unique ImutAVLTree* for profiling.
Modified ImutAVLTree:
(1) changed ComputeHash() to ComputeDigest() and
(2) changed Profile() to use the computed digest and
(3) modified insertion of IMutAVLTree into the FoldingSet owned by
the ImutAVLTreeFactory object to use profiling instead of computing
a direct hash. This fixes a bug where our abuse of the FoldingSet would
not work when the FoldingSet was resized.
llvm-svn: 46753
was incorrectly simplifying "x == (gep x, 1, i)" into false, even
though i could be negative. As it turns out, all the code to
handle this already existed, we just need to disable the incorrect
optimization case and let the general case handle it.
llvm-svn: 46739
vec_ext_v4si builtins. This is a hack; they should
be defined here, then resolved in the X86 BE.
However there is enough other stuff missing in the
X86 BE for SSE41 that this will do for now.
llvm-svn: 46727
node in the FoldingSet of nodes held by the Factory object. If we
we find a node with a matching hash, we do a full structural comparison.
Nodes are also now inserted into the FoldingSet only when we mark them
Immutable, as their children can change during intermediate-rebalancing.
The 'Profile' method for ImutAVLTree is no longer used when looking up
existing ImutAVLTrees with a given set of contents; instead the Profile method
is used by other clients that wish to insert such a tree into a folding set.
This means that we are not using FoldingSet in ImutAVLTreeFactory in the way
it was intended, but instead are using it as an opaque hashtable.
llvm-svn: 46717
any bugs in the future since to get the crash you also
need hacked in fake libcall support (which creates odd
but legal trees), but since adding it doesn't hurt...
Thanks to Chris for this ultimately reduced version.
llvm-svn: 46706
ReadyToProcess node - add an assertion to check
this. Add an assertion to NodeDeleted that checks
that processed/ready nodes are indeed not deleted.
It is because they are never deleted that none of
the maps can have a deleted node as the source of
a mapping. It does however seem to be possible in
theory to have a deleted value as the target of a
mapping, however this has not yet been spotted in
the wild. Still mulling on what to do about this.
[The theoretical situation is this: a node A is
expanded/promoted/whatever to a newly created node
B. Thus A->B is added to a map. When the subtree
rooted at B is legalized it is conceivable that B
is deleted due to RAUW on a node somewhere above
it].
llvm-svn: 46705
keep the LegalizeTypes node flags up to date when doing a RAUW.
This fixes a nasty bug that Duncan ran into and makes the
previous (nonbuggy case) more efficent.
llvm-svn: 46679
