Skip to content

[InstCombine] Detect uadd with overflow idiom #140178

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
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

AZero13
Copy link
Contributor

@AZero13 AZero13 commented May 16, 2025

Change processUMulZExtIdiom to also support adds, since the idiom is the same, except with add instead of mul.

Alive2: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/SsB4AK

@AZero13 AZero13 requested a review from nikic as a code owner May 16, 2025 02:52
@AZero13 AZero13 changed the title [Instcombine] Detect uadd with overflow idiom. [InstCombine] Detect uadd with overflow idiom. May 16, 2025
@llvmbot
Copy link
Member

llvmbot commented May 16, 2025

@llvm/pr-subscribers-llvm-transforms

Author: AZero13 (AZero13)

Changes

Change processUMulZExtIdiom to also support adds, since the idiom is the same, except with add instead of mul.

Alive2: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/SsB4AK


Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140178.diff

3 Files Affected:

  • (modified) llvm/lib/Transforms/InstCombine/InstCombineCompares.cpp (+69-61)
  • (modified) llvm/test/Transforms/InstCombine/saturating-add-sub.ll (+53)
  • (modified) llvm/test/Transforms/InstCombine/uadd-with-overflow.ll (+36)
diff --git a/llvm/lib/Transforms/InstCombine/InstCombineCompares.cpp b/llvm/lib/Transforms/InstCombine/InstCombineCompares.cpp
index 00b0f05f18f03..ef26e9272b523 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Transforms/InstCombine/InstCombineCompares.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/Transforms/InstCombine/InstCombineCompares.cpp
@@ -6515,72 +6515,75 @@ bool InstCombinerImpl::OptimizeOverflowCheck(Instruction::BinaryOps BinaryOp,
   llvm_unreachable("Unexpected overflow result");
 }
 
-/// Recognize and process idiom involving test for multiplication
+/// Recognize and process idiom involving test for unsigned
 /// overflow.
 ///
 /// The caller has matched a pattern of the form:
+///   I = cmp u (add(zext A, zext B), V
 ///   I = cmp u (mul(zext A, zext B), V
 /// The function checks if this is a test for overflow and if so replaces
-/// multiplication with call to 'mul.with.overflow' intrinsic.
+/// addition with call to the right intrinsic.
 ///
 /// \param I Compare instruction.
-/// \param MulVal Result of 'mult' instruction.  It is one of the arguments of
+/// \param Val Result of instruction.  It is one of the arguments of
 ///               the compare instruction.  Must be of integer type.
 /// \param OtherVal The other argument of compare instruction.
 /// \returns Instruction which must replace the compare instruction, NULL if no
 ///          replacement required.
-static Instruction *processUMulZExtIdiom(ICmpInst &I, Value *MulVal,
-                                         const APInt *OtherVal,
-                                         InstCombinerImpl &IC) {
+static Instruction *processUZExtIdiom(ICmpInst &I, Value *Val,
+                                      const APInt *OtherVal,
+                                      InstCombinerImpl &IC) {
   // Don't bother doing this transformation for pointers, don't do it for
   // vectors.
-  if (!isa<IntegerType>(MulVal->getType()))
+  if (!isa<IntegerType>(Val->getType()))
     return nullptr;
 
-  auto *MulInstr = dyn_cast<Instruction>(MulVal);
-  if (!MulInstr)
+  auto *Instr = dyn_cast<Instruction>(Val);
+  if (!Instr)
     return nullptr;
-  assert(MulInstr->getOpcode() == Instruction::Mul);
 
-  auto *LHS = cast<ZExtInst>(MulInstr->getOperand(0)),
-       *RHS = cast<ZExtInst>(MulInstr->getOperand(1));
+  unsigned Opcode = Instr->getOpcode();
+  assert(Opcode == Instruction::Add || Opcode == Instruction::Mul);
+
+  auto *LHS = cast<ZExtInst>(Instr->getOperand(0)),
+       *RHS = cast<ZExtInst>(Instr->getOperand(1));
   assert(LHS->getOpcode() == Instruction::ZExt);
   assert(RHS->getOpcode() == Instruction::ZExt);
   Value *A = LHS->getOperand(0), *B = RHS->getOperand(0);
 
