[CodeGen] Tail Duplication: Remove irrelevant phi node workaround #86981
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
AtariDreams
force-pushed
the
tails
branch
2 times, most recently
from
09dfd61
to
3a17954
Compare
AtariDreams
changed the title
arsenm
reviewed
Apr 22, 2024
The comment is quite old, and removing it and then running the old test, it passed without asserting.
arsenm
reviewed
Apr 22, 2024
| ; CHECK-LABEL: foo: | ||
| ; CHECK: // %bb.0: // %entry | ||
| ; CHECK-NEXT: { | ||
| ; CHECK-NEXT: r1:0 = combine(r3,r2) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This looks like too much was optimized out, that I doubt whatever MIR pattern was here didn't survive late enough
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Alright, so is there a way to see all the optimizations done
There was a problem hiding this comment.
-print-changed/-print-after-all?
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The comment is quite old, and removing it and then running the old test, it passed without asserting.