[PATCH] D35635: Optimize {s,u}{add,sub}.with.overflow on ARM

[Joel Galenson via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

jgalenson added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D35635#887746, @efriedma wrote:

> Is it really necessary to have two different of almost identical code to generate an ARMISD::BRCOND?  (I would rather have an explicit check for an AND than two versions of the code, if that's the issue.)


Both of them are used in the attached testcase.  The br_cc case handles almost everything, but the brcond case is needed once (when the brcond isn't combined into a br_cc).

We could outline the two cases into a helper function, although they're different enough that I'm not sure that it would help too much.  What do you think?


https://reviews.llvm.org/D35635