Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "00973".
Did you mean:
0973
2011 Aug 26
2
[LLVMdev] Dead node removal in DAGCombiner
...;t push its operands to the work
list as done in line 974-975?
00970 // If N has no uses, it is dead. Make sure to revisit all
N's operands once
00971 // N is deleted from the DAG, since they too may now be dead
or may have a
00972 // reduced number of uses, allowing other xforms.
00973 if (N->use_empty() && N != &Dummy) {
00974 for (unsigned i = 0, e = N->getNumOperands(); i != e; ++i)
00975 AddToWorkList(N->getOperand(i).getNode());
00976
00977 DAG.DeleteNode(N);
00978 continue;
00979 }
Or is it one of the corner cases ment...
2011 Aug 26
0
[LLVMdev] Dead node removal in DAGCombiner
...ist as done in line 974-975?
>
> 00970 // If N has no uses, it is dead. Make sure to revisit all
> N's operands once
> 00971 // N is deleted from the DAG, since they too may now be dead
> or may have a
> 00972 // reduced number of uses, allowing other xforms.
> 00973 if (N->use_empty()&& N !=&Dummy) {
> 00974 for (unsigned i = 0, e = N->getNumOperands(); i != e; ++i)
> 00975 AddToWorkList(N->getOperand(i).getNode());
> 00976
> 00977 DAG.DeleteNode(N);
> 00978 continue;
> 00979 }
I suspec...
2011 Aug 27
3
[LLVMdev] OpenCL Backend
...? ? // If N has no uses, it is dead. ?Make sure to revisit all
> >> N's operands once
> >> 00971 ? ? // N is deleted from the DAG, since they too may now be dead
> >> or may have a
> >> 00972 ? ? // reduced number of uses, allowing other xforms.
> >> 00973 ? ? if (N->use_empty()&& ?N !=&Dummy) {
> >> 00974 ? ? ? for (unsigned i = 0, e = N->getNumOperands(); i != e; ++i)
> >> 00975 ? ? ? ? AddToWorkList(N->getOperand(i).getNode());
> >> 00976
> >> 00977 ? ? ? DAG.DeleteNode(N);
> >> 009...