-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.3k
Improve IsKnownConstant #84002
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.
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
Closed
Closed
Improve IsKnownConstant #84002
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
b2d407f
Improve IsKnownConstant
EgorBo f4708cd
Update lower.cpp
EgorBo d4bb2b3
Update src/coreclr/jit/lower.cpp
EgorBo a8f20d9
Merge branch 'main' of github.com:dotnet/runtime into improve-isknown…
EgorBo e473e6d
less conservative VN impl
EgorBo File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is "not enough"...
Consider a case where VN assigns this
1(i. e. the operand is constant). Then CSE CSEs this as a def with some other unrelated uses of the value1. Then lowering comes along, and we get0instead of1.Essentially, each subsequent phase can only further "refine" the value of this intrinsic. The tricky part here is of course that by the time we get to lowering, VNs are no longer valid. So this needs a separate "lower IsKnownConstant" phase, that would use the still-valid VNs. Bit yucky.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree, but the current code is correct, isn't it? it justs conservatively assumes that input is not a constant so we end up in the non-constant path.
I agree that it'd be nice to have a separate phase for such transforms somewhere after assert prop with still valid VNs. Maybe I'll add one eventuallly (and move unrollings there e.g.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No - consider the CSE example. We cannot have this assigned
1in VN and then lower it to zero.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah, I see what you mean. I'll implement it in a separate phase if we find a real use case for it