================
@@ -2602,6 +2605,100 @@ SDValue DAGCombiner::foldSubToAvg(SDNode *N, const
SDLoc &DL) {
return SDValue();
}
+/// Try to fold a pointer arithmetic node.
+/// This needs to be done separately from normal addition, because pointer
+/// addition is not commutative.
+/// This function was adapted from DAGCombiner::visitPTRADD() from the Morello
+/// project, which is based on CHERI.
+SDValue DAGCombiner::visitPTRADD(SDNode *N) {
+ SDValue N0 = N->getOperand(0);
+ SDValue N1 = N->getOperand(1);
+ EVT PtrVT = N0.getValueType();
+ EVT IntVT = N1.getValueType();
+ SDLoc DL(N);
+
+ // fold (ptradd undef, y) -> undef
+ if (N0.isUndef())
+ return N0;
+
+ // fold (ptradd x, undef) -> undef
+ if (N1.isUndef())
+ return DAG.getUNDEF(PtrVT);
+
+ // fold (ptradd x, 0) -> x
+ if (isNullConstant(N1))
+ return N0;
+
+ if (N0.getOpcode() == ISD::PTRADD &&
+ !reassociationCanBreakAddressingModePattern(ISD::PTRADD, DL, N, N0, N1))
{
+ SDValue X = N0.getOperand(0);
+ SDValue Y = N0.getOperand(1);
+ SDValue Z = N1;
+ bool N0OneUse = N0.hasOneUse();
+ bool YIsConstant = DAG.isConstantIntBuildVectorOrConstantInt(Y);
+ bool ZIsConstant = DAG.isConstantIntBuildVectorOrConstantInt(Z);
+ bool ZOneUse = Z.hasOneUse();
+
+ // (ptradd (ptradd x, y), z) -> (ptradd x, (add y, z)) if:
+ // * x is a null pointer; or
+ // * y is a constant and z has one use; or
+ // * y is a constant and (ptradd x, y) has one use; or
+ // * (ptradd x, y) and z have one use and z is not a constant.
+ if (isNullConstant(X) || (YIsConstant && ZOneUse) ||
+ (YIsConstant && N0OneUse) || (N0OneUse && ZOneUse && !ZIsConstant)) {
+ SDValue Add = DAG.getNode(ISD::ADD, DL, IntVT, {Y, Z});
+
+ // Calling visit() can replace the Add node with ISD::DELETED_NODE if
+ // there aren't any users, so keep a handle around whilst we visit it.
+ HandleSDNode ADDHandle(Add);
+
+ SDValue VisitedAdd = visit(Add.getNode());
+ if (VisitedAdd) {
+ // If visit() returns the same node, it means the SDNode was RAUW'd,
and
+ // therefore we have to load the new value to perform the checks
whether
+ // the reassociation fold is profitable.
+ if (VisitedAdd.getNode() == Add.getNode())
+ Add = ADDHandle.getValue();
+ else
+ Add = VisitedAdd;
+ }
----------------
arichardson wrote:
That's a good question - I believe that code might be my fault. It just seemed
like the easiest way to avoid the assertion we were seeing before.
I *believe* adding the Add to the worklist should result in the same end result
with less code complexity.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105669
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
