The limitation of the current pass that it skips initializer-less GV's
seems arbitrary, in all the reduced cases i (personally) looked at,
the globals weren't needed, yet they were kept.
So let's do two things:
1. allow reducing initializer-less globals
2. before reducing globals, reduce their initializers, much like we do function bodies
Summary:
I think, this results in much more understandable/readable flow.
At least the original logic was perhaps the most hard thing for me to grasp when taking an initial look on the delta passes.
Reviewers: nickdesaulniers, dblaikie, diegotf, george.burgess.iv
Reviewed By: nickdesaulniers
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83287
As it can be seen in newly-added (previously-crashing) test-case,
there can be a situation where multiple GV's are used in instr,
and we would schedule the same instruction to be deleted several times,
crashing when trying to delete it the second time.
We could either store WeakVH (done here), or use something set-like.
I think using WeakVH is prevalent in these cases elsewhere.
Summary:
This pass tries to remove Global Variables, as well as their derived uses. For example if a variable `@x` is used by `%call1` and `%call2`, both these uses and the definition of `@x` are deleted. Moreover if `%call1` or `%call2` are used elsewhere those uses are also deleted, and so on recursively.
I'm still uncertain if this pass should remove derived uses, I'm open to suggestions.
Subscribers: mgorny, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64176
> llvm-svn: 368918
llvm-svn: 369061
Remove the @return to fix the warning: '@returns' command used in a
comment that is attached to a function returning void [-Wdocumentation]
llvm-svn: 368957
Summary:
This pass tries to remove Global Variables, as well as their derived uses. For example if a variable `@x` is used by `%call1` and `%call2`, both these uses and the definition of `@x` are deleted. Moreover if `%call1` or `%call2` are used elsewhere those uses are also deleted, and so on recursively.
I'm still uncertain if this pass should remove derived uses, I'm open to suggestions.
Subscribers: mgorny, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64176
llvm-svn: 368918
Roman Lebedev