Somehow there was no verification of this, other than an ad-hoc
assertion in TwoAddressInstructions.
Details
Details
Diff Detail
Diff Detail
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
Good catch @arsenm!
Overall LGTM. Just one missing case if I'm not mistaken.
llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineVerifier.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
1940 | Nit: For compactness, I would put MI->getOperand(I + 1) in its own variable. | |
llvm/test/MachineVerifier/verify-reg-sequence.mir | ||
14 | I think we miss a case in the test and in the verifier: %val = REG_SEQUENCE <noOperands> |
Nit: For compactness, I would put MI->getOperand(I + 1) in its own variable.