-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.5k
[HLSL] Add "or" intrinsic #128979
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
[HLSL] Add "or" intrinsic #128979
Changes from 7 commits
08e1912
eae4c9f
aa69604
659f2fc
39ebc00
a770cbf
cc26694
d99e734
b72a197
584548f
6c93c16
69fb22e
c07e61e
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -2305,6 +2305,25 @@ bool SemaHLSL::CheckBuiltinFunctionCall(unsigned BuiltinID, CallExpr *TheCall) { | |
TheCall->setType(ArgTyA); | ||
break; | ||
} | ||
case Builtin::BI__builtin_hlsl_or: { | ||
if (SemaRef.checkArgCount(TheCall, 2)) | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. we are doing the same sema checks for the and intrinsic. Delete this whole block and merge the and an or builtins as fall through cases. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Code updated with suggested changes. |
||
return true; | ||
if (CheckVectorElementCallArgs(&SemaRef, TheCall)) | ||
return true; | ||
|
||
// Ensure input expr type is a scalar/vector and the same as the return type | ||
damyanp marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
if (CheckScalarOrVector(&SemaRef, TheCall, getASTContext().BoolTy, 0)) | ||
return true; | ||
|
||
// Ensure input parameter type is bool | ||
damyanp marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
ExprResult A = TheCall->getArg(0); | ||
QualType ArgTyA = A.get()->getType(); | ||
|
||
// return type is the same as the input type | ||
TheCall->setType(ArgTyA); | ||
|
||
break; | ||
} | ||
case Builtin::BI__builtin_hlsl_all: | ||
case Builtin::BI__builtin_hlsl_any: { | ||
if (SemaRef.checkArgCount(TheCall, 1)) | ||
|
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@ | ||
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -finclude-default-header -triple \ | ||
// RUN: dxil-pc-shadermodel6.3-library %s \ | ||
// RUN: -emit-llvm -O1 -o - | FileCheck %s | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I suppose you are doing O1 because you want to see short circuiting optimizations? I think this would better to check we are doing thing correctly without any optimizations. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Test cases updated without any optimization |
||
|
||
//CHECK-LABEL: define noundef i1 @_Z12test_or_boolbb( | ||
//CHECK-SAME: i1 noundef [[X:%.*]], i1 noundef [[Y:%.*]]) local_unnamed_addr #[[ATTR0:[0-9]+]] { | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: [[ENTRY:.*:]] | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: [[HLSL_OR:%.*]] = or i1 [[x]], [[y]] | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: ret i1 [[HLSL_OR]] | ||
//CHECK_NEXT: } | ||
bool test_or_bool(bool x, bool y) | ||
damyanp marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
{ | ||
return or(x, y); | ||
|
||
} | ||
|
||
//CHECK-LABEL: define noundef <2 x i1> @_Z13test_or_bool2Dv2_bS_( | ||
//CHECK-SAME: <2 x i1> noundef [[X:%.*]], <2 x i1> noundef [[Y:%.*]]) local_unnamed_addr #[[ATTR0]] { | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: [[ENTRY:.*:]] | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: [[HLSL_OR:%.*]] = or <2 xi1> [[x]], [[y]] | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: ret <2 x i1> [[HLSL_OR]] | ||
//CHECK_NEXT: } | ||
bool2 test_or_bool2(bool2 x, bool2 y) | ||
{ | ||
return or(x, y); | ||
} | ||
|
||
//CHECK-LABEL: define noundef <3 x i1> @_Z13test_or_bool3Dv3_bS_( | ||
//CHECK-SAME: <3 x i1> noundef [[X:%.*]], <3 x i1> noundef [[Y:%.*]]) local_unnamed_addr #[[ATTR0]] { | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: [[ENTRY:.*:]] | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: [[HLSL_OR:%.*]] = or <3 xi1> [[x]], [[y]] | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: ret <3 x i1> [[HLSL_OR]] | ||
//CHECK_NEXT: } | ||
bool3 test_or_bool3(bool3 x, bool3 y) | ||
{ | ||
return or(x, y); | ||
} | ||
|
||
//CHECK-LABEL: define noundef <4 x i1> @_Z13test_or_bool4Dv4_bS_( | ||
//CHECK-SAME: <4 x i1> noundef [[X:%.*]], <4 x i1> noundef [[Y:%.*]]) local_unnamed_addr #[[ATTR0]] { | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: [[ENTRY:.*:]] | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: [[HLSL_OR:%.*]] = or <4 xi1> [[x]], [[y]] | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: ret <4 x i1> [[HLSL_OR]] | ||
