[llvm] [CodeGen][ShrinkWrap] Clarify StackAddressUsedBlockInfo meaning (PR #80679)

[via llvm-commits]

github-actions[bot] wrote:

<!--LLVM CODE FORMAT COMMENT: {clang-format}-->


:warning: C/C++ code formatter, clang-format found issues in your code. :warning:

<details>
<summary>
You can test this locally with the following command:
</summary>

``````````bash
git-clang-format --diff d4ef4b818929732bcb68a536ef2c91891c0ad179 dd2b04d3997c029dfdc41fc91442313756cc3a9c -- llvm/lib/CodeGen/ShrinkWrap.cpp
``````````

</details>

<details>
<summary>
View the diff from clang-format here.
</summary>

``````````diff
diff --git a/llvm/lib/CodeGen/ShrinkWrap.cpp b/llvm/lib/CodeGen/ShrinkWrap.cpp
index 2de161b3b7..a4b2299abc 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/CodeGen/ShrinkWrap.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/CodeGen/ShrinkWrap.cpp
@@ -162,9 +162,10 @@ class ShrinkWrap : public MachineFunctionPass {
   MachineFunction *MachineFunc = nullptr;
 
   /// Is `true` for the block numbers where we assume possible stack accesses
-  /// or computation of stack-relative addresses on any CFG path including the block itself.
-  /// Is `false` for basic blocks where we can guarantee the opposite.
-  /// False positives won't lead to incorrect analysis results, therefore this approach is fair.
+  /// or computation of stack-relative addresses on any CFG path including the
+  /// block itself. Is `false` for basic blocks where we can guarantee the
+  /// opposite. False positives won't lead to incorrect analysis results,
+  /// therefore this approach is fair.
   BitVector StackAddressUsedBlockInfo;
 
   /// Check if \p MI uses or defines a callee-saved register or

``````````

</details>


https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80679