-  // Calculate type and width of the result produced by mul.with.overflow.
+  // Calculate type and width of the result produced by add.with.overflow.
   Type *TyA = A->getType(), *TyB = B->getType();
   unsigned WidthA = TyA->getPrimitiveSizeInBits(),
            WidthB = TyB->getPrimitiveSizeInBits();
-  unsigned MulWidth;
-  Type *MulType;
+  unsigned ResultWidth;
+  Type *ResultType;
   if (WidthB > WidthA) {
-    MulWidth = WidthB;
-    MulType = TyB;
+    ResultWidth = WidthB;
+    ResultType = TyB;
   } else {
-    MulWidth = WidthA;
-    MulType = TyA;
+    ResultWidth = WidthA;
+    ResultType = TyA;
   }
 
-  // In order to replace the original mul with a narrower mul.with.overflow,
-  // all uses must ignore upper bits of the product.  The number of used low
-  // bits must be not greater than the width of mul.with.overflow.
-  if (MulVal->hasNUsesOrMore(2))
-    for (User *U : MulVal->users()) {
+  // In order to replace the original result with a .with.overflow intrinsic,
+  // all uses must ignore upper bits of the result.  The number of used low
+  // bits must be not greater than the width of .with.overflow.
+  if (Val->hasNUsesOrMore(2))
+    for (User *U : Val->users()) {
       if (U == &I)
         continue;
       if (TruncInst *TI = dyn_cast<TruncInst>(U)) {
-        // Check if truncation ignores bits above MulWidth.
+        // Check if truncation ignores bits above ResultWidth.
         unsigned TruncWidth = TI->getType()->getPrimitiveSizeInBits();
-        if (TruncWidth > MulWidth)
+        if (TruncWidth > ResultWidth)
           return nullptr;
       } else if (BinaryOperator *BO = dyn_cast<BinaryOperator>(U)) {
-        // Check if AND ignores bits above MulWidth.
+        // Check if AND ignores bits above ResultWidth.
         if (BO->getOpcode() != Instruction::And)
           return nullptr;
         if (ConstantInt *CI = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(BO->getOperand(1))) {
           const APInt &CVal = CI->getValue();
-          if (CVal.getBitWidth() - CVal.countl_zero() > MulWidth)
+          if (CVal.getBitWidth() - CVal.countl_zero() > ResultWidth)
             return nullptr;
         } else {
           // In this case we could have the operand of the binary operation
@@ -6598,9 +6601,9 @@ static Instruction *processUMulZExtIdiom(ICmpInst &I, Value *MulVal,
   switch (I.getPredicate()) {
   case ICmpInst::ICMP_UGT: {
     // Recognize pattern:
-    //   mulval = mul(zext A, zext B)
-    //   cmp ugt mulval, max
-    APInt MaxVal = APInt::getMaxValue(MulWidth);
+    //   val = add/mul(zext A, zext B)
+    //   cmp ugt val, max
+    APInt MaxVal = APInt::getMaxValue(ResultWidth);
     MaxVal = MaxVal.zext(OtherVal->getBitWidth());
     if (MaxVal.eq(*OtherVal))
       break; // Recognized
@@ -6609,9 +6612,9 @@ static Instruction *processUMulZExtIdiom(ICmpInst &I, Value *MulVal,
 
   case ICmpInst::ICMP_ULT: {
     // Recognize pattern:
-    //   mulval = mul(zext A, zext B)
-    //   cmp ule mulval, max + 1
-    APInt MaxVal = APInt::getOneBitSet(OtherVal->getBitWidth(), MulWidth);
+    //   val = add/mul(zext A, zext B)
+    //   cmp ule val, max + 1
+    APInt MaxVal = APInt::getOneBitSet(OtherVal->getBitWidth(), ResultWidth);
     if (MaxVal.eq(*OtherVal))
       break; // Recognized
     return nullptr;
@@ -6622,38 +6625,41 @@ static Instruction *processUMulZExtIdiom(ICmpInst &I, Value *MulVal,
   }
 
