From: Chris Lattner <sabre@nondot.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 16:38:55 +0000 (+0000)
Subject: Don't unswitch really large loops even if they are mostly filled with empty
X-Git-Url: http://demsky.eecs.uci.edu/git/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=daa2bf9a192496a456b548fbb6787cdcee183c70;p=oota-llvm.git

Don't unswitch really large loops even if they are mostly filled with empty
blocks.


git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@28959 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
---

diff --git a/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopUnswitch.cpp b/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopUnswitch.cpp
index d33dcb7c0b0..945803f0afc 100644
--- a/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopUnswitch.cpp
+++ b/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopUnswitch.cpp
@@ -333,6 +333,12 @@ unsigned LoopUnswitch::getLoopUnswitchCost(Loop *L, Value *LIC) {
   if (IsTrivialUnswitchCondition(L, LIC))
     return 0;
   
+  // If the loop is really large (over twice our threshold) don't even consider
+  // unswitching it.  This will produce a really large loop with lots of empty
+  // blocks.
+  if (L->getBlocks().size() > 2*Threshold)
+    return 2*Threshold;
+  
   unsigned Cost = 0;
   // FIXME: this is brain dead.  It should take into consideration code
   // shrinkage.