[llvm] [ValueTracking] [ValueTracking] Add more conditions in `isTruePredicate` (PR #86083)

[via llvm-commits]

goldsteinn wrote:

> > @goldsteinn I think the patch you have in mind is #69471. Totally forgot about that one...
> > My general feedback on this patch is that we're re-implementing simplifyICmpInst() here. I think it would be good to at least check what the compile-time impact of using simplifyICmpInst() instead would be -- I suspect "bad", but best to confirm that...
> > Otherwise, I am fine with having some pragmatic duplication here, if having it is useful. I just want to make sure we don't end up with a full reimplementation down the line because a certain someone keeps spotting missing cases :)
> 
> Let me look into creating a common helper for simlifyICmpInst and this.

I think impl is relatively novel, we have a scattering if the cases supported in
instsimplify like `simplifyICmpWithMinMax`, but the and/or icmp instructions
generally defer to is implied.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/86083