The (previously-crashing) test-case would cause us to seemingly-harmlessly
replace some use with something else, but we can't replace it with itself,
so we would crash.
As reported in https://reviews.llvm.org/D83101#2133062
the new visitInsertElementInst()/visitExtractElementInst() functionality
is causing miscompiles (previously-crashing test added)
It is due to the fact how the infra of Scalarizer is dealing with DCE,
it was not updated or was it ready for such scalar value forwarding.
It always assumed that the moment we "scalarized" something,
it can go away, and did so with prejudice.
But that is no longer safe/okay to do.
Instead, let's prevent it from ever shooting itself into foot,
and let's just accumulate the instructions-to-be-deleted
in a vector, and collectively cleanup (those that are *actually* dead)
them all at the end.
All existing tests are not reporting any new garbage leftovers,
but maybe it's test coverage issue.
As it's causing some bot failures (and per request from kbarton).
This reverts commit r358543/ab70da07286e618016e78247e4a24fcb84077fda.
llvm-svn: 358546
I've added a new test case that causes the scalarizer to try and use
dead-and-erased values - caused by the basic blocks not being in
domination order within the function. To fix this, instead of iterating
through the blocks in function order, I walk them in reverse post order.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52540
llvm-svn: 344128
Summary:
In Scalarizer::gather we see if we already have a scattered form of Op,
and in that case use the new form.
In the particular case of PR28108, the found ValueVector SV has size 2,
where the first Value is nullptr, and the second is indeed a proper Value.
The nullptr then caused an assert to blow when we tried to do
cast<Instruction>(SV[I]).
With this patch we check SV[I] before doing the cast, and if it's nullptr
we just skip over it.
I don't know the Scalarizer well enough to know if this is the best fix
or if something should be done else where to prevent the nullptr from
being in the ValueVector at all, but at least this avoids the crash
and looking at the test case output it looks reasonable.
Reviewers: hfinkel, frasercrmck, wala, mehdi_amini
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21518
llvm-svn: 275359
Roman Lebedev