anna marked an inline comment as done. anna added inline comments.
================ Comment at: llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/InlineFunction.cpp:1172 + if (NumInstChecked++ > MaxInstCheckedForThrow || + isGuaranteedToTransferExecutionToSuccessor(&I)) + return true; ---------------- lebedev.ri wrote: > anna wrote: > > Noticed while adding couple more tests, there are 2 bugs here: > > 1. the `isGuaranteedToTransferExecutionToSuccessor` check should be inverted > > 2. make_range should be until the return instruction - so we do not want > > `std::prev` on the returnInstruction. what's needed is: > > `make_range(RVal->getIterator(), RInst->getIterator())` > > This means that from the callsite until (and excluding) the return > > instruction should be guaranteed to transfer execution to successor - only > > then we can backward propagate the attribute to that callsite. > Are you aware of `llvm::isValidAssumeForContext()`? > All this (including pitfalls) sound awfully close to that function. as stated in a previous comment (https://reviews.llvm.org/D76140#1922292), adding `Assumes` here for simple cases seems like an overkill. It has significant IR churn and it also adds a use for something which can be easily inferred. Consider optimizations that depend on facts such as `hasOneUse` or a limited number of uses. We will now be inhibiting those optimizations. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D76140/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D76140 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
