Index: lib/Transforms/Utils/SimplifyCFG.cpp =================================================================== --- lib/Transforms/Utils/SimplifyCFG.cpp +++ lib/Transforms/Utils/SimplifyCFG.cpp @@ -2334,6 +2334,35 @@ return false; } +/// Return true if B is known to be implied by A +static bool implies(Value *A, Value *B) { + // TODO: Consider extending this to vector of i1? + assert(A->getType()->isIntegerTy(1) && B->getType()->isIntegerTy(1)); + + // A ==> A by definition + if (A == B) return true; + + // i +_{nsw} C_{>0} i (A); + auto *ICmpB = dyn_cast(B); + if (!ICmpA || !ICmpB || + ICmpA->getPredicate() != ICmpInst::ICMP_SLT || + ICmpB->getPredicate() != ICmpInst::ICMP_SLT || + ICmpA->getOperand(1) != ICmpB->getOperand(1)) + return false; + + auto *BO = dyn_cast(ICmpA->getOperand(0)); + if (!BO || !BO->hasNoSignedWrap() || + BO->getOperand(0) != ICmpB->getOperand(0)) + return false; + + ConstantInt *C = dyn_cast(BO->getOperand(1)); + if (!C || C->isNegative()) + return false; + + return true; +} + /// If we have a conditional branch as a predecessor of another block, /// this function tries to simplify it. We know /// that PBI and BI are both conditional branches, and BI is in one of the @@ -2388,6 +2417,19 @@ } } + // If BI is reached from the true path of PBI and PBI's condition implies + // BI's condition, we know the direction of the BI branch. + if (PBI->getSuccessor(0) == BI->getParent() && + implies(PBI->getCondition(), BI->getCondition()) && + PBI->getSuccessor(0) != PBI->getSuccessor(1) && + BB->getSinglePredecessor()) { + // Turn this into a branch on constant. + auto *OldCond = BI->getCondition(); + BI->setCondition(ConstantInt::getTrue(Type::getInt1Ty(BB->getContext()))); + RecursivelyDeleteTriviallyDeadInstructions(OldCond); + return true; // Nuke the branch on constant. + } + // If this is a conditional branch in an empty block, and if any // predecessors are a conditional branch to one of our destinations, // fold the conditions into logical ops and one cond br. Index: test/Transforms/SimplifyCFG/implied-cond.ll =================================================================== --- test/Transforms/SimplifyCFG/implied-cond.ll +++ test/Transforms/SimplifyCFG/implied-cond.ll @@ -0,0 +1,81 @@ +; RUN: opt %s -S -simplifycfg | FileCheck %s +; Check for when one branch implies the value of a successors conditional and +; it's not simply the same conditional repeated. + +define void @test(i32 %length.i, i32 %i) { +; CHECK-LABEL: @test + %iplus1 = add nsw i32 %i, 1 + %var29 = icmp slt i32 %iplus1, %length.i +; CHECK: br i1 %var29, label %in_bounds, label %out_of_bounds + br i1 %var29, label %next, label %out_of_bounds + +next: +; CHECK-LABEL: in_bounds: +; CHECK-NEXT: ret void + %var30 = icmp slt i32 %i, %length.i + br i1 %var30, label %in_bounds, label %out_of_bounds2 + +in_bounds: + ret void + +out_of_bounds: + call void @foo(i64 0) + unreachable + +out_of_bounds2: + call void @foo(i64 1) + unreachable +} + +; If the add is not nsw, it's not safe to use the fact about i+1 to imply the +; i condition since it could have overflowed. +define void @test_neg(i32 %length.i, i32 %i) { +; CHECK-LABEL: @test_neg + %iplus1 = add i32 %i, 1 + %var29 = icmp slt i32 %iplus1, %length.i +; CHECK: br i1 %var29, label %next, label %out_of_bounds + br i1 %var29, label %next, label %out_of_bounds + +next: + %var30 = icmp slt i32 %i, %length.i +; CHECK: br i1 %var30, label %in_bounds, label %out_of_bounds2 + br i1 %var30, label %in_bounds, label %out_of_bounds2 + +in_bounds: + ret void + +out_of_bounds: + call void @foo(i64 0) + unreachable + +out_of_bounds2: + call void @foo(i64 1) + unreachable +} + + +define void @test2(i32 %length.i, i32 %i) { +; CHECK-LABEL: @test2 + %iplus100 = add nsw i32 %i, 100 + %var29 = icmp slt i32 %iplus100, %length.i +; CHECK: br i1 %var29, label %in_bounds, label %out_of_bounds + br i1 %var29, label %next, label %out_of_bounds + +next: + %var30 = icmp slt i32 %i, %length.i + br i1 %var30, label %in_bounds, label %out_of_bounds2 + +in_bounds: + ret void + +out_of_bounds: + call void @foo(i64 0) + unreachable + +out_of_bounds2: + call void @foo(i64 1) + unreachable +} + +declare void @foo(i64) +