[LLVMdev] Splitting basic blocks while preserving machine code

[Kenneth Uildriks]

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 7:19 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Oct 20, 2010, at 5:16 PM, Trevor Harmon wrote:
>> I'm writing a pass that does some static analysis on C code. A
>> critical requirement of the pass is that it must preserve not only the
>> correctness of the code but also its timing -- It cannot add or remove
>> even one CPU cycle from the resulting machine code. To put it another
>> way, the binary executable that is produced when the pass is present
>> must be identical to what is produced when the pass is not present.
>>
>> That said, I have run into a situation where it would help to split
>> certain basic blocks, probably by calling BasicBlock::splitBasicBlock.
>> But this method adds an unconditional branch instruction. Would this
>> new instruction alter the machine code that is later generated, or
>> would the additional branch somehow be optimized away in subsequent
>> passes?
>
> It probably would be optimized away, yes, but I would recommend against counting on it with requirements as strict as yours.
>
> -Jim
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>

You could always undo the split right before your pass finishes.