Update aosp/master LLVM for rebase to r230699.

Change-Id: I2b5be30509658cb8266be782de0ab24f9099f9b9

1 files changed, 46 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/test/Transforms/PlaceSafepoints/split-backedge.ll b/test/Transforms/PlaceSafepoints/split-backedge.ll
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..176b54f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/test/Transforms/PlaceSafepoints/split-backedge.ll
@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
+;; A very basic test to make sure that splitting the backedge keeps working
+;; RUN: opt -place-safepoints -spp-split-backedge=1 -S %s | FileCheck %s
+
+define void @test(i32, i1 %cond) gc "statepoint-example" {
+; CHECK-LABEL: @test
+; CHECK-LABEL: loop.loop_crit_edge
+; CHECK: gc.statepoint
+; CHECK-NEXT: br label %loop
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  br i1 %cond, label %loop, label %exit
+
+exit:
+  ret void
+}
+
+; Test for the case where a single conditional branch jumps to two
+; different loop header blocks.  Since we're currently using LoopSimplfy
+; this doesn't hit the interesting case, but once we remove that, we need
+; to be sure this keeps working.
+define void @test2(i32, i1 %cond) gc "statepoint-example" {
+; CHECK-LABEL: @test2
+; CHECK-LABE: loop.loopexit.split
+; CHECK: gc.statepoint
+; CHECK-NEXT: br label %loop
+; CHECK-LABEL: loop2.loop2_crit_edge
+; CHECK: gc.statepoint
+; CHECK-NEXT: br label %loop2
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  br label %loop2
+
+loop2:
+  br i1 %cond, label %loop, label %loop2
+}
+
+declare void @do_safepoint()
+define void @gc.safepoint_poll() {
+entry:
+  call void @do_safepoint()
+  ret void
+}