[PATCH] D105098: [DSE][NFC] Introduce "doesn't overwrite" return code for isOverwrite
Florian Hahn via Phabricator via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Sun Oct 31 09:46:02 PDT 2021
fhahn added a comment.
In D105098#3005755 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D105098#3005755>, @fhahn wrote:
> In D105098#2986088 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D105098#2986088>, @ebrevnov wrote:
>
>> In D105098#2984988 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D105098#2984988>, @fhahn wrote:
>>
>>> Looks good in general, but I couldn't find a use in the linked patches. Could you update the description with more details about the motivation, when/how this will be used.
>>
>> The thing is that I had to remove depending changes from the list since I didn't manage to come up with a regression test. Looks like it is not that critical and we can return to it once main functionality settles down. So let's skip this one for now as well if you don't mind :-)
>
> Sounds good to me. Marking as changes requested so it is gone from the review queue for now.
I've encountered another case where `OW_None` would be helpful: D112313 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D112313>.
@ebrevnov I think it would be very useful to get this patch in soonish to unblock D112313 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D112313> & following. I put up a variation of this patch as D112312 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D112312> with a small addition: returning `OW_None` if both accesses do not alias. It would be good to include those here as well.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D105098/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D105098
More information about the llvm-commits
mailing list