| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
... | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Take-2 after fixing bugs in the original patch.
Differential Revsion: http://reviews.llvm.org/D36864
llvm-svn: 311727
|
|
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 311341
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Differential Revsion: http://reviews.llvm.org/D36864
llvm-svn: 311208
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
JumpThreading claims to preserve LVI, but it doesn't preserve
the analyses which LVI holds a reference to (e.g. the Dominator).
In the current pass manager infrastructure, after JT runs, the
PM frees these analyses (including DominatorTree) but preserves
LVI.
CorrelatedValuePropagation runs immediately after and queries
a corrupted domtree, causing weird miscompiles.
This commit disables the preservation of LVI for the time being.
Eventually, we should either move LVI to a proper dependency
tracking mechanism (i.e. an analyses shouldn't hold references
to other analyses and compute them on demand if needed), or
we should teach all the passes preserving LVI to preserve the
analyses LVI depends on.
The new pass manager has a mechanism to invalidate LVI in case
one of the analyses it depends on becomes invalid, so this problem
shouldn't exist (at least not in this immediate form), but handling
of analyses holding references is still a very delicate subject.
Fixes PR33917 (and rustc).
llvm-svn: 309355
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
can destroy canonical loop structure.
Summary:
When simplifying unconditional branches from empty blocks, we pre-test if the
BB belongs to a set of loop headers and keep the block to prevent passes from
destroying canonical loop structure. However, the current algorithm fails if
the destination of the branch is a loop header. Especially when such a loop's
latch block is folded into loop header it results in additional backedges and
LoopSimplify turns it into a nested loop which prevent later optimizations
from being applied (e.g., loop unrolling and loop interleaving).
This patch augments the existing algorithm by further checking if the
destination of the branch belongs to a set of loop headers and defer
eliminating it if yes to LateSimplifyCFG.
Fixes PR33605: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33605
Reviewers: efriedma, mcrosier, pacxx, hsung, davidxl
Reviewed By: efriedma
Subscribers: ashutosh.nema, gberry, javed.absar, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35411
llvm-svn: 308422
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Add the following pattern to TryToUnfoldSelectInCurrBB()
bb:
%p = phi [0, %bb1], [1, %bb2], [0, %bb3], [1, %bb4], ...
%c = cmp %p, 0
%s = select %c, trueval, falseval
The Select in the above pattern will be unfolded and then jump-threaded. The
current implementation does not allow CMP in the middle of PHI and Select.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34762
llvm-svn: 308050
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Looks like I forgot to 'git add' when I submitted the commit. Thanks to Chandler for noticing.
llvm-svn: 306416
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This patch builds over https://reviews.llvm.org/rL303349 and replaces
the use of the condition only if it is safe to do so.
We should not blindly RAUW the condition if experimental.guard or assume
is a use of that
condition. This is because LVI may have used the guard/assume to
identify the
value of the condition, and RUAWing will fold the guard/assume and uses
before the guards/assumes.
Reviewers: sanjoy, reames, trentxintong, mkazantsev
Reviewed by: sanjoy, reames
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33257
llvm-svn: 303633
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
We have a bug when RAUWing the condition if experimental.guard or assumes is a use of that
condition. This is because LazyValueInfo may have used the guards/assumes to identify the
value of the condition at the end of the block. RAUW replaces the uses
at the guard/assume as well as uses before the guard/assume. Both of
these are incorrect.
For now, disable RAUW for conditions and fix the logic as a next
step: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33257
Reviewers: sanjoy, reames, trentxintong
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33279
llvm-svn: 303349
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We may not be able to rewrite indirect branch target, but we also want to take it into
account when folding, i.e. if it and all its successor's predecessors go to the same
destination, we can fold, i.e. no need to thread.
llvm-svn: 301816
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary: [JumpThread] Do RAUW in case Cond folds to a constant in the CFG
Reviewers: sanjoy
Reviewed By: sanjoy
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32407
llvm-svn: 301804
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
BB's successor.
