[PATCH] D14228: [FunctionAttrs] Identify norecurse functions

[Philip Reames via llvm-commits]

reames added a subscriber: reames.

================
Comment at: lib/Transforms/IPO/FunctionAttrs.cpp:77
@@ -76,2 +76,3 @@
   bool AddNonNullAttrs(const CallGraphSCC &SCC);
+  bool AddNoRecurseAttrs(const CallGraphSCC &SCC);
   bool annotateLibraryCalls(const CallGraphSCC &SCC);
----------------
It looks like this change needs to be rebased over Chandler's recent ones.  Can you update the patch?

================
Comment at: lib/Transforms/IPO/FunctionAttrs.cpp:1841
@@ +1840,3 @@
+
+  if (std::any_of(CGN->begin(), CGN->end(),
+                  [](const CallGraphNode::CallRecord &CR) {
----------------
If there's a single element in the SCC, why do you need the any_of?

================
Comment at: lib/Transforms/IPO/FunctionAttrs.cpp:1849
@@ +1848,3 @@
+
+  F->setDoesNotRecurse();
+  return true;
----------------
The change needs to be conditional on whether the function was already marked recursive.  Otherwise, you'll be misleading the wrapping code about changes being made.

================
Comment at: test/Transforms/FunctionAttrs/norecurse.ll:9
@@ +8,3 @@
+; CHECK: define i32 @g() #1
+define i32 @g() {
+  %a = call i32 @g()
----------------
"self_rec" rather than "g"?

================
Comment at: test/Transforms/FunctionAttrs/norecurse.ll:15
@@ +14,3 @@
+; CHECK: define i32 @h() #1
+define i32 @h() {
+  %a = call i32 @i()
----------------
for readability, I'd call these two something like: mutually_rec1 and mutually_rec2


Repository:
  rL LLVM

http://reviews.llvm.org/D14228