RPCS3/llvm-mirror
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/RPCS3/llvm-mirror.git synced 2024-11-23 03:02:36 +01:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity
d88c540901
llvm-mirror/test/Other/scc-deleted-printer.ll

21 lines
611 B
LLVM
Raw Normal View History

[NewPM] fixing asserts on deleted loop in -print-after-all IR-printing AfterPass instrumentation might be called on a loop that has just been invalidated. We should skip printing it to avoid spurious asserts. Reviewed By: chandlerc, philip.pfaffe Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54740 llvm-svn: 348887
2018-12-11 20:05:35 +01:00
; RUN: opt < %s 2>&1 -disable-output \
[NewPM] Print pre-transformation IR name in --print-after-all Sometimes a transformation can change the name of some IR (e.g. an SCC with functions added/removed). This can be confusing when debug logging doesn't match the post-transformation name. The specific example I came across was that --print-after-all said the inliner was working on an SCC that only contained one function, but calls in multiple functions were getting inlined. After all inlining, the current SCC only contained one function. Piggyback off of the existing logic to handle invalidated IR + --print-module-scope. Simply always store the IR description and use that. Reviewed By: jamieschmeiser Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106290
2021-07-19 19:32:12 +02:00
; RUN: -passes=inline -print-before-all -print-after-all | FileCheck %s
[NewPM] fixing asserts on deleted loop in -print-after-all IR-printing AfterPass instrumentation might be called on a loop that has just been invalidated. We should skip printing it to avoid spurious asserts. Reviewed By: chandlerc, philip.pfaffe Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54740 llvm-svn: 348887
2018-12-11 20:05:35 +01:00
; RUN: opt < %s 2>&1 -disable-output \
[NewPM] Print pre-transformation IR name in --print-after-all Sometimes a transformation can change the name of some IR (e.g. an SCC with functions added/removed). This can be confusing when debug logging doesn't match the post-transformation name. The specific example I came across was that --print-after-all said the inliner was working on an SCC that only contained one function, but calls in multiple functions were getting inlined. After all inlining, the current SCC only contained one function. Piggyback off of the existing logic to handle invalidated IR + --print-module-scope. Simply always store the IR description and use that. Reviewed By: jamieschmeiser Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106290
2021-07-19 19:32:12 +02:00
; RUN: -passes=inline -print-before-all -print-after-all -print-module-scope | FileCheck %s
[NewPM] fixing asserts on deleted loop in -print-after-all IR-printing AfterPass instrumentation might be called on a loop that has just been invalidated. We should skip printing it to avoid spurious asserts. Reviewed By: chandlerc, philip.pfaffe Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54740 llvm-svn: 348887
2018-12-11 20:05:35 +01:00
[NewPM] Print pre-transformation IR name in --print-after-all Sometimes a transformation can change the name of some IR (e.g. an SCC with functions added/removed). This can be confusing when debug logging doesn't match the post-transformation name. The specific example I came across was that --print-after-all said the inliner was working on an SCC that only contained one function, but calls in multiple functions were getting inlined. After all inlining, the current SCC only contained one function. Piggyback off of the existing logic to handle invalidated IR + --print-module-scope. Simply always store the IR description and use that. Reviewed By: jamieschmeiser Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106290
2021-07-19 19:32:12 +02:00
; CHECK: IR Dump Before InlinerPass on (tester, foo)
; CHECK: IR Dump After InlinerPass on (tester, foo) (invalidated)
; CHECK: IR Dump Before InlinerPass on (tester)
; CHECK: IR Dump After InlinerPass on (tester)
[NewPM] fixing asserts on deleted loop in -print-after-all IR-printing AfterPass instrumentation might be called on a loop that has just been invalidated. We should skip printing it to avoid spurious asserts. Reviewed By: chandlerc, philip.pfaffe Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54740 llvm-svn: 348887
2018-12-11 20:05:35 +01:00
define void @tester() noinline {
call void @foo()
ret void
}
define internal void @foo() alwaysinline {
call void @tester()
ret void
}
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink