[llvm-commits] [llvm] r166157 - /llvm/trunk/lib/VMCore/Verifier.cpp

[Eli Friedman]

On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 18, 2012, at 3:21 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:39 PM, Bill Wendling <wendling at apple.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 18, 2012, at 11:41 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Oct 18, 2012, at 8:04 AM, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Oh. I didn't know that LLVM defines things in a non-standard way.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is very standard actually. A dominates B if all execution paths
>>>>> that reach B pass through A. In this case, all the 0 paths that reach
>>>>> B pass through A.
>>>>
>>>> This is also the only reasonable way to define dominance and SSA.  If not, things like trivial copy propagation are potentially really complicated and expensive.
>>>>
>>> Okay. Good to know. Because one pass is creating this for reachable code, which is making GVN blow up.
>>
>> The verifier will reject that, GVN shouldn't have to handle it.
>>
> The verifier didn't reject it as far as I could tell.

The verifier is supposed to check dominance.

Random guess, but have you tried -verify-dom-info?

-Eli