[LICM] Make LICM able to hoist phis

[john.brawn]

Summary

The general approach taken is to make note of loop invariant branches, then when we see something conditional on that branch, such as a phi, we create a copy of the branch and (empty versions of) its successors and hoist using that.

This has no impact by itself that I've been able to see, as LICM typically doesn't see such phis as they will have been converted into selects by the time LICM is run, but once we start doing phi-to-select conversion later it will be important.

[efriedma]

This has no impact by itself that I've been able to see, as LICM typically doesn't see such phis as they will have been converted into selects by the time LICM is run

That's surprising... I would have expected this to show up in some cases. Some branches can't eliminated due to side-effects.

lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

797 ↗

(On Diff #168101)

Would it be better to insert a PHI node, rather than re-hoist?

[john.brawn]

In D52827#1254146, @efriedma wrote:

This has no impact by itself that I've been able to see, as LICM typically doesn't see such phis as they will have been converted into selects by the time LICM is run

That's surprising... I would have expected this to show up in some cases. Some branches can't eliminated due to side-effects.

It's quite likely that the various TODOs are preventing anything anything significant from being hoisted.

lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

797 ↗

(On Diff #168101)

I considered that, but went with this as it gives more similar results to the current behaviour in the cases where we end up not hoisting any phis. However I'm currently working on fixing the various TODOs here and it looks like maybe I will need to go for the approach of inserting phis. I'm currently working on it.

[reames]

Starting with only high level design comments....

I think this patch is going about things in slightly the wrong way. As far as I can tell, there are two key components to this: 1) hoisting PHIs w/loop invariant selectors and operands, and 2) hoisting instructions from below conditional branches into conditional blocks inserted in preheader. I think these two can and should be separate into distinct patches.

I'm concerned about (2). This really seems like a form of loop peeling, and a currently unrestricted one without a cost model. I'm not sure I'm convinced this belongs in LICM at all.

(1) could be formulated w/o (2). The easiest way would be to form a select chain using the LIV conditions and LIV operands. This also works for any instruction for which we have a predicated form.

lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

442 ↗

(On Diff #168101)

Basic question on design here. Once we've hoisted the branch on the loop invariant condition, shouldn't we be able to remove the condition within the loop? Or is this more analogous to loop peeling where we leave a copy of the control flow within the loop?

472 ↗

(On Diff #168101)

loop invariant operands

485 ↗

(On Diff #168101)

I don't think the approach you're using here works. Consider the following:
A -> B, C
B-> D, E
C-> D, F

B & C share a common successor, but it's not a unique successor. As such, there are paths that don't converge in D.

546 ↗

(On Diff #168101)

What about indirectly dependent blocks? (e.g. D in A->B, C, B->D)

767 ↗

(On Diff #168101)

Minor: I'd suggest sinking the invariant operand check into the helper. Reading the helper in isolation is currently confusing.

798 ↗

(On Diff #168101)

I think the "re-hoisting" here (which is really re-sinking right?) is probably a non-starter. We should instead prevent hoisting.

[john.brawn]

In D52827#1257485, @reames wrote:

Starting with only high level design comments....

I think this patch is going about things in slightly the wrong way. As far as I can tell, there are two key components to this: 1) hoisting PHIs w/loop invariant selectors and operands, and 2) hoisting instructions from below conditional branches into conditional blocks inserted in preheader. I think these two can and should be separate into distinct patches.

I'm concerned about (2). This really seems like a form of loop peeling, and a currently unrestricted one without a cost model. I'm not sure I'm convinced this belongs in LICM at all.

(1) could be formulated w/o (2). The easiest way would be to form a select chain using the LIV conditions and LIV operands. This also works for any instruction for which we have a predicated form.

I'd not considered going direct from phi to select when hoisting. It seems like it will restrict the kinds of phis that can be hoisted, but we're probably not hoisting them anyway due to the various TODOs here. I'll look into it.

lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

442 ↗

(On Diff #168101)

Only if we also hoist everything from the if and else blocks in the loop. Currently I'm leaving it up to simplifycfg to figur out if that's the case and clean it up if so.

485 ↗

(On Diff #168101)

I'm pretty sure that only matters if E uses values defined in B (or F uses values defined in C) which are then hoisted to conditional blocks in the preheader. But in that case we'd see that the uses aren't dominated and rehoist. But this does cause problems if we insert phis instead of rehoisting, so I do need to look at what I'm doing here some more.

