assert((SIOpd == 1 || SIOpd == 2) && "Invalid select operand!");
if (isChainSelectCmpBranch(SI) && Icmp->getPredicate() == ICmpInst::ICMP_EQ) {
BasicBlock *Succ = SI->getParent()->getTerminator()->getSuccessor(1);
- // The check for the unique predecessor is not the best that can be
+ // The check for the single predecessor is not the best that can be
// done. But it protects efficiently against cases like when SI's
// home block has two successors, Succ and Succ1, and Succ1 predecessor
// of Succ. Then SI can't be replaced by SIOpd because the use that gets
// guarantees that the path all uses of SI (outside SI's parent) are on
// is disjoint from all other paths out of SI. But that information
// is more expensive to compute, and the trade-off here is in favor
- // of compile-time.
- if (Succ->getUniquePredecessor() && dominatesAllUses(SI, Icmp, Succ)) {
+ // of compile-time. It should also be noticed that we check for a single
+ // predecessor and not only uniqueness. This to handle the situation when
+ // Succ and Succ1 points to the same basic block.
+ if (Succ->getSinglePredecessor() && dominatesAllUses(SI, Icmp, Succ)) {
NumSel++;
SI->replaceUsesOutsideBlock(SI->getOperand(SIOpd), SI->getParent());
return true;
br label %bb
}
+; Negative test. Must not trigger the select-cmp-br combine because the result
+; of the select is used in both flows following the br (the special case where
+; the conditional branch has the same target for both flows).
+define i32 @test6(i32 %arg, i1 %arg1) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: @test6(
+; CHECK-NEXT: entry:
+; CHECK-NEXT: br i1 undef, label [[BB:%.*]], label [[BB]]
+; CHECK: bb:
+; CHECK-NEXT: [[TMP:%.*]] = select i1 [[ARG1:%.*]], i32 [[ARG:%.*]], i32 0
+; CHECK-NEXT: ret i32 [[TMP]]
+;
+entry:
+ %tmp = select i1 %arg1, i32 %arg, i32 0
+ %tmp2 = icmp eq i32 %tmp, 0
+ br i1 %tmp2, label %bb, label %bb
+
+bb: ; preds = %entry, %entry
+ ret i32 %tmp
+}