[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [polly] [IR] Add CallBr intrinsics support (PR #133907)

[Nikita Popov via llvm-branch-commits]

================
@@ -3490,19 +3514,25 @@ void SelectionDAGBuilder::visitCallBr(const CallBrInst &I) {
 
   // Update successor info.
   addSuccessorWithProb(CallBrMBB, Return, BranchProbability::getOne());
-  for (unsigned i = 0, e = I.getNumIndirectDests(); i < e; ++i) {
-    BasicBlock *Dest = I.getIndirectDest(i);
-    MachineBasicBlock *Target = FuncInfo.getMBB(Dest);
-    Target->setIsInlineAsmBrIndirectTarget();
-    // If we introduce a type of asm goto statement that is permitted to use an
-    // indirect call instruction to jump to its labels, then we should add a
-    // call to Target->setMachineBlockAddressTaken() here, to mark the target
-    // block as requiring a BTI.
-
-    Target->setLabelMustBeEmitted();
-    // Don't add duplicate machine successors.
-    if (Dests.insert(Dest).second)
-      addSuccessorWithProb(CallBrMBB, Target, BranchProbability::getZero());
+  // TODO: For most of the cases where there is an intrinsic callbr, we're
+  // having exactly one indirect target, which will be unreachable. As soon as
----------------
nikic wrote:

It would probably be good to assert this here?

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133907