As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).
This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@358546 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This is an almost direct move of the functionality from InstCombine to
InstSimplify. There's no reason not to do this in InstSimplify because
we never create a new value with this transform.
(There's a question of whether any dominance-based transform belongs in
either of these passes, but that's a separate issue.)
I've changed 1 of the conditions for the fold (1 of the blocks for the
branch must be the block we started with) into an assert because I'm not
sure how that could ever be false.
We need 1 extra check to make sure that the instruction itself is in a
basic block because passes other than InstCombine may be using InstSimplify
as an analysis on values that are not wired up yet.
The 3-way compare changes show that InstCombine has some kind of
phase-ordering hole. Otherwise, we would have already gotten the intended
final result that we now show here.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@347896 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Eric Christopher