   InstCombiner::BuilderTy &Builder = IC.Builder;
-  Builder.SetInsertPoint(MulInstr);
-
-  // Replace: mul(zext A, zext B) --> mul.with.overflow(A, B)
-  Value *MulA = A, *MulB = B;
-  if (WidthA < MulWidth)
-    MulA = Builder.CreateZExt(A, MulType);
-  if (WidthB < MulWidth)
-    MulB = Builder.CreateZExt(B, MulType);
-  CallInst *Call =
-      Builder.CreateIntrinsic(Intrinsic::umul_with_overflow, MulType,
-                              {MulA, MulB}, /*FMFSource=*/nullptr, "umul");
-  IC.addToWorklist(MulInstr);
-
-  // If there are uses of mul result other than the comparison, we know that
+  Builder.SetInsertPoint(Instr);
+
+  // Replace: add/mul(zext A, zext B) --> add/mulwith.overflow(A, B)
+  Value *ResultA = A, *ResultB = B;
+  if (WidthA < ResultWidth)
+    ResultA = Builder.CreateZExt(A, ResultType);
+  if (WidthB < ResultWidth)
+    ResultB = Builder.CreateZExt(B, ResultType);
+  CallInst *Call = Builder.CreateIntrinsic(
+      Opcode == Instruction::Add ? Intrinsic::uadd_with_overflow
+                                 : Intrinsic::umul_with_overflow,
+      ResultType, {ResultA, ResultB}, /*FMFSource=*/nullptr,
+      Intrinsic::uadd_with_overflow ? "uadd" : "umul");
+  IC.addToWorklist(Instr);
+
+  // If there are uses of add result other than the comparison, we know that
   // they are truncation or binary AND. Change them to use result of
-  // mul.with.overflow and adjust properly mask/size.
-  if (MulVal->hasNUsesOrMore(2)) {
-    Value *Mul = Builder.CreateExtractValue(Call, 0, "umul.value");
-    for (User *U : make_early_inc_range(MulVal->users())) {
+  // add.with.overflow and adjust properly mask/size.
+  if (Val->hasNUsesOrMore(2)) {
+    Value *Extract = Builder.CreateExtractValue(
+        Call, 0, Instruction::Add ? "uadd.value" : "umul.value");
+    for (User *U : make_early_inc_range(Val->users())) {
       if (U == &I)
         continue;
       if (TruncInst *TI = dyn_cast<TruncInst>(U)) {
-        if (TI->getType()->getPrimitiveSizeInBits() == MulWidth)
-          IC.replaceInstUsesWith(*TI, Mul);
+        if (TI->getType()->getPrimitiveSizeInBits() == ResultWidth)
+          IC.replaceInstUsesWith(*TI, Extract);
         else
-          TI->setOperand(0, Mul);
+          TI->setOperand(0, Extract);
       } else if (BinaryOperator *BO = dyn_cast<BinaryOperator>(U)) {
         assert(BO->getOpcode() == Instruction::And);
-        // Replace (mul & mask) --> zext (mul.with.overflow & short_mask)
+        // Replace (Extract & mask) --> zext (with.overflow & short_mask)
         ConstantInt *CI = cast<ConstantInt>(BO->getOperand(1));
-        APInt ShortMask = CI->getValue().trunc(MulWidth);
-        Value *ShortAnd = Builder.CreateAnd(Mul, ShortMask);
+        APInt ShortMask = CI->getValue().trunc(ResultWidth);
+        Value *ShortAnd = Builder.CreateAnd(Extract, ShortMask);
         Value *Zext = Builder.CreateZExt(ShortAnd, BO->getType());
         IC.replaceInstUsesWith(*BO, Zext);
       } else {
@@ -7078,7 +7084,7 @@ Instruction *InstCombinerImpl::foldICmpUsingBoolRange(ICmpInst &I) {
         // icmp eq X, (zext (icmp ne X, 0)) --> X == 0 || X == 1
         // icmp ne X, (zext (icmp ne X, 0)) --> X != 0 && X != 1
         // icmp eq X, (sext (icmp ne X, 0)) --> X == 0 || X == -1
-        // icmp ne X, (sext (icmp ne X, 0)) --> X != 0 && X == -1
+        // icmp ne X, (sext (icmp ne X, 0)) --> X != 0 && X != -1
         return CreateRangeCheck();
       }
     } else if (IsSExt ? C->isAllOnes() : C->isOne()) {
@@ -7791,10 +7797,12 @@ Instruction *InstCombinerImpl::visitICmpInst(ICmpInst &I) {
       }
     }
 
