See D42775 for discussion. Turns out, just exploring nodes which
weren't explored first is not quite enough, as e.g. the first quick
traversal resulting in a report can mark everything as "visited", and
then subsequent traversals of the same region will get all the pitfalls
of DFS.
Priority queue-based approach in comparison shows much greater
increase in coverage and even performance, without sacrificing memory.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D43354
llvm-svn: 326136
The assertion gets exposed when changing the exploration order.
This is a quick hacky fix, but the intention is that if the nodes do
merge, it should not matter which predecessor should be traverse.
A proper fix would be not to traverse predecessors at all, as all
information relevant for any decision should be avilable locally.
rdar://37540480
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42773
llvm-svn: 325977
See reviews.llvm.org/M1 for evaluation, and
lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2018-January/056718.html for
discussion.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42775
llvm-svn: 324956
George Karpenkov