798 ↗

(On Diff #168101)

Current behaviour of LICM is to hoist everything to the same block, and what this re-hoisting does is essentially get us that behaviour in those cases where hoisting to a conditional block doesn't work. Preventing hoisting would therefore prevent hoisting of things that are currently hoisted. We _could_ do something like delaying the decision of where to hoist things until we know if everything will end up being dominated, but re-hoisting seems much easier.

[john.brawn]

Update based on review comments, and add some more tests.

[john.brawn]

In D52827#1257963, @john.brawn wrote:

In D52827#1257485, @reames wrote:

Starting with only high level design comments....

I think this patch is going about things in slightly the wrong way. As far as I can tell, there are two key components to this: 1) hoisting PHIs w/loop invariant selectors and operands, and 2) hoisting instructions from below conditional branches into conditional blocks inserted in preheader. I think these two can and should be separate into distinct patches.

I'm concerned about (2). This really seems like a form of loop peeling, and a currently unrestricted one without a cost model. I'm not sure I'm convinced this belongs in LICM at all.

(1) could be formulated w/o (2). The easiest way would be to form a select chain using the LIV conditions and LIV operands. This also works for any instruction for which we have a predicated form.

I'd not considered going direct from phi to select when hoisting. It seems like it will restrict the kinds of phis that can be hoisted, but we're probably not hoisting them anyway due to the various TODOs here. I'll look into it.

After trying this out and running lnt/spec2000/spec2006 it gives no improvements (either by itself or combined with D50723). By comparison the current approach gives no improvement by itself, and 2% improvement in spec2000/254.gap combined with D50723 (on Cortex-A57).

lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

485 ↗

(On Diff #168101)

It turns out that this is taken care of by the check that BT dominates CommonSucc. I've restructured the code here a little (as in some cases we weren't picking TrueDest/FalseDest when it was a triangle destination) and adjusted the comments.

546 ↗

(On Diff #168101)

Then we don't do anything. In the case that we're hoisting a phi in D we make sure to call getHoistedBlock on B and C beforehand which takes care of duplicating the control flow.

797 ↗

(On Diff #168101)

Inserting a phi, combined with relaxing the dominated check in registerPossiblyHoistableBranch, can lead to cases where we get the phi value from the 'wrong' predecessor (e.g. in the diamond_with_extra_in_edge test). It's probably not the case that this can happen without that relaxation but I'd rather not risk it.

[john.brawn]

Ping.

[mkazantsev]

lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

485 ↗

(On Diff #169215)

Bail if TrueDest == FalseDest.

497 ↗

(On Diff #169215)

If the size of set is not 1, you are introducing non-deterministic optimizer behavior here. Please assert that the size is 1.

550 ↗

(On Diff #169215)

BB != Pair.second is checked 2 times, you could instead write if (BB != Pair.second && (succ1 == BB || succ2 == BB)).

575 ↗

(On Diff #169215)

Do you ever add nullptr to this map? I guess it should be .count(Orig).

592 ↗

(On Diff #169215)

Dot missing.

626 ↗

(On Diff #169215)

Dot missing.

670 ↗

(On Diff #169215)

It's O(N^2) in the worst case, which is not super-cool. If I understand this part correctly, you need to make sure that there is an element of WorkList that is a predecessor of another element of this WorkList. It can be done faster if you accumulate all elements of the WorkList into a set and do like

for (el : Worklist)
  for (p : predecessors(el))
    if (set.contains(p)) we are done.

It will be O(N).

681 ↗

(On Diff #169215)

How do you ensure that you have found something? Is it correct to do it if nothing was found and idx has a default value?

[probinson]

Does this lose debug information? I do very little with optimization passes so I don't know, but it would be nice to keep it in mind.

[john.brawn]

lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

497 ↗

(On Diff #169215)

It is actually possible to have more than 1 here. I'll adjust it to have deterministic behaviour for that case (by picking whichever happens to be first in the function's block list).

681 ↗

(On Diff #169215)

It's actually possible to not find anything, in which case we fall back to picking the first element of the worklist. I've updated the comment to make this clear.

