[llvm-commits] [llvm] r167740 - in /llvm/trunk: lib/Transforms/Scalar/Reassociate.cpp test/Transforms/Reassociate/mul_neg.ll test/Transforms/Reassociate/multistep.ll

[Duncan Sands]

Hi Evan,

> The approach seems sound to me. Since no one has raised design concerns at this point and the fact this is a a bug fix for a crash, I think it's appropriate for review after commit.

I told Shuxin Yang that I would take a look at it this week.  I was disappointed
to see it was applied anyway, without review.

Ciao, Duncan.

>
> Thanks,
>
> Evan
>
> On Nov 12, 2012, at 11:40 AM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Author: shuxin_yang
>>> Date: Mon Nov 12 13:34:11 2012
>>> New Revision: 167740
>>>
>>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=167740&view=rev
>>> Log:
>>> This change is to fix rdar://12571717 which is about assertion in Reassociate pass.
>>>
>>> The assertion is trigged when the Reassociater tries to transform expression
>>>      ... + 2 * n * 3 + 2 * m + ...
>>>   into:
>>>      ... + 2 * (n*3 + m).
>>>
>>> In the process of the transformation, a helper routine folds the constant 2*3 into 6,
>>> confusing optimizer which is trying the to eliminate the common factor 2, and cannot
>>> find 2 any more.
>>>
>>> Review is pending. But I'd like commit first in order to help those who are waiting
>>> for this fix.
>>
>> No; this is not how our review system works; you're not allowed to
>> commit without review just because some particular customer needs a
>> fix.  We have private branches for that sort of thing.
>>
>> -Eli
>> _______________________________________________
>> llvm-commits mailing list
>> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>
> _______________________________________________
> llvm-commits mailing list
> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>