[SLP] put verifyFunction call behind EXPENSIVE_CHECKS
A severe compile-time slowdown from this call is noted in:
https://llvm.org/PR48689
My naive fix was to put it under LLVM_DEBUG ( 267ff79 ),
but that's not limiting in the way we want.
This is a quick fix (or we could just remove the call completely
and rely on some later pass to discover potentially wrong IR?).
A bigger/better fix would be to improve/limit verifyFunction()
as noted in:
https://llvm.org/PR47712
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94328
This commit is contained in:
@@ -2499,7 +2499,11 @@ BoUpSLP::~BoUpSLP() {
|
||||
"trying to erase instruction with users.");
|
||||
Pair.getFirst()->eraseFromParent();
|
||||
}
|
||||
LLVM_DEBUG(verifyFunction(*F));
|
||||
#ifdef EXPENSIVE_CHECKS
|
||||
// If we could guarantee that this call is not extremely slow, we could
|
||||
// remove the ifdef limitation (see PR47712).
|
||||
assert(!verifyFunction(*F, %dbgs()));
|
||||
#endif
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
void BoUpSLP::eraseInstructions(ArrayRef<Value *> AV) {
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user