[PATCH] D123172: Transforms: Fix code duplication between LowerAtomic and AtomicExpand

[Philip Reames via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

reames added a comment.

After you've added the NotAtomic option to AtomicExpand, does LowerAtomic serve any purpose at all?  The one in tree use I can find (in ARM) could be handled via the shouldExpandX callbacks without issue (I think).  If possible, I'd rather switch that one backend over and then just delete the code.

Unless we think the ability to strip out atomics is useful for debugging or something?


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D123172/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D123172