[llvm] 8bef547 - [NFC] Run clang-format on llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86InstroInfo.cpp

[Mingming Liu via llvm-commits]

Oh in retrospect I should have updated the commit message as well.

Going to revert, update commit message and reapply.

On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 6:55 PM Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote:

> This did not use the title that I asked you to put in the review.
>
> ~Craig
>
>
> On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 5:57 PM Mingming Liu via llvm-commits <
> llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> Author: Mingming Liu
>> Date: 2022-05-10T17:56:51-07:00
>> New Revision: 8bef5476de3ec7388ad0c72b26dcc82ac7fd970a
>>
>> URL:
>> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/8bef5476de3ec7388ad0c72b26dcc82ac7fd970a
>> DIFF:
>> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/8bef5476de3ec7388ad0c72b26dcc82ac7fd970a.diff
>>
>> LOG: [NFC] Run clang-format on llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86InstroInfo.cpp
>>
>> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D125345
>>
>> Added:
>>
>>
>> Modified:
>>     llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86InstrInfo.cpp
>>
>> Removed:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ################################################################################
>> diff  --git a/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86InstrInfo.cpp
>> b/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86InstrInfo.cpp
>> index f4ffb42d9972d..831142a66d6bb 100644
>> --- a/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86InstrInfo.cpp
>> +++ b/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86InstrInfo.cpp
>> @@ -1049,11 +1049,12 @@ static bool findRedundantFlagInstr(MachineInstr
>> &CmpInstr,
>>      // in the `AND` and `TEST` operation; signed bit is not known for
>> `AND`,
>>      // and is known to be 0 as a result of `TEST64rr`.
>>      //
>> -    // FIXME: As opposed to poisoning the SF bit direclty, consider
>> peeking into
>> -    // the AND instruction and using the static information to guide
>> peephole optimization if possible.
>> -    // For example, it's possible to fold a conditional move into a copy
>> -    // if the relevant EFLAG bits could be deduced from an immediate
>> operand of and operation.
>> -    //
>> +    // FIXME: As opposed to poisoning the SF bit directly, consider
>> peeking into
>> +    // the AND instruction and using the static information to guide
>> peephole
>> +    // optimization if possible. For example, it's possible to fold a
>> +    // conditional move into a copy if the relevant EFLAG bits could be
>> deduced
>> +    // from an immediate operand of and operation.
>> +    //
>>      NoSignFlag = true;
>>      // ClearsOverflowFlag is true for AND operation (no surprise).
>>      ClearsOverflowFlag = true;
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> llvm-commits mailing list
>> llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>>
>

-- 
Thanks,
Mingming
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20220510/ef549558/attachment.html>