Summary:
In case all predecessor go to a single successor of current BB. We want to fold (not thread).
I failed to update the phi nodes properly in the last patch https://reviews.llvm.org/rL300657.
Phi nodes values are per predecessor in LLVM.
Reviewers: sanjoy
Reviewed By: sanjoy
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32400
llvm-svn: 301139
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-with-lto-ubuntu/builds/2476/steps/build-stage2-LLVMgold.so/logs/stdio
http://bb.pgr.jp/builders/clang-3stage-x86_64-linux/builds/15036/steps/build_llvmclang/logs/stdio
I've updated the commit thread, reverting to get the bots back to green.
Original commit summary:
[JumpThread] We want to fold (not thread) when all predecessor go to single BB's successor.
llvm-svn: 300662
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
BB's successor. .
Summary: In case all predecessor go to a single successor of current BB. We want to fold (not thread).
Reviewers: efriedma, sanjoy
Reviewed By: sanjoy
Subscribers: dberlin, majnemer, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30869
llvm-svn: 300657
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
In case we are loading on a phi-load in SimplifyPartiallyRedundantLoad.
Try to phi translate it into incoming values in the predecessors before
we search for available loads.
This needs https://reviews.llvm.org/D30524
Reviewers: davide, sanjoy, efriedma, dberlin, rengolin
Reviewed By: dberlin
Subscribers: junbuml, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30543
llvm-svn: 298217
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary: Use AA when scanning to find an available load value.
Reviewers: rengolin, mcrosier, hfinkel, trentxintong, dberlin
Reviewed By: rengolin, dberlin
Subscribers: aemerson, dberlin, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30352
llvm-svn: 297284
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
JumpThreading for guards feature has been reverted at https://reviews.llvm.org/rL295200
due to the following problem: the feature used the following algorithm for detection of
diamond patters:
1. Find a block with 2 predecessors;
2. Check that these blocks have a common single parent;
3. Check that the parent's terminator is a branch instruction.
The problem is that these checks are insufficient. They may pass for a non-diamond
construction in case if those two predecessors are actually the same block. This may
happen if parent's terminator is a br (either conditional or unconditional) to a block
that ends with "switch" instruction with exactly two branches going to one block.
This patch re-enables the JumpThreading for guards and fixes this issue by adding the
check that those found predecessors are actually different blocks. This guarantees that
parent's terminator is a conditional branch with exactly 2 different successors, which
is now ensured by assertions. It also adds two more tests for this situation (with parent's
terminator being a conditional and an unconditional branch).
Patch by Max Kazantsev!
Reviewers: anna, sanjoy, reames
Reviewed By: sanjoy
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30036
llvm-svn: 295410
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This reverts commit r294617.
We fail on an assert while trying to get a condition from an
unconditional branch.
llvm-svn: 295200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
This patch allows JumpThreading also thread through guards.
Virtually, guard(cond) is equivalent to the following construction:
if (cond) { do something } else {deoptimize}
Yet it is not explicitly converted into IFs before lowering.
This patch enables early threading through guards in simple cases.
Currently it covers the following situation:
if (cond1) {
// code A
} else {
// code B
}
// code C
guard(cond2)
// code D
If there is implication cond1 => cond2 or !cond1 => cond2, we can transform
this construction into the following:
if (cond1) {
// code A
// code C
} else {
// code B
// code C
guard(cond2)
}
// code D
Thus, removing the guard from one of execution branches.
Patch by Max Kazantsev!
Reviewers: reames, apilipenko, igor-laevsky, anna, sanjoy
Reviewed By: sanjoy
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29620
llvm-svn: 294617
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
single predecessor
Summary: While scanning predecessors to find an available loaded value, if the predecessor has a single predecessor, we can continue scanning through the single predecessor.
Reviewers: mcrosier, rengolin, reames, davidxl, haicheng
Reviewed By: rengolin
Subscribers: zzheng, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29200
llvm-svn: 293896
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
invalidation of deleted functions in GlobalDCE.
