<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=gb2312">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"> P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} </style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<div>
<div id="appendonsend" style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
</div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
Thank for reverting it.</div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
For the original issue in<a href="https://reviews.llvm.org/D64868"> https://reviews.llvm.org/D64868</a>, if we want to make sure nsw can be correctly added to increment SCEV, we need to also check isLoopEntryGuardedByCond? Is this a right way to go?</div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
BRS//</div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
Chen Zheng<br>
</div>
<hr tabindex="-1" style="display:inline-block; width:98%">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font style="font-size:11pt" face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000"><b>发件人:</b> llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org> 代表 Tim Northover via llvm-dev <llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org><br>
<b>发送时间:</b> 2019年9月30日 15:45<br>
<b>收件人:</b> Sanjoy Das <sanjoy@playingwithpointers.com><br>
<b>抄送:</b> LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org><br>
<b>主题:</b> Re: [llvm-dev] ScalarEvolution invariants around wrapping flags</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="BodyFragment"><font size="2"><span style="font-size:11pt">
<div class="PlainText">On Sun, 29 Sep 2019 at 19:23, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy@playingwithpointers.com> wrote:<br>
> Your reasoning sounds correct to me. Let's revert for now?<br>
<br>
Sounds good, I've reverted it with r373184 (and r373185 to polly,<br>
which fixed up some tests after the original commit).<br>
<br>
> I don't think there is an easy fix, we'll have to do a global "must be<br>
> executed" analysis to reapply the patch soundly. And that's difficult<br>
> since any external functional call can call "exit(0)".<br>
<br>
Oh yes, that didn't even occur to me.<br>
<br>
Cheers.<br>
<br>
Tim.<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
LLVM Developers mailing list<br>
llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org<br>
<a href="https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev">https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a><br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</div>
</body>
</html>