Szelethus added a comment. In D66716#1647668 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D66716#1647668>, @NoQ wrote:
> I don't understand. Isn't widening supposed to happen //after we exit the > loop//? The loop isn't over yet when the bug is being reported. Why is this > problem widening-specific? Given that we also have a weird invalidation of > `b`, i suspect that we're doing widening in a wrong moment of time. Something is totally off here. Do you think its ever okay to find a last store in a `BlockEdge`? Should I rather fix this by changing how loop widening works? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D66716/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D66716 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
