[PATCH] D19210: Teach poison value tracking that certain calls always terminate
Bjarke Hammersholt Roune via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Thu Apr 21 16:24:47 PDT 2016
broune accepted this revision.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
================
Comment at: lib/Analysis/ValueTracking.cpp:3288
@@ +3287,3 @@
+ // not contain side effects. As far as I can tell, this isn't a new
+ // assumption (e.g. we will DCE readnone and readonly calls).
+ return CS.doesNotThrow() && CS.onlyReadsMemory();
----------------
This seems unfortunate given that, as I understand it, we then can't compile C11 correctly:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/16436237/is-while1-undefined-behavior-in-c
Go ahead and submit this if you're sure that the consensus is that this is how LLVM ought to behave. I'd be more comfortable if the langref stated that infinite side-effect free loops are not allowed, but I couldn't find anything about that in there.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D19210
More information about the llvm-commits
mailing list