[PATCH] D17588: Fix tests that used CHECK-NEXT-NOT and CHECK-DAG-NOT

[Chad Rosier via llvm-commits]

mcrosier added inline comments.

================
Comment at: test/Transforms/LoopVectorize/PowerPC/large-loop-rdx.ll:17
@@ -16,1 +16,3 @@
+; CHECK-NOT: fadd
+; CHECK-SAME: >
 
----------------
probinson wrote:
> mcrosier wrote:
> > Why is the CHECK-SAME needed here?
> Using CHECK-SAME documents that the = and > are expected to be on the same line, thus achieving the effect that 'fadd' is also not on that line, i.e. that the sequence of 'fadd' instructions has ended.  Given how IR syntax works this could be a CHECK rather than CHECK-SAME and it would have the same effect.  I just think it's clearer with CHECK-SAME.  If you disagree I can change it.
AFAICT, the test is just checking that we generate exactly 12 fadd instructions.  Given that I think you could just replace

CHECK-NEXT-NOT: fadd

with

CHECK-NOT: fadd
CHECK: ret

IMO, that's a bit easier to understand.  What do you think, Paul?

================
Comment at: test/Transforms/LoopVectorize/PowerPC/small-loop-rdx.ll:17
@@ -16,1 +16,3 @@
+; CHECK-NOT: fadd
+; CHECK-SAME: >
 
----------------
probinson wrote:
> mcrosier wrote:
> > And here?
> See above.
See above. :)


http://reviews.llvm.org/D17588