[john.brawn]

In D52827#1280717, @probinson wrote:

Does this lose debug information? I do very little with optimization passes so I don't know, but it would be nice to keep it in mind.

The hoisting of phis goes through the hoist function, so it's no worse than anything else i.e. it loses the debug information, see line 1404.

[john.brawn]

Update according to review comments.

[mkazantsev]

lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

501 ↗

(On Diff #171944)

The general algorithm for non-empty TrueDestSucc deals well with case of size == 1; do we really need separate processing for this case?

622 ↗

(On Diff #171944)

Maybe I am missing something, but where do we notify DomTree of existence of these new edges?

683 ↗

(On Diff #171944)

I guess you could use insert(Worklist.begin(), Worklist.end()), it's tad faster.

681 ↗

(On Diff #169215)

I think I now understand the algorithm you're trying to apply.

Imagine the graph A -> B -> C -> D -> E, and the blocks happened to be arranged as E, D, C, B, A in the Worklist. Maybe I am missing something, but it seems that the algorithm inside collectChildrenInLoop is BFS-based and cannot protect us from this situation. It could, for example, happen if all these blocks have a common parent and arranged in the order E, D, C, B, A in this parent.

The downside if your algorithm is that it will traverse over all worklist to find A, then over all remaining worklist to find B and so on. Each any_of query will work O(N), and you do N such queries, so overall algorithmic complexity is O(N^2).

The correct way to efficiently process all blocks before their successors is processing them in Reverse Post-Order. This arrangement by definition gives you what you want: it sorts the blocks in order that all successors go after their predecessors. If the elements of Worklist are arranged in RPO, you can just process them in order without extra checks, and it will be O(N).

You can see example how to build RPO in class LoopBlocksDFS, the methods you need are beginRPO(), endRPO().

And aside from all that above, erasing the last element from the Worklist is O(1) and of the first one is O(N). When you don't care what element to erase, you should do so to the last one. Erasing the first element is expensive. However once you process them in RPO order, you don't need to erase anything from the Worklist at all because you know that you've processed all predecessors before all successors.

[mkazantsev]

I generally like what this patch is doing, but the size of code and its complexity overwhelms me. Is it possible to separate the patch into smaller pieces so that it would be easier to review them in isolation? If yes, I'd appreciate that a lot.

[john.brawn]

lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

501 ↗

(On Diff #171944)

We could have one case for size >= 1 but that would mean iterating through potentially all of the blocks in the function to find the one element of the set, which seems rather wasteful when we can just take that one element directly.

622 ↗

(On Diff #171944)

Inserting the edge is never needed. insertEdge only has an effect when the source and destination blocks have different immediate dominators (see InsertReachable in GenericDomTreeConstruction.h) and that never happens - HoistTrueDest and HoistFalseDest always have the same immediate dominator as HoistCommonSucc, and for the edge from HoistCommonSucc to TargetSucc it may be that HoistCommonSucc is now the immediate dominator of TargetSucc but that's handled in the loop at line 632.

681 ↗

(On Diff #169215)

Yes it does look like reverse post-order gives me what I want (though I have to adjust some of the tests as it picks a different but equally good order). I'll modify this to do that.

[john.brawn]

In D52827#1283474, @mkazantsev wrote:

I generally like what this patch is doing, but the size of code and its complexity overwhelms me. Is it possible to separate the patch into smaller pieces so that it would be easier to review them in isolation? If yes, I'd appreciate that a lot.

I don't really think so. The only way I can think of slicing it up would be to add the control flow hoisting (which does nothing useful by itself) as one patch, and then the phi hoisting as a seprate patch, but the phi hoisting part is very small and simple so I don't think it would usefully reduce the size of the first part.

[john.brawn]

Use LoopBlocksRPO to generate the worklist.

[mkazantsev]

lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

470 ↗

(On Diff #172788)

Preheader by definition has only one successor which is the loop header. Therefore, OriginalPreheaderChildren always has one element which is header's DTNode. So it doesn't look like you even need this field, just take loop header (it doesn't change, right?)

Or am I missing something here?

And btw, if it needs to be a field and a vector, use SmallVector instead of std::vector.

559 ↗

(On Diff #172788)

This name is misleading, it doesn't look like something that can change the IR. How about getOrCreateHoistedBlock?

