[all-commits] [llvm/llvm-project] 587dcc: [InstCombine] avoid 'tmp' usage in test files; NFC

[Sanjay Patel via All-commits]

  Branch: refs/heads/main
  Home:   https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project
  Commit: 587dccfb1238724c3365b12f24f7fc343d60974b
      https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/587dccfb1238724c3365b12f24f7fc343d60974b
  Author: Sanjay Patel <spatel at rotateright.com>
  Date:   2022-01-20 (Thu, 20 Jan 2022)

  Changed paths:
    M llvm/test/Transforms/InstCombine/canonicalize-lshr-shl-to-masking.ll
    M llvm/test/Transforms/InstCombine/canonicalize-shl-lshr-to-masking.ll

  Log Message:
  -----------
  [InstCombine] avoid 'tmp' usage in test files; NFC

The update script ( utils/update_test_checks.py ) warns against this
because it can conflict with the default FileCheck names given to
anonymous values in the IR.


  Commit: 2d031ec5e53f4e28ea5cc02b4cfdead98a9c0007
      https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/2d031ec5e53f4e28ea5cc02b4cfdead98a9c0007
  Author: Sanjay Patel <spatel at rotateright.com>
  Date:   2022-01-20 (Thu, 20 Jan 2022)

  Changed paths:
    M llvm/lib/Transforms/InstCombine/InstCombineShifts.cpp
    M llvm/test/Transforms/InstCombine/canonicalize-shl-lshr-to-masking.ll
    M llvm/test/Transforms/InstCombine/shift.ll

  Log Message:
  -----------
  [InstCombine] add one-use check to opposite shift folds

Test comments say this might be intentional, but I don't
see any hard evidence to support it. The extra instruction
shows up as a potential regression in D117680.

One test does show a missed fold that might be recovered
with better demanded bits analysis.


Compare: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/compare/b58cc9fb2348...2d031ec5e53f