The symptom is that an assertion is triggered. The assertion was added by
me to detect the situation when value is propagated from dead blocks.
(We can certainly get rid of assertion; it is safe to do so, because propagating
value from dead block to alive join node is certainly ok.)
The root cause of this bug is : edge-splitting is conducted on the fly,
the edge being split could be a dead edge, therefore the block that
split the critial edge needs to be flagged "dead" as well.
There are 3 ways to fix this bug:
1) Get rid of the assertion as I mentioned eariler
2) When an dead edge is split, flag the inserted block "dead".
3) proactively split the critical edges connecting dead and live blocks when
new dead blocks are revealed.
This fix go for 3) with additional 2 LOC.
Testing case was added by Rafael the other day.
llvm-svn: 194424
The problem of r191017 is that when GVN fabricate a val-number for a dead instruction (in order
to make following expr-PRE happy), it forget to fabricate a leader-table entry for it as well.
llvm-svn: 191118
This is how it ignores the dead code:
1) When a dead branch target, say block B, is identified, all the
blocks dominated by B is dead as well.
2) The PHIs of those blocks in dominance-frontier(B) is updated such
that the operands corresponding to dead predecessors are replaced
by "UndefVal".
Using lattice's jargon, the "UndefVal" is the "Top" in essence.
Phi node like this "phi(v1 bb1, undef xx)" will be optimized into
"v1" if v1 is constant, or v1 is an instruction which dominate this
PHI node.
3) When analyzing the availability of a load L, all dead mem-ops which
L depends on disguise as a load which evaluate exactly same value as L.
4) The dead mem-ops will be materialized as "UndefVal" during code motion.
llvm-svn: 191017
Shuxin Yang