In PR39475:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39475
..we may fail to recognize/simplify fabs() in some cases because we do not
canonicalize fcmp with a -0.0 operand.
Adding that canonicalization can cause regressions on min/max FP tests, so
that's this patch: for the purpose of determining whether something is min/max,
let the value returned by the select determine how we treat a 0.0 operand in the fcmp.
This patch doesn't actually change the -0.0 to +0.0. It just changes the analysis, so
we don't fail to recognize equivalent min/max patterns that only differ in the
signbit of 0.0.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54001
llvm-svn: 346097
e7c94ef1de