echristo marked 6 inline comments as done.
echristo added a comment.
OK, ready again :)
================
Comment at: llvm/test/Transforms/LoopUnroll/FullUnroll.ll:4-6
+; We don't end up deleting the loop, but we remove everything inside of it so
checking for any
+; reasonable instruction from the original loop will work.
+; CHECK-NOT: br i1
----------------
chandlerc wrote:
> Make sure it is in the correct function at least, and maybe after the label
> for the loop header?
Got it. There's not a lot of function left at the end:
define void @walrus() local_unnamed_addr #0 {
entry:
br label %for.cond.preheader
for.cond.preheader: ; preds =
%for.cond.preheader, %entry
br label %for.cond.preheader
}
================
Comment at: llvm/test/Transforms/LoopUnroll/FullUnroll.ll:12-17
+; Function Attrs: noinline optnone uwtable
+define dso_local void @_Z3Runv() #0 {
+entry:
+ call void @_Z6Helperv()
+ ret void
+}
----------------
chandlerc wrote:
> Are both functions needed?
I thought so, but apparently not :)
================
Comment at: llvm/test/Transforms/LoopUnroll/FullUnroll.ll:19-20
+
+; Function Attrs: noinline nounwind optnone uwtable
+define linkonce_odr dso_local void @_Z6Helperv() #1 comdat {
+entry:
----------------
chandlerc wrote:
> Nit, but minimize and clean this function up a touch?
>
> At the least, removing all the target features seems valuable, and I'd give
> things stable names instead of numbered values.
Got it. Most things have stable names, only a few temporaries have numbered
names.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D71687/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D71687
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
