[llvm-dev] Early CSE clobbering llvm.assume

[Daniel Berlin via llvm-dev]

We do, implicitly, because assert generates if conditions. Or at least, gvn
knows how to propagate that implicit info. We can do better by exposing it
more, most likely

On Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:59 PM Lawrence, Peter <c_plawre at qca.qualcomm.com>
wrote:

> Daniel,
>
>              Well then my next (dumb?) question is why aren’t we using
> source level assert information
>
> For optimization ?
>
>
>
> --Peter Lawrence.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Daniel Berlin [mailto:dberlin at dberlin.org]
> *Sent:* Friday, June 10, 2016 5:39 PM
> *To:* Lawrence, Peter <c_plawre at qca.qualcomm.com>
> *Cc:* llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> *Subject:* Re: [llvm-dev] Early CSE clobbering llvm.assume
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Lawrence, Peter via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> My (dumb?) question would be:  why is llvm.assume being handled any
> differently than llvm.assert ?
>
>
>
> There is no llvm.assert intrinsic, so i'm not sure what you mean here.
> Care to give an example?
>
>
>
> Other than one trapping and one not-trapping, they should be identical, in
> both cases they are giving
>
> The optimizers information,  and that shouldn’t be any different from
> being inside an “if” statement with the same condition ?
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160611/e137ba37/attachment.html>