//CHECK_NEXT: } | ||
bool4 test_or_bool4(bool4 x, bool4 y) | ||
{ | ||
return or(x, y); | ||
} | ||
|
||
//CHECK-LABEL: define noundef i1 @_Z11test_or_intii( | ||
//CHECK-SAME: i32 noundef [[X:%.*]], i32 noundef [[Y:%.*]]) local_unnamed_addr #[[ATTR0]] { | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: [[ENTRY:.*:]] | ||
//CHECK_NEXT: [[0:%.*]] = or i32 [[y]], [[x]] | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: [[HLSL_OR:%.*]] = icmp ne i32 [[0]], 0 | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: ret i1 [[HLSL_OR]] | ||
//CHECK_NEXT: } | ||
bool test_or_int(int x, int y) | ||
{ | ||
return or(x, y); | ||
} | ||
|
||
//CHECK-LABEL: define noundef <4 x i1> @_Z12test_or_int4Dv4_iS_( | ||
//CHECK-SAME: <4 x i32> noundef [[X:%.*]], <4 x i32> noundef [[Y:%.*]]) local_unnamed_addr #[[ATTR0]] { | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: [[ENTRY:.*:]] | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Can this line have a stricter match? If not, does it make since to just delete it? |
||
//CHECK_NEXT: [[0:%.*]] = or <4 x i32> [[y]], [[x]] | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: [[HLSL_OR:%.*]] = icmp ne <4 x i32> [[0]], zeroinitializer | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: ret <4 x i1> [[HLSL_OR]] | ||
//CHECK_NEXT: } | ||
bool4 test_or_int4(int4 x, int4 y) | ||
{ | ||
return or(x, y); | ||
} | ||
|
||
//CHECK-LABEL: noundef <4 x i1> @_Z14test_or_float4Dv4_fS_( | ||
//CHECK-SAME: <4 x float> noundef nofpclass(nan inf) [[X:%.*]], <4 x float> noundef nofpclass(nan inf) [[Y:%.*]]) local_unnamed_addr #[[ATTR0]] { | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: [[ENTRY:.*:]] | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: [[TOBOOL:%.*]] = fcmp reassoc nnan ninf nsz arcp afn une <4 x float> [[X]], zeroinitializer | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: [[TOBOOL1:%.*]] = fcmp reassoc nnan ninf nsz arcp afn une <4 x float> [[Y]], zeroinitializer | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: [[HLSL_OR:%.*]] = or <4 x i1> [[TOBOOL]], [[TOBOOL1]] | ||
//CHECK-NEXT: ret <4 x i1> [[HLSL_OR]] | ||
//CHECK_NEXT: } | ||
bool4 test_or_float4(float4 x, float4 y) | ||
{ | ||
return or(x, y); | ||
} | ||
damyanp marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
This file was deleted.
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ | ||||||||
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -finclude-default-header -triple dxil-pc-shadermodel6.6-library %s -verify -DTEST_FUNC=__builtin_hlsl_or | ||||||||
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -finclude-default-header -triple dxil-pc-shadermodel6.6-library %s -verify -DTEST_FUNC=__builtin_hlsl_and | ||||||||
damyanp marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
V-FEXrt marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||||||||
bool test_too_few_arg(bool a) | ||||||||
{ | ||||||||
return TEST_FUNC(a); | ||||||||
// expected-error@-1 {{too few arguments to function call, expected 2, have 1}} | ||||||||
} | ||||||||
|
||||||||
bool test_too_many_arg(bool a) | ||||||||
{ | ||||||||
return TEST_FUNC(a, a, a); | ||||||||
// expected-error@-1 {{too many arguments to function call, expected 2, have 3}} | ||||||||
} | ||||||||
|
||||||||
bool2 test_mismatched_args(bool2 a, bool3 b) | ||||||||
{ | ||||||||
return TEST_FUNC(a, b); | ||||||||
// expected-error@-1 {{all arguments to}}{{.*}}{{must have the same type}} | ||||||||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This suggestion is almost certainly wrong way to type this out. Just trying to show the idea. Does the .* here capture
Suggested change
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. It should actually be |
||||||||
} | ||||||||
|
||||||||
bool test_incorrect_type(int a) | ||||||||
{ | ||||||||
return TEST_FUNC(a, a); | ||||||||
// expected-error@-1{{invalid operand of type 'int' where 'bool' or a vector of such type is required}} | ||||||||
} | ||||||||
damyanp marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.