[X86] Don't lie about legality to TLI's demanded bits.

Like r309323, X86 had a typo where it passed the wrong flags to TLO.

Found by inspection; I haven't been able to tickle this into having
observable behavior.  I don't think it does, given that X86 doesn't have
custom demanded bits logic, and the generic logic doesn't have a lot of
exposure to illegal constructs.

llvm-svn: 309325

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp b/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp
index ba6a924e531..bcf7874a406 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp
@@ -30573,8 +30573,8 @@ static SDValue combineSelect(SDNode *N, SelectionDAG &DAG,
     assert(BitWidth >= 8 && BitWidth <= 64 && "Invalid mask size");
     APInt DemandedMask(APInt::getSignMask(BitWidth));
     KnownBits Known;
-    TargetLowering::TargetLoweringOpt TLO(DAG, DCI.isBeforeLegalize(),
-                                          DCI.isBeforeLegalizeOps());
+    TargetLowering::TargetLoweringOpt TLO(DAG, !DCI.isBeforeLegalize(),
+                                          !DCI.isBeforeLegalizeOps());
     if (TLI.ShrinkDemandedConstant(Cond, DemandedMask, TLO) ||
         TLI.SimplifyDemandedBits(Cond, DemandedMask, Known, TLO)) {
       // If we changed the computation somewhere in the DAG, this change will