-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.5k
[InstSimplify] Optimize maximumnum and minimumnum #139581
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
Open
LewisCrawford
wants to merge
6
commits into
llvm:main
Choose a base branch
from
LewisCrawford:instsimplify_maximumnum
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
5751b4a
[InstSimplify] Optimize maximumnum and minimumnum
LewisCrawford 4c19f04
Add more vector tests + cleanup
LewisCrawford bfded37
Add vector tests for all inf/max tests
LewisCrawford fc0ec57
Avoid optimization for maxnum(x, <sNaN, qNaN>)
LewisCrawford 88fe0b1
Update failing AMDGPU tests
LewisCrawford 995a1a3
Tidy up if/else chain
LewisCrawford 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
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
With this chain of nan-matchers, it might actually be easier to just do the elementwise handling - propgqtenan already has the elementwise code in it
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 think element-wise comparisons will end up taking this slightly out of the current scope of the patch, as it will introduce cases like: maxnum(<x, y>, <sNaN, qNaN>) -> <qNaN, y> , which will require insert/extract chains to be created, and might end up with cases where there are not clear perf wins from re-creating partially applied vectors where some elements are NaN vs just using maxnum on the original vector despite some elements being NaN. To avoid these partially applied cases, we'd need to check whether the whole vec is sNaN or qNaN (ignoring poison/undef elements), which is what the current patch does with the matchers already.
It might be worth considering these kind of element-wise folds in future (and for partial Inf, partial poison, partial FMAX vectors too in addition to NaNs maybe), but I think that would be better-suited to a separate patch.