[PATCH] D31908: [AntiDepBreaker] Don't rename callee saved register restore instruction

[Hal Finkel via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

hfinkel added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D31908#746071, @kparzysz wrote:

> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D31908#746050, @hfinkel wrote:
>
> > Could we check this in the verifier? One advantage this might have is that, for blocks ending in unreachable, we can easily realize that we don't need the restoration code.
>
>
> Are we adding restoration code to such blocks now?  That could be checked in the verifier, but it's not incorrect.  Maybe a warning could be issued...


I didn't mean checking that in the verifier. I meant checking that the return insts had the necessary implicit operands in the non-unreachable case. Looks like you say yes.

> The verifier should be able to check if the callee-saved registers are properly marked as live/used in the relevant places (return instructions, etc.)




https://reviews.llvm.org/D31908