650 ↗

(On Diff #172788)

Please add verification of LI in debug mode just to make sure that we didn't mess up anything (maybe not here, but in some reasonable place).

672 ↗

(On Diff #172788)

Why not SmallVector and push_back? That wouldn't make any difference in terms of effect but less memory-consuming.

793 ↗

(On Diff #172788)

This is the part I don't understand. If the hoist destination doesn't dominate instruction's users then it also doesn't dominate the original instruction. Is LICM able to hoist to such locations? Is there an example of that?

804 ↗

(On Diff #172788)

Set Changed here.

805 ↗

(On Diff #172788)

Do we really need to change the hoist point? Why not just hoist of them before preheader's terminator? That would make this code simpler.

1391 ↗

(On Diff #172788)

Braces not needed (here and in some other places like this).

test/Transforms/LICM/hoist-phi.ll

126 ↗

(On Diff #172788)

Please add TODO: to the tests you think we should cover in the future, that will make it easier to track if we decide to expand this transform to something more general.

[mkazantsev]

Missing Changed update and LI sanitizing should be added.

[john.brawn]

lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

470 ↗

(On Diff #172788)

Yes, I think you're right. I'll do some testing to double-check then change this.

672 ↗

(On Diff #172788)

The iteration order when rehoisting will have to be changed (because we have to visit instructions before the instructions they use, i.e. later instructions before earlier instructions), but yes that will work.

793 ↗

(On Diff #172788)

We get this when we hoist an instruction but don't hoist all of its uses. An easy example of this is a phi where one operand is loop invariant and the other is not. The hoisted loop invariant operand will not dominate its use. In the tests I've added @conditional_use, @rehoist, and @diamond_with_extra_in_edge are all examples of where rehoisting happens.

805 ↗

(On Diff #172788)

If we have something like

%a = add i32 %loop_invariant, 1
%b = mul i32 %a, 2

then if %b does not dominate its uses we have to rehoist %b, at which point %a no longer dominates %b and has to be rehoisted to before %a. That's what HoistPoint is doing, it's making sure we rehoist instructions before rehoisted instructions that use them.

[mkazantsev]

lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

672 ↗

(On Diff #172788)

You can preserve the order of processing if you just iterate in reverse order.

[mkazantsev]

lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

793 ↗

(On Diff #172788)

Right, it makes sense when uses are Phis. Maybe it should be explicitly stated in the comment. :)

805 ↗

(On Diff #172788)

But if we process %a and then %b and insert each of them before the terminator, we don't have this problem. It seems that using a vector instead of a list will spare you of this problem.

[john.brawn]

Use SmallVector for HoistedInstructions, rename getHoistedBlock, add LI and DT verification, other small changes.

[mkazantsev]

I have some minor comment, only the one that is related to SafetyInfo worries me (yet it just needs using utility function instead of just moveBefore). All other things are non-functional nits.
I'll take some time running fuzz tests with this patch because it's big. :) Please wait few hours, I will either give you approval (under condition that my comments will be addressed) or give you a failing test example.

lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

504 ↗

(On Diff #173148)

Minor: please add explanatory messages to the assertions you make.

562 ↗

(On Diff #173148)

If you only expect BI to be the only element with the property you need, it would make sense to save some compile time by inserting break here. But on the other hand, the assertion you make also makes sense. How about this: BI = find_if(<cond>), and then assert that find_if(<cond> && el != BI) == HoistableBranches.end()? Just a suggestion.

797 ↗

(On Diff #173148)

Removal/insertion of instructions to blocks may also need SafetyInfo updates. We have a helper function eraseInstruction for removal that handles it properly, but there was no helper for moveBefore because of only 1 occurrence. I've just added it in the patch rL346472

I am pretty sure that the current code is accidentally correct because rehoisting happens outside of loop (and SafetyInfo doesn't really care), but please rebase on top of this patch and use this utility whenever you move instructions to keep things general.

805 ↗

(On Diff #173148)

It makes more sense to verify DT before LI since LI uses it.

1369 ↗

(On Diff #173148)

After you've changed the semantics, Preheader is no longer the preheader of CurLoop (or is it)? If not, please rename it. If yes, why do you need it as parameter? You can just take loop's preheader as it was before.

In any case, it should be const BasicBlock *.

