Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[test] Remove test added in #67479 #67578

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 27, 2023
Merged

[test] Remove test added in #67479 #67578

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 27, 2023

Conversation

aeubanks
Copy link
Contributor

With 7aab12e, the test is no longer relevant, but the patch is still good to have.

With 7aab12e, the test is no longer relevant, but the patch is still good to have.
@llvmbot
Copy link
Collaborator

llvmbot commented Sep 27, 2023

@llvm/pr-subscribers-llvm-transforms

Changes

With 7aab12e, the test is no longer relevant, but the patch is still good to have.


Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/67578.diff

1 Files Affected:

  • (removed) llvm/test/Transforms/DeadStoreElimination/object-size-offset-visitor-max-visit-instructions.ll (-52)
diff --git a/llvm/test/Transforms/DeadStoreElimination/object-size-offset-visitor-max-visit-instructions.ll b/llvm/test/Transforms/DeadStoreElimination/object-size-offset-visitor-max-visit-instructions.ll
deleted file mode 100644
index 46cd1e4d6463e53..000000000000000
--- a/llvm/test/Transforms/DeadStoreElimination/object-size-offset-visitor-max-visit-instructions.ll
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,52 +0,0 @@
-; NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_test_checks.py UTC_ARGS: --version 3
-; XFAIL: *
-; RUN: opt -passes=dse -S -object-size-offset-visitor-max-visit-instructions=2 < %s | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=NO
-; RUN: opt -passes=dse -S -object-size-offset-visitor-max-visit-instructions=3 < %s | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=YES
-
-declare void @use(ptr)
-
-define void @f(i32 %i, i1 %c) {
-; NO-LABEL: define void @f(
-; NO-SAME: i32 [[I:%.*]], i1 [[C:%.*]]) {
-; NO-NEXT:  b0:
-; NO-NEXT:    [[A1:%.*]] = alloca i32, align 4
-; NO-NEXT:    [[A2:%.*]] = alloca i32, align 4
-; NO-NEXT:    br i1 [[C]], label [[B1:%.*]], label [[B2:%.*]]
-; NO:       b1:
-; NO-NEXT:    br label [[B2]]
-; NO:       b2:
-; NO-NEXT:    [[A5:%.*]] = phi ptr [ [[A1]], [[B0:%.*]] ], [ [[A2]], [[B1]] ]
-; NO-NEXT:    [[G:%.*]] = getelementptr i8, ptr [[A5]], i32 [[I]]
-; NO-NEXT:    store i8 1, ptr [[G]], align 1
-; NO-NEXT:    store i32 0, ptr [[A5]], align 4
-; NO-NEXT:    call void @use(ptr [[A5]])
-; NO-NEXT:    ret void
-;
-; YES-LABEL: define void @f(
-; YES-SAME: i32 [[I:%.*]], i1 [[C:%.*]]) {
-; YES-NEXT:  b0:
-; YES-NEXT:    [[A1:%.*]] = alloca i32, align 4
-; YES-NEXT:    [[A2:%.*]] = alloca i32, align 4
-; YES-NEXT:    br i1 [[C]], label [[B1:%.*]], label [[B2:%.*]]
-; YES:       b1:
-; YES-NEXT:    br label [[B2]]
-; YES:       b2:
-; YES-NEXT:    [[A5:%.*]] = phi ptr [ [[A1]], [[B0:%.*]] ], [ [[A2]], [[B1]] ]
-; YES-NEXT:    store i32 0, ptr [[A5]], align 4
-; YES-NEXT:    call void @use(ptr [[A5]])
-; YES-NEXT:    ret void
-;
-b0:
-  %a1 = alloca i32
-  %a2 = alloca i32
-  br i1 %c, label %b1, label %b2
-b1:
-  br label %b2
-b2:
-  %a5 = phi ptr [ %a1, %b0 ], [ %a2, %b1 ]
-  %g = getelementptr i8, ptr %a5, i32 %i
-  store i8 1, ptr %g
-  store i32 0, ptr %a5
-  call void @use(ptr %a5)
-  ret void
-}

@aeubanks
Copy link
Contributor Author

would you still like a test for -object-size-offset-visitor-max-visit-instructions?

@nikic
Copy link
Contributor

nikic commented Sep 27, 2023

would you still like a test for -object-size-offset-visitor-max-visit-instructions?

We could test through llvm.objectsize, but I don't think it's very important.

@aeubanks aeubanks merged commit 56f7c7e into llvm:main Sep 27, 2023
3 of 4 checks passed
@aeubanks aeubanks deleted the test branch September 27, 2023 17:59
legrosbuffle pushed a commit to legrosbuffle/llvm-project that referenced this pull request Sep 29, 2023
With 7aab12e, the test is no longer relevant, but the patch is still
good to have.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants