After unrolling, there may be additional simplifications that can be
applied. One example is removing SCALAR-STEPS for the first part where
only the first lane is demanded.

This removes redundant adds of 0 from a large number of tests (~200),
many which I am still working on updating.

In preparation for removing redundant WideIV steps added in
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/119284.

PR: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123655

The unsized-pointee-crash.ll and zero-sized-pointee-crash.ll tests
have been removed, because these issues are not relevant for opaque
pointers.

IR is now always parsed in opaque pointer mode, unless
-opaque-pointers=0 is explicitly given. There is no automatic
detection of typed pointers anymore.

The -opaque-pointers=0 option is added to any remaining IR tests
that haven't been migrated yet.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D141912

Update a bunch of loop-vectorize regression tests to use the new PM
syntax (opt -passes=loop-vectorize) instead of the deprecated legacy
PM syntax (opt -loop-vectorize).

This reverts commit 14e3450fb57305aa9ff3e9e60687b458e43835c9.

The modified tests didn't have actual users of all inductions, making it
trivial to eliminate them. Add users to make sure the inductions are
actually used in the vectorized version.

This patch marks the induction increment of the main induction variable
of the vector loop as NUW when not folding the tail.

If the tail is not folded, we know that End - Start >= Step (either
statically or through the minimum iteration checks). We also know that both
Start % Step == 0 and End % Step == 0. We exit the vector loop if %IV +
%Step == %End. Hence we must exit the loop before %IV + %Step unsigned
overflows and we can mark the induction increment as NUW.

This should make SCEV return more precise bounds for the created vector
loops, used by later optimizations, like late unrolling.

At the moment quite a few tests still need to be updated, but before
doing so I'd like to get initial feedback to make sure I am not missing
anything.

Note that this could probably be further improved by using information
from the original IV.

Attempt of modeling of the assumption in Alive2:
https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/H_DL_g

Part of a set of fixes required for PR50412.

Reviewed By: mkazantsev

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103255

This was reverted because of a miscompilation. At closer inspection, the
problem was actually visible in a changed llvm regression test too. This
one-line follow up fix/recommit will splat the IV, which is what we are trying
to avoid if unnecessary in general, if tail-folding is requested even if all
users are scalar instructions after vectorisation. Because with tail-folding,
the splat IV will be used by the predicate of the masked loads/stores
instructions. The previous version omitted this, which caused the
miscompilation. The original commit message was:

If tail-folding of the scalar remainder loop is applied, the primary induction
variable is splat to a vector and used by the masked load/store vector
instructions, thus the IV does not remain scalar. Because we now mark
that the IV does not remain scalar for these cases, we don't emit the vector IV
if it is not used. Thus, the vectoriser produces less dead code.

Thanks to Ayal Zaks for the direction how to fix this.