[mkazantsev]

lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

636 ↗

(On Diff #173148)

It can be useful to have staitstics on hoisted branches. I'm OK if it goes as a follow-up patch.

[mkazantsev]

One of my fuzz tests has failed with the following assertion:

PHINode should have one entry for each predecessor of its parent basic block!
%.us-phi = phi i32 [ %res.i.peel, %cHeapLvb.exit181 ], [ %83, %bci_229.licm.split.us.licm ], [ %83, %bci_229.licm.split.us.licm ]

It will take me time to reduce the test to something reasonable, but maybe this info will help you find the bug in the code. So far I can say that the problematic situation happens when FalseDest == CommonSucc. Hope if helps you to diagnose the bug and construct a test. If not, I'll be able to provide the reduced test case early next week.

[mkazantsev]

The patch fails the following test:

opt -licm -S test.ll

; ModuleID = './bugpoint-reduced-simplified.ll'
source_filename = "./bugpoint-reduced-simplified.ll"
target datalayout = "e-m:e-i64:64-f80:128-n8:16:32:64-S128-ni:1"

define void @bar() {
bb:
  %tmp = call i32 @llvm.x86.sse2.cvttsd2si(<2 x double> undef)
  br label %bb3

bb1:                                              ; preds = %bb4
  %tmp2 = phi i32 [ %tmp5, %bb4 ]
  ret void

bb3:                                              ; preds = %bb4, %bb
  br i1 undef, label %bb6, label %bb4

bb4:                                              ; preds = %bb6, %bb6, %bb3
  %tmp5 = phi i32 [ %tmp, %bb3 ], [ undef, %bb6 ], [ undef, %bb6 ]
  br i1 undef, label %bb1, label %bb3

bb6:                                              ; preds = %bb3
  br i1 undef, label %bb4, label %bb4
}

; Function Attrs: nounwind readnone
declare i32 @llvm.x86.sse2.cvttsd2si(<2 x double>) #0

attributes #0 = { nounwind readnone }

The failure looks like

PHINode should have one entry for each predecessor of its parent basic block!
  %tmp5 = phi i32 [ %tmp, %bb ], [ undef, %bb6.licm ], [ undef, %bb6.licm ]
in function bar
LLVM ERROR: Broken function found, compilation aborted!

Likely some corner case related to conditional branch to the same block for true and false is not handled. Please make sure that it passes before we can proceed with the patch.

[john.brawn]

In D52827#1295052, @mkazantsev wrote:

The patch fails the following test:

...

Likely some corner case related to conditional branch to the same block for true and false is not handled. Please make sure that it passes before we can proceed with the patch.

Yes, it's specifically that in such cases the phi in the destination block has the same incoming block appear more than once which I didn't expect. I think the easiest thing to do is to have canHoistPHI return false for such phis.

lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

636 ↗

(On Diff #173148)

I'll add this and also one for the number of created blocks, which seems like it may also be useful.

1369 ↗

(On Diff #173148)

I left it as Preheader just because it was simpler not to change it, but yes it makes sense to rename it so I'll do so. It can't be const though, as we're hoisting I into it (i.e. modifying it).

[john.brawn]

Update according to review comments.

[mkazantsev]

I don't see any obvious problems in code. Let me run one more round of fuzz testing, I'll give my approval if it passes.

[mkazantsev]

LGTM.

[maxim-kuvyrkov]

Hi John,

This crashes on AArch64 kernel build:

https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_kernel-bisect-llvm-master-aarch64-stable-allnoconfig/4/artifact/artifacts/build-d9902c5262f22d97eda691f00daee1ef7f5623b8/3-count_linux_objs/console.log/*view*/

Let me know if you need help reproducing this.

Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org

[nickdesaulniers]

Looks like this was reverted in r347225.

[john.brawn]

The thing causing the crash was incorrect handling of instructions that need to be rehoisted. When we have hoisted a phi, then hoisted a use of that phi, then if have to rehoist that use we need to make sure that we rehoist it to _after_ the hoisted phi. We can do this by rehoisting to the immediate dominator instead of just rehoisting everything to the original preheader.

[mkazantsev]

This rehoisting stuff has been wary for me before, and now I'm completely hesitant about what is going on there. Why do we end up hoisting to some block that does not dominate its users? Do we have a strong reason of doing so rather than finding