Chandler Carruth 3ac929c473 Fix a miscompile introduced in r220178.
The original code had an implicit assumption that if the test for
allocas or globals was reached, the two pointers were not equal. With my
changes to make the pointer analysis more powerful here, I also had to
guard against circumstances where the results weren't useful. That in
turn violated the assumption and gave rise to a circumstance in which we
could have a store with both the queried pointer and stored pointer
rooted at *the same* alloca. Clearly, we cannot ignore such a store.
There are other things we might do in this code to better handle the
case of both pointers ending up at the same alloca or global, but it
seems best to at least make the test explicit in what it intends to
check.

I've added tests for both the alloca and global case here.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@220190 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
2014-10-20 10:03:01 +00:00
..
2014-08-26 02:03:40 +00:00
2014-05-15 01:52:21 +00:00

Analysis Opportunities:

//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//

In test/Transforms/LoopStrengthReduce/quadradic-exit-value.ll, the
ScalarEvolution expression for %r is this:

  {1,+,3,+,2}<loop>

Outside the loop, this could be evaluated simply as (%n * %n), however
ScalarEvolution currently evaluates it as

  (-2 + (2 * (trunc i65 (((zext i64 (-2 + %n) to i65) * (zext i64 (-1 + %n) to i65)) /u 2) to i64)) + (3 * %n))

In addition to being much more complicated, it involves i65 arithmetic,
which is very inefficient when expanded into code.

//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//

In formatValue in test/CodeGen/X86/lsr-delayed-fold.ll,

ScalarEvolution is forming this expression:

((trunc i64 (-1 * %arg5) to i32) + (trunc i64 %arg5 to i32) + (-1 * (trunc i64 undef to i32)))

This could be folded to

(-1 * (trunc i64 undef to i32))

//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//