[clang-tools-extra] llvm-canon (PR #68176)

[Nikita Popov via cfe-commits]

nikic wrote:

Using the term for MIR is okay, because it does not have a pre-existing notion of canonical form. Doing the same for IR is not okay, because it already has a canonical form and this pass does not produce it. Calling this `ir-normalizer` instead of `ir-canonicalizer` should convey about the same intent without overloading an existing, widely used term.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/68176