Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "r292773".
2017 Jan 23
6
Should analyses be able to hold AssertingVH to IR? (related to PR28400)
...gt; jump-threading invalidate LVI.
>
>
> Is everybody happy with this workaround?
>
I wasn't too happy with it, but I had no better suggestion.
As the infrastructure matured, what I think is a substantially less
horrible workaround is available in the form of what I implemented in
r292773. Instead of just working around this for each analysis, this works
around it in GlobalDCE for *any* function analysis stashing an AssertingVH.
The down side is that it only defends against *function* removal and
*function* analyses. =[
This may be a tiny bit better in some senses, but in others it...
2017 Jan 24
2
Should analyses be able to hold AssertingVH to IR? (related to PR28400)
...reading invalidate LVI.
>
> Is everybody happy with this workaround?
>
> I wasn't too happy with it, but I had no better suggestion.
>
> As the infrastructure matured, what I think is a substantially less horrible workaround is available in the form of what I implemented in r292773. Instead of just working around this for each analysis, this works around it in GlobalDCE for *any* function analysis stashing an AssertingVH. The down side is that it only defends against *function* removal and *function* analyses. =[
>
> This may be a tiny bit better in some senses, but in...
2016 Jul 06
4
Should analyses be able to hold AssertingVH to IR? (related to PR28400)
While building test-suite with the new PM, I ran into problems with
AssertingVH being triggered which is obvious in retrospect:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=28400
Both cases I ran into revolve around LVI which holds AssertingVH.
Essentially, what happens is this:
1. LVI holds an AssertingVH pointing at a BasicBlock
2. Some other pass ends up deleting that BB (e.g. SimplifyCFG)
3. BOOM