+    // (zext X) + (zext Y)  --> llvm.uadd.with.overflow.
     // (zext X) * (zext Y)  --> llvm.umul.with.overflow.
-    if (match(Op0, m_NUWMul(m_ZExt(m_Value(X)), m_ZExt(m_Value(Y)))) &&
+    if ((match(Op0, m_NUWAdd(m_ZExt(m_Value(X)), m_ZExt(m_Value(Y)))) ||
+         match(Op0, m_NUWMul(m_ZExt(m_Value(X)), m_ZExt(m_Value(Y))))) &&
         match(Op1, m_APInt(C))) {
-      if (Instruction *R = processUMulZExtIdiom(I, Op0, C, *this))
+      if (Instruction *R = processUZExtIdiom(I, Op0, C, *this))
         return R;
     }
 
diff --git a/llvm/test/Transforms/InstCombine/saturating-add-sub.ll b/llvm/test/Transforms/InstCombine/saturating-add-sub.ll
index cfd679c0cc592..d19515c638c81 100644
--- a/llvm/test/Transforms/InstCombine/saturating-add-sub.ll
+++ b/llvm/test/Transforms/InstCombine/saturating-add-sub.ll
@@ -2350,4 +2350,57 @@ define i8 @fold_add_umax_to_usub_multiuse(i8 %a) {
   ret i8 %sel
 }
 
