From 70a98bb9e85fbc2d654c4c9cc360d277b8891db6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Silviu Baranga Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 11:15:29 +0000 Subject: [LoopVersioning] Don't assert when there are no memchecks We shouldn't assert when there are no memchecks, since we can have SCEV checks. There is already an assert covering the case where there are no SCEV checks or memchecks. This also changes the LAA pointer wrapping versioning test to use the loop versioning pass (this was how I managed to trigger the assert in the loop versioning pass). llvm-svn: 260086 --- llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/LoopVersioning.cpp | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'llvm/lib/Transforms') diff --git a/llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/LoopVersioning.cpp b/llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/LoopVersioning.cpp index 1aeffb79b19..9303dee99db 100644 --- a/llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/LoopVersioning.cpp +++ b/llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/LoopVersioning.cpp @@ -56,7 +56,6 @@ void LoopVersioning::versionLoop( BasicBlock *RuntimeCheckBB = VersionedLoop->getLoopPreheader(); std::tie(FirstCheckInst, MemRuntimeCheck) = LAI.addRuntimeChecks(RuntimeCheckBB->getTerminator(), AliasChecks); - assert(MemRuntimeCheck && "called even though needsAnyChecking = false"); const SCEVUnionPredicate &Pred = LAI.PSE.getUnionPredicate(); SCEVExpander Exp(*SE, RuntimeCheckBB->getModule()->getDataLayout(), -- cgit v1.2.3