This was always testing a bug really triggered in GlobalDCE. Right now
we have analyses with asserting value handles into IR. As long as those
remain, when *deleting* an IR unit, we cannot wait for the normal
invalidation scheme to kick in even though it was designed to work
correctly in the face of these kinds of deletions. Instead, the pass
needs to directly handle invalidating the analysis results pointing at
that IR unit.
I've tought the Inliner about this and this patch teaches GlobalDCE.
This will handle the asserting VH case in the existing test as well as
other issues of the same fundamental variety. I've moved the test into
the GlobalDCE directory and added a comment explaining what is going on.
Note that we cannot simply require LVI here because LVI is too lazy.
llvm-svn: 292773
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This creates non-linear behavior in the inliner (see more details in
r289755's commit thread).
llvm-svn: 290086
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
There was an efficiency problem with how we processed @llvm.assume in
ValueTracking (and other places). The AssumptionCache tracked all of the
assumptions in a given function. In order to find assumptions relevant to
computing known bits, etc. we searched every assumption in the function. For
ValueTracking, that means that we did O(#assumes * #values) work in InstCombine
and other passes (with a constant factor that can be quite large because we'd
repeat this search at every level of recursion of the analysis).
Several of us discussed this situation at the last developers' meeting, and
this implements the discussed solution: Make the values that an assume might
affect operands of the assume itself. To avoid exposing this detail to
frontends and passes that need not worry about it, I've used the new
operand-bundle feature to add these extra call "operands" in a way that does
not affect the intrinsic's signature. I think this solution is relatively
clean. InstCombine adds these extra operands based on what ValueTracking, LVI,
etc. will need and then those passes need only search the users of the values
under consideration. This should fix the computational-complexity problem.
At this point, no passes depend on the AssumptionCache, and so I'll remove
that as a follow-up change.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27259
llvm-svn: 289755
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
This change adds some verification in the IR verifier around struct path
TBAA metadata.
Other than some basic sanity checks (e.g. we get constant integers where
we expect constant integers), this checks:
- That by the time an struct access tuple `(base-type, offset)` is
"reduced" to a scalar base type, the offset is `0`. For instance, in
C++ you can't start from, say `("struct-a", 16)`, and end up with
`("int", 4)` -- by the time the base type is `"int"`, the offset
better be zero. In particular, a variant of this invariant is needed
for `llvm::getMostGenericTBAA` to be correct.
- That there are no cycles in a struct path.
- That struct type nodes have their offsets listed in an ascending
order.
- That when generating the struct access path, you eventually reach the
access type listed in the tbaa tag node.
Reviewers: dexonsmith, chandlerc, reames, mehdi_amini, manmanren
Subscribers: mcrosier, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26438
llvm-svn: 289402
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This reverts commit ac54d0066c478a09c7cd28d15d0f9ff8af984afc.
llvm-svn: 286976
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
These are good candidates for jump threading. This enables later opts
(such as InstCombine) to combine instructions from the selects with
instructions out of the selects. SimplifyCFG will fold the select
again if unfolding wasn't worth it.
Patch by James Molloy and Pablo Barrio.
Reviewers: rengolin, haicheng, sebpop
Subscribers: jojo, jmolloy, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26391
llvm-svn: 286236
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
It seems to break selfhost on some bots, see e.g.
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-x86-windows-msvc2015/builds/21
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64be-linux-multistage/builds/20
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64be-linux-lnt/builds/22
llvm-svn: 284979
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
These are good candidates for jump threading. This enables later opts
(such as InstCombine) to combine instructions from the selects with
instructions out of the selects. SimplifyCFG will fold the select
again if unfolding wasn't worth it.
Patch by James Molloy and Pablo Barrio.
Reviewers: reames, bkramer, mcrosier, gberry, haicheng, jmolloy, sebpop
Subscribers: jojo, rengolin, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25477
llvm-svn: 284971
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Splitting the edge is nontrivial because of the landing pad, and we would
currently assert trying to do it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24680
llvm-svn: 283129
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
had PGO info
Currently the pass updates branch weights in the IR if the function has
any PGO info (entry frequency is set). However we could still have
regions of the CFG that does not have branch weights collected (e.g. a
cold region). In this case we'd use static estimates. Since static
estimates for branches are determined independently, they are
inconsistent. Updating them can "randomly" inflate block frequencies.
I've run into this in a completely cold loop of h264ref from
SPEC. -Rpass-with-hotness showed the loop to be completely cold during
inlining (before JT) but completely hot during vectorization (after JT).
The new testcase demonstrate the problem. We check array elements
against 1, 2 and 3 in a loop. The check against 3 is the loop-exiting
check. The block names should be self-explanatory.
In this example, jump threading incorrectly updates the weight of the
loop-exiting branch to 0, drastically inflating the frequency of the
loop (in the range of billions).
There is no run-time profile info for edges inside the loop, so branch
probabilities are estimated. These are the resulting branch and block
frequencies for the loop body:
check_1 (16)
(8) / |
eq_1 | (8)
\ |
check_2 (16)
(8) / |
eq_2 | (8)
\ |
check_3 (16)
(1) / |
(loop exit) | (15)
|
(back edge)
First we thread eq_1 -> check_2 to check_3. Frequencies are updated to
remove the frequency of eq_1 from check_2 and then from the false edge
leaving check_2. Changed frequencies are highlighted with * *:
check_1 (16)
(8) / |
eq_1~ | (8)
/ |
/ check_2 (*8*)
/ (8) / |
\ eq_2 | (*0*)
\ \ |
` --- check_3 (16)
(1) / |
(loop exit) | (15)
|
(back edge)
Next we thread eq_1 -> check_3 and eq_2 -> check_3 to check_1 as new
back edges. Frequencies are updated to remove the frequency of eq_1 and
eq_3 from check_3 and then the false edge leaving check_3 (changed
frequencies are highlighted with * *):
check_1 (16)
(8) / |
eq_1~ | (8)
/ |
/ check_2 (*8*)
/ (8) / |
/-- eq_2~ | (*0*)
(back edge) |
check_3 (*0*)
(*0*) / |
(loop exit) | (*0*)
|
(back edge)
As a result, the loop exit edge ends up with 0 frequency which in turn makes
the loop header to have maximum frequency.
There are a few potential problems here:
1. The profile data seems odd. There is a single profile sample of the
loop being entered. On the other hand, there are no weights inside the
loop.
2. Based on static estimation we shouldn't set edges to "extreme"
values, i.e. extremely likely or unlikely.
3. We shouldn't create profile metadata that is calculated from static
estimation. I am not sure what policy is but it seems to make sense to
treat profile metadata as something that is known to originate from
profiling. Estimated probabilities should only be reflected in BPI/BFI.
Any one of these would probably fix the immediate problem. I went for 3
because I think it's a good policy to have and added a FIXME about 2.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24118
llvm-svn: 280713
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
The correctness fix here is that when we CSE a load with another load,
we need to combine the metadata on the two loads. This matches the
behavior of other passes, like instcombine and GVN.
There's also a minor optimization improvement here: for load PRE, the
aliasing metadata on the inserted load should be the same as the
metadata on the original load. Not sure why the old code was throwing
it away.
Issue found by inspection.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21460
llvm-svn: 277977
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary: Extend JumpThreading's PRE to unordered atomic loads.
Reviewers: hfinkel, reames
Subscribers: mcrosier, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D22326
llvm-svn: 275456
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We were still crashing in the "no change" case because LVI was not
getting invalidated.
See the thread "Should analyses be able to hold AssertingVH to IR?
(related to PR28400)" for more discussion.
llvm-svn: 274656
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
BranchProbabilityInfo"
It was causing failures in Profile-i386 and Profile-x86_64 tests.
llvm-svn: 272912
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We should update results of the BranchProbabilityInfo after removing block in JumpThreading. Otherwise
we will get dangling pointer inside BranchProbabilityInfo cache.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20957
llvm-svn: 272891
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This reverts commit r272603 and adds a fix.
Big thanks to Davide for pointing me at r216244 which gives some insight
into how to fix this VS2013 issue. VS2013 can't synthesize a move
constructor. So the fix here is to add one explicitly to the
JumpThreadingPass class.
llvm-svn: 272607
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This reverts commit r272597.
Will investigate issue with VS2013 compilation and then recommit.
llvm-svn: 272603
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This follows the approach in r263208 (for GVN) pretty closely:
- move the bulk of the body of the function to the new PM class.
- expose a runImpl method on the new-PM class that takes the IRUnitT and
pointers/references to any analyses and use that to implement the
old-PM class.
- use a private namespace in the header for stuff that used to be file
scope
llvm-svn: 272597
|
|
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 267430
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
operands.
This patch improves SimplifyCFG to catch cases like:
if (a < b) {
if (a > b) <- known to be false
unreachable;
}
Phabricator Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18905
llvm-svn: 266767
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
To capture more jump-thread opportunity.
llvm-svn: 263618
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
ComputeValueKnownInPredecessors()"
Not sure it handles undef properly.
llvm-svn: 263605
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This change tries to find more opportunities to thread over basic blocks.
llvm-svn: 261981
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
LVI has several separate sources of facts - edge local conditions, recursive queries, assumes, and control independent value facts - which all apply to the same value at the same location. The existing implementation was very conservative about exploiting all of these facts at once.
This change introduces an "intersect" function specifically to abstract the action of picking a good set of facts from all of the separate facts given. At the moment, this function is relatively simple (i.e. mostly just reuses the bits which were already there), but even the minor additions reveal the inherent power. For example, JumpThreading is now capable of doing an inductive proof that a particular value is always positive and removing a half range check.
I'm currently only using the new intersect function in one place. If folks are happy with the direction of the work, I plan on making a series of small changes without review to replace mergeIn with intersect at all the appropriate places.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D14476
llvm-svn: 259461
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
If the normal destination of the invoke or the parent block of the call site is unreachable-terminated, there is little point in inlining the call site unless there is literally zero cost. Unlike my previous change (D15289), this change specifically handle the call sites followed by unreachable in the same basic block for call or in the normal destination for the invoke. This change could be a reasonable first step to conservatively inline call sites leading to an unreachable-terminated block while BFI / BPI is not yet available in inliner.
Reviewers: manmanren, majnemer, hfinkel, davidxl, mcrosier, dblaikie, eraman
Subscribers: dblaikie, davidxl, mcrosier, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16616
llvm-svn: 259403
|
|
|
|
| |
llvm-svn: 257280
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
PHI node
Look for PHI/Select in the same BB of the form
bb:
%p = phi [false, %bb1], [true, %bb2], [false, %bb3], [true, %bb4], ...
%s = select p, trueval, falseval
And expand the select into a branch structure. This later enables
jump-threading over bb in this pass.
Using the similar approach of SimplifyCFG::FoldCondBranchOnPHI(), unfold
select if the associated PHI has at least one constant. If the unfolded
select is not jump-threaded, it will be folded again in the later
optimizations.
llvm-svn: 257198
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The code that was meant to adjust the duplication cost based on the
terminator opcode was not being executed in cases where the initial
threshold was hit inside the loop.
Subscribers: mcrosier, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15536
llvm-svn: 256568
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This patch removes all weight-related interfaces from BPI and replace
them by probability versions. With this patch, we won't use edge weight
anymore in either IR or MC passes. Edge probabilitiy is a better
representation in terms of CFG update and validation.
Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15519
llvm-svn: 256263
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
If P branches to Q conditional on C and Q branches to R conditional on
C' and C => C' then the branch conditional on C' can be folded to an
unconditional branch.
Reviewers: reames
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13972
llvm-svn: 251557
|