+define i32 @uadd_with_zext(i32 %x, i32 %y) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: @uadd_with_zext(
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[COND:%.*]] = call i32 @llvm.uadd.sat.i32(i32 [[X:%.*]], i32 [[Y:%.*]])
+; CHECK-NEXT:    ret i32 [[COND]]
+;
+  %conv = zext i32 %x to i64
+  %conv1 = zext i32 %y to i64
+  %add = add i64 %conv, %conv1
+  %cmp = icmp ugt i64 %add, 4294967295
+  %conv4 = trunc i64 %add to i32
+  %cond = select i1 %cmp, i32 -1, i32 %conv4
+  ret i32 %cond
+}
+
+define i32 @uadd_with_zext_multi_use(i32 %x, i32 %y) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: @uadd_with_zext_multi_use(
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[TRUNCADD:%.*]] = add i32 [[X:%.*]], [[Y:%.*]]
+; CHECK-NEXT:    call void @usei32(i32 [[TRUNCADD]])
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[COND:%.*]] = call i32 @llvm.uadd.sat.i32(i32 [[X]], i32 [[Y]])
+; CHECK-NEXT:    ret i32 [[COND]]
+;
+  %conv = zext i32 %x to i64
+  %conv1 = zext i32 %y to i64
+  %add = add i64 %conv, %conv1
+  %truncAdd = trunc i64 %add to i32
+  call void @usei32(i32 %truncAdd)
+  %cmp = icmp ugt i64 %add, 4294967295
+  %cond = select i1 %cmp, i32 -1, i32 %truncAdd
+  ret i32 %cond
+}
+
+define i32 @uadd_with_zext_neg_use(i32 %x, i32 %y) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: @uadd_with_zext_neg_use(
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[CONV:%.*]] = zext i32 [[X:%.*]] to i64
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[CONV1:%.*]] = zext i32 [[Y:%.*]] to i64
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[ADD:%.*]] = add nuw nsw i64 [[CONV]], [[CONV1]]
+; CHECK-NEXT:    call void @usei64(i64 [[ADD]])
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[COND1:%.*]] = call i64 @llvm.umin.i64(i64 [[ADD]], i64 4294967295)
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[COND:%.*]] = trunc nuw i64 [[COND1]] to i32
+; CHECK-NEXT:    ret i32 [[COND]]
+;
+  %conv = zext i32 %x to i64
+  %conv1 = zext i32 %y to i64
+  %add = add i64 %conv, %conv1
+  call void @usei64(i64 %add)
+  %cmp = icmp ugt i64 %add, 4294967295
+  %conv4 = trunc i64 %add to i32
+  %cond = select i1 %cmp, i32 -1, i32 %conv4
+  ret i32 %cond
+}
+
+declare void @usei64(i64)
+declare void @usei32(i32)
 declare void @usei8(i8)
diff --git a/llvm/test/Transforms/InstCombine/uadd-with-overflow.ll b/llvm/test/Transforms/InstCombine/uadd-with-overflow.ll
index eb021a0fd2c89..c8a8fdf3cfd9c 100644
--- a/llvm/test/Transforms/InstCombine/uadd-with-overflow.ll
+++ b/llvm/test/Transforms/InstCombine/uadd-with-overflow.ll
@@ -147,3 +147,39 @@ define { <2 x i32>, <2 x i1> } @fold_simple_splat_constant_with_or_fail(<2 x i32
   %b = tail call { <2 x i32>, <2 x i1> } @llvm.uadd.with.overflow.v2i32(<2 x i32> %a, <2 x i32> <i32 30, i32 30>)
   ret { <2 x i32>, <2 x i1> } %b
 }
+
+define i32 @uadd_with_zext(i32 %x, i32 %y) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: @uadd_with_zext(
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[UADD:%.*]] = call { i32, i1 } @llvm.uadd.with.overflow.i32(i32 [[X:%.*]], i32 [[Y:%.*]])
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[CMP:%.*]] = extractvalue { i32, i1 } [[UADD]], 1
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[COND:%.*]] = zext i1 [[CMP]] to i32
+; CHECK-NEXT:    ret i32 [[COND]]
+;
+  %conv = zext i32 %x to i64
+  %conv1 = zext i32 %y to i64
+  %add = add i64 %conv, %conv1
+  %cmp = icmp ugt i64 %add, 4294967295
+  %cond = zext i1 %cmp to i32
+  ret i32 %cond
+}
+
+define i32 @uadd_with_zext_neg_use(i32 %x, i32 %y) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: @uadd_with_zext_neg_use(
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[CONV:%.*]] = zext i32 [[X:%.*]] to i64
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[CONV1:%.*]] = zext i32 [[Y:%.*]] to i64
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[ADD:%.*]] = add nuw nsw i64 [[CONV]], [[CONV1]]
+; CHECK-NEXT:    call void @usei64(i64 [[ADD]])
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[CMP:%.*]] = icmp samesign ugt i64 [[ADD]], 4294967295
+; CHECK-NEXT:    [[COND:%.*]] = zext i1 [[CMP]] to i32
+; CHECK-NEXT:    ret i32 [[COND]]
+;
+  %conv = zext i32 %x to i64
+  %conv1 = zext i32 %y to i64
+  %add = add i64 %conv, %conv1
+  call void @usei64(i64 %add)
+  %cmp = icmp ugt i64 %add, 4294967295
+  %cond = zext i1 %cmp to i32
+  ret i32 %cond
+}
+
+declare void @usei64(i64)

@AZero13 AZero13 changed the title [InstCombine] Detect uadd with overflow idiom. [InstCombine] Detect uadd with overflow idiom May 16, 2025
Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 16, 2025

✅ With the latest revision this PR passed the C/C++ code formatter.

@AZero13 AZero13 force-pushed the vectors branch 4 times, most recently from 29aed2c to 4dfe2c9 Compare May 20, 2025 02:26
@AZero13
Copy link
Contributor Author

AZero13 commented May 22, 2025

@dtcxzyw Thoughts on this?

@topperc
Copy link
Collaborator

topperc commented May 22, 2025

Do you have any real word examples of this pattern? It's a bit of an unusual way to check for unsigned add overflow. The more common way is to check if the result is less than one of the inputs.

@AZero13
Copy link
Contributor Author

AZero13 commented May 22, 2025

Do you have any real word examples of this pattern? It's a bit of an unusual way to check for unsigned add overflow. The more common way is to check if the result is less than one of the inputs.

Well, yes.

Casting up to a higher value and checking is one way I was taught in programming class.

AND, not to mention, the work is already here, AND I saw this pattern in systemd's source code iirc.

@AZero13
Copy link
Contributor Author

AZero13 commented May 22, 2025

Do you have any real word examples of this pattern? It's a bit of an unusual way to check for unsigned add overflow. The more common way is to check if the result is less than one of the inputs.

Well, yes.

Casting up to a higher value and checking is one way I was taught in programming class.

AND, not to mention, the work is already here, AND I saw this pattern in systemd's source code iirc.

Also @dtcxzyw Can you run this in opt-benchmark?

@AZero13
Copy link
Contributor Author

AZero13 commented May 22, 2025

@topperc since you are here:

m_NUWAdd is not needed in theory, because this will always be nuw. alive2 works without the nuw tag.

Should I just change it to m_Add, or keep NUWAdd, because any condition that will be tranformed will ALWAYS be nuwadd, well, assuming the rest of the llvm code works properly.

@AZero13
Copy link
Contributor Author

AZero13 commented May 22, 2025

Note that uadd_with_zext_neg_use doesn't have nuw, but it works because it is always given nuw.

@topperc
Copy link
Collaborator

topperc commented May 22, 2025

Note that uadd_with_zext_neg_use doesn't have nuw, but it works because it is always given nuw.

@topperc since you are here:

m_NUWAdd is not needed in theory, because this will always be nuw. alive2 works without the nuw tag.

Should I just change it to m_Add, or keep NUWAdd, because any condition that will be tranformed will ALWAYS be nuwadd, well, assuming the rest of the llvm code works properly.

The NUW is definitely needed for multiplication because there is no check in the code that there are enough bits to hold the full product. The code that sets the nuw flag is responsible for that. For add, we only need one extra bit and a zext has to increase the size by at least 1 bit so the NUWAdd probably isn't explicitly needed, but it should always be there since the add will be visited by InstCombine before the icmp.

@AZero13
Copy link
Contributor Author

AZero13 commented May 22, 2025

Note that uadd_with_zext_neg_use doesn't have nuw, but it works because it is always given nuw.

@topperc since you are here:
m_NUWAdd is not needed in theory, because this will always be nuw. alive2 works without the nuw tag.
Should I just change it to m_Add, or keep NUWAdd, because any condition that will be tranformed will ALWAYS be nuwadd, well, assuming the rest of the llvm code works properly.

The NUW is definitely needed for multiplication because there is no check in the code that there are enough bits to hold the full product. The code that sets the nuw flag is responsible for that. For add, we only need one extra bit and a zext has to increase the size by at least 1 bit so the NUWAdd probably isn't explicitly needed, but it should always be there since the add will be visited by InstCombine before the icmp.

Alright. Thank you!

AZero13 added 2 commits May 22, 2025 13:53
Change processUMulZExtIdiom to also support adds, since the idiom is the same, except with add instead of mul.

Alive2: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/SsB4AK
@AZero13
Copy link
Contributor Author

AZero13 commented May 23, 2025

@topperc

It is in fact used.

@AZero13
Copy link
Contributor Author

AZero13 commented May 25, 2025

@RKSimon What do you think about this?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants