This generally follows what other targets do. I don't completely
understand why the special case for tail calls existed in the first
place; even when the code was committed in r105413, call lowering didn't
work in the way described in the comments.
Stack protector lowering breaks if the register copies are not glued to
a tail call: we have to insert the stack protector check before the tail
call, and we choose the location based on the assumption that all
physical register dependencies of a tail call are adjacent to the tail
call. (See FindSplitPointForStackProtector.) This is sort of fragile,
but I don't see any reason to break that assumption.
I'm guessing nobody has seen this before just because it's hard to
convince the scheduler to actually schedule the code in a way that
breaks; even without the glue, the only computation that could actually
be scheduled after the register copies is the computation of the call
address, and the scheduler usually prefers to schedule that before the
copies anyway.
Fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41417
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60427
llvm-svn: 360099
