[llvm] [LoopPeel] Peel to make Phis loop inductions (PR #121104)

[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 1aea0241f1cce9eb4eba3e4add3be9370e30e415 88272e4daf6e313e577c31f7958068ed0c61f23c --extensions cpp -- llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/LoopPeel.cpp
``````````

</details>

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

``````````diff
diff --git a/llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/LoopPeel.cpp b/llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/LoopPeel.cpp
index 4ab1ed2783..cb760c2170 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/LoopPeel.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/LoopPeel.cpp
@@ -221,9 +221,9 @@ PhiAnalyzer::PhiAnalyzer(const Loop &L, unsigned MaxIterations)
   assert(MaxIterations > 0 && "no peeling is allowed?");
 }
 
-/// Test if \p Phi is induction variable or not. It can be checked by using SCEV,
-/// but it's expensive to calculate it here. Instead, we perform the cheaper
-/// checks, which cannot detect complex one but enough for some cases.
+/// Test if \p Phi is induction variable or not. It can be checked by using
+/// SCEV, but it's expensive to calculate it here. Instead, we perform the
+/// cheaper checks, which cannot detect complex one but enough for some cases.
 bool PhiAnalyzer::isInductionPHI(const PHINode *Phi) const {
   // Currently, we only support loops that consist of one basic block. In this
   // case, the phi can become an IV if it has an incoming value from the basic

``````````

</details>


https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121104