1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
|
; RUN: llc -mtriple=amdgcn--amdpal -mcpu=gfx900 -verify-machineinstrs <%s | FileCheck -check-prefixes=GCN %s
;
; This test checks that we have the correct fold for zext(cc1) - zext(cc2).
;
; GCN-LABEL: sub_zext_zext:
; GCN: ds_read_b32 [[VAL:v[0-9]+]],
; GCN: v_cmp_lt_f32{{.*}} vcc, 0, [[VAL]]
; GCN: v_cndmask_{{.*}} [[ZEXTCC1:v[0-9]+]], 0, 1, vcc
; GCN: v_cmp_gt_f32{{.*}} vcc, 0, [[VAL]]
; GCN: v_subbrev{{.*}} {{v[0-9]+}}, vcc, 0, [[ZEXTCC1]], vcc
;
; Before the reversion that this test is attached to, the compiler commuted
; the operands to the sub and used different logic to select the addc/subc
; instruction:
; sub zext (setcc), x => addcarry 0, x, setcc
; sub sext (setcc), x => subcarry 0, x, setcc
;
; ... but that is bogus. I believe it is not possible to fold those commuted
; patterns into any form of addcarry or subcarry.
define amdgpu_cs float @sub_zext_zext() {
.entry:
%t519 = load float, float addrspace(3)* null
%t524 = fcmp ogt float %t519, 0.000000e+00
%t525 = fcmp olt float %t519, 0.000000e+00
%t526 = zext i1 %t524 to i32
%t527 = zext i1 %t525 to i32
%t528 = sub nsw i32 %t526, %t527
%t529 = sitofp i32 %t528 to float
ret float %t529
}
|
