/// isLoopInvariant - Return true if the specified value is loop invariant
///
-bool Loop::isLoopInvariant(Value *V) const {
- if (Instruction *I = dyn_cast<Instruction>(V))
+bool Loop::isLoopInvariant(const Value *V) const {
+ if (const Instruction *I = dyn_cast<Instruction>(V))
return !contains(I);
return true; // All non-instructions are loop invariant
}
/// hasLoopInvariantOperands - Return true if all the operands of the
/// specified instruction are loop invariant.
-bool Loop::hasLoopInvariantOperands(Instruction *I) const {
- for (unsigned i = 0, e = I->getNumOperands(); i != e; ++i)
- if (!isLoopInvariant(I->getOperand(i)))
- return false;
-
- return true;
+bool Loop::hasLoopInvariantOperands(const Instruction *I) const {
+ return all_of(I->operands(), [this](Value *V) { return isLoopInvariant(V); });
}
/// makeLoopInvariant - If the given value is an instruciton inside of the
return false;
if (I->mayReadFromMemory())
return false;
- // The landingpad instruction is immobile.
- if (isa<LandingPadInst>(I))
+ // EH block instructions are immobile.
+ if (I->isEHPad())
return false;
// Determine the insertion point, unless one was given.
if (!InsertPt) {
return NearLoop;
}
+LoopInfo::LoopInfo(const DominatorTreeBase<BasicBlock> &DomTree) {
+ analyze(DomTree);
+}
+
/// updateUnloop - The last backedge has been removed from a loop--now the
/// "unloop". Find a new parent for the blocks contained within unloop and
/// update the loop tree. We don't necessarily have valid dominators at this
// objects. I don't want to add that kind of complexity until the scope of
// the problem is better understood.
LoopInfo LI;
- LI.Analyze(AM->getResult<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(F));
+ LI.analyze(AM->getResult<DominatorTreeAnalysis>(F));
return LI;
}
bool LoopInfoWrapperPass::runOnFunction(Function &) {
releaseMemory();
- LI.Analyze(getAnalysis<DominatorTreeWrapperPass>().getDomTree());
+ LI.analyze(getAnalysis<DominatorTreeWrapperPass>().getDomTree());
return false;
}