Philip Reames 5660bd460b [AST] Visit memtransfer arguments in order
The only point to this change is the test diffs.  When I remove this code entirely (in favor of the recently added generic handling), I don't want there to be any confusion due to spurious test diffs.

As an aside, the fact out tests are AST construction order dependent is not great.  I thought about fixing that, but the reasonable schemes I might want (e.g. sort by name) need the test diffs anyways.

Philip

llvm-svn: 341841
2018-09-10 16:00:27 +00:00
..
2018-07-30 19:41:25 +00:00
2018-07-30 19:41:25 +00:00
2018-07-30 19:41:25 +00:00
2018-08-05 14:53:08 +00:00
2018-05-14 12:53:11 +00:00
2018-07-30 19:41:25 +00:00
2018-07-30 19:41:25 +00:00
2018-07-30 19:41:25 +00:00
2018-08-30 18:37:18 +00:00
2018-07-22 20:04:42 +00:00
2018-07-30 19:41:25 +00:00

Analysis Opportunities:

//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//

In test/Transforms/LoopStrengthReduce/quadradic-exit-value.ll, the
ScalarEvolution expression for %r is this:

  {1,+,3,+,2}<loop>

Outside the loop, this could be evaluated simply as (%n * %n), however
ScalarEvolution currently evaluates it as

  (-2 + (2 * (trunc i65 (((zext i64 (-2 + %n) to i65) * (zext i64 (-1 + %n) to i65)) /u 2) to i64)) + (3 * %n))

In addition to being much more complicated, it involves i65 arithmetic,
which is very inefficient when expanded into code.

//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//

In formatValue in test/CodeGen/X86/lsr-delayed-fold.ll,

ScalarEvolution is forming this expression:

((trunc i64 (-1 * %arg5) to i32) + (trunc i64 %arg5 to i32) + (-1 * (trunc i64 undef to i32)))

This could be folded to

(-1 * (trunc i64 undef to i32))

//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//