

(x<<1)+(y<<1) -> (X+Y)<<1.  This implements
Transforms/Reassociate/shift-factor.ll

llvm-svn: 26753

transformation decisions.

llvm-svn: 26738

arrays out of range in a horrible way, but we shouldn't break it anyway.
Details in the comments.

llvm-svn: 26606

llvm-svn: 26580

the pointer is known to come from either a global variable, alloca or
malloc.  This allows us to compile this:

  P = malloc(28);
  memset(P, 0, 28);

into explicit stores on PPC instead of a memset call.

llvm-svn: 26577

Transforms/InstCombine/vec_narrow.ll.  This add support for narrowing
extract_element(insertelement) also.

llvm-svn: 26538

Testcase here: Transforms/Reassociate/mulfactor.ll

llvm-svn: 26524

This implements Transforms/InstCombine/add.ll:test31

llvm-svn: 26519

llvm-svn: 26484

pointed out: realize the AND can provide factors and look through Casts.

llvm-svn: 26469

Transforms/InstCombine/2006-02-28-Crash.ll

llvm-svn: 26427

llvm-svn: 26415

llvm-svn: 26413

llvm-svn: 26411

Make this code more powerful by using ComputeMaskedBits instead of looking
for an AND operand.  This lets us fold this:

int %test23(int %a) {
        %tmp.1 = and int %a, 1
        %tmp.2 = seteq int %tmp.1, 0
        %tmp.3 = cast bool %tmp.2 to int  ;; xor tmp1, 1
        ret int %tmp.3
}

into: xor (and a, 1), 1
llvm-svn: 26396

and  (A-B) == A  ->  B == 0

llvm-svn: 26394

InstCombine/or.ll:test23.

llvm-svn: 26385

in the code that does "select C, (X+Y), (X-Y) --> (X+(select C, Y, (-Y)))".
We now compile this loop:

LBB1_1: ; no_exit
        add r6, r2, r3
        subf r3, r2, r3
        cmpwi cr0, r2, 0
        addi r7, r5, 4
        lwz r2, 0(r5)
        addi r4, r4, 1
        blt cr0, LBB1_4 ; no_exit
LBB1_3: ; no_exit
        mr r3, r6
LBB1_4: ; no_exit
        cmpwi cr0, r4, 16
        mr r5, r7
        bne cr0, LBB1_1 ; no_exit

into this instead:

LBB1_1: ; no_exit
        srawi r6, r2, 31
        add r2, r2, r6
        xor r6, r2, r6
        addi r7, r5, 4
        lwz r2, 0(r5)
        addi r4, r4, 1
        add r3, r3, r6
        cmpwi cr0, r4, 16
        mr r5, r7
        bne cr0, LBB1_1 ; no_exit

llvm-svn: 26356

caused SPASS to fail building last night.

We can't trivially unswitch a loop if the exit block has phi nodes in it,
because we don't know which predecessor to use.

llvm-svn: 26320