Matthias Braun 8d82476153 TailDuplicator: Remove live-in updating logic ... This logic was introduced in r157663 and does not make any sense to me. The motivating example in rdar://11538365 looks like this: This is the tail: BB#16: derived from LLVM BB %if.end68 Live Ins: %R0 %R4 %R5 Predecessors according to CFG: BB#15 BB#5 tBLXi pred:14, pred:%noreg, <ga:@CFRelease>, %R0<kill>, <regmask>, %LR<imp-def,dead>, %SP<imp-use>, %SP<imp-def> t2B <BB#20>, pred:14, pred:%noreg Successors according to CFG: BB#20 This is the predBB: BB#5: Live Ins: %R5 Predecessors according to CFG: BB#4 %R4<def> = t2MOVi 0, pred:14, pred:%noreg, opt:%noreg t2B <BB#16>, pred:14, pred:%noreg Successors according to CFG: BB#16 However this is invalid machine code to begin with, if %R0 is live-in to BB#16 then it must be live-in to BB#5 as well if BB#5 does not define it. We should not need logic to retroactively fix broken machine code and in fact the example from r157663 passes cleanly with the code removed and I do not see any (newly) failing tests with the machine verifier enabled. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D22031 llvm-svn: 274655		2016-07-06 18:55:10 +00:00
..
llvm	TailDuplicator: Remove live-in updating logic	2016-07-06 18:55:10 +00:00
llvm-c	Add support for string attributes in the C API.	2016-06-15 17:50:39 +00:00