[llvm] [ValueTracking] Extend LHS/RHS with matching operand to work without constants. (PR #85557)

[via llvm-commits]

goldsteinn wrote:

> Yeah, I can't say I'm particularly fond of the direction.
> 
> From the test diffs, a fold we're missing is this: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/-njJr8 Particularly profitable if the new comparison folds later, but also seems generally beneficial.

Would think its more principled to more generally handle the implication between conditions rather than add a transform for each possible case.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/85557