[DebugInfo] Examine all uses of isDebugValue() for debug instructions.

Because we create a new kind of debug instruction, DBG_LABEL, we need to
check all passes which use isDebugValue() to check MachineInstr is debug
instruction or not. When expelling debug instructions, we should expel
both DBG_VALUE and DBG_LABEL. So, I create a new function,
isDebugInstr(), in MachineInstr to check whether the MachineInstr is
debug instruction or not.

This patch has no new test case. I have run regression test and there is
no difference in regression test.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45342

Patch by Hsiangkai Wang.

llvm-svn: 331844

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/llvm/lib/CodeGen/CriticalAntiDepBreaker.cpp b/llvm/lib/CodeGen/CriticalAntiDepBreaker.cpp
index 5a4e6d0aad9..608fc4ba89b 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/CodeGen/CriticalAntiDepBreaker.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/CodeGen/CriticalAntiDepBreaker.cpp
@@ -113,7 +113,7 @@ void CriticalAntiDepBreaker::Observe(MachineInstr &MI, unsigned Count,
   // FIXME: It may be possible to remove the isKill() restriction once PR18663
   // has been properly fixed. There can be value in processing kills as seen in
   // the AggressiveAntiDepBreaker class.
-  if (MI.isDebugValue() || MI.isKill())
+  if (MI.isDebugInstr() || MI.isKill())
     return;
   assert(Count < InsertPosIndex && "Instruction index out of expected range!");
 
@@ -534,7 +534,7 @@ BreakAntiDependencies(const std::vector<SUnit> &SUnits,
     // FIXME: It may be possible to remove the isKill() restriction once PR18663
     // has been properly fixed. There can be value in processing kills as seen
     // in the AggressiveAntiDepBreaker class.
-    if (MI.isDebugValue() || MI.isKill())
+    if (MI.isDebugInstr() || MI.isKill())
       continue;
 
     // Check if this instruction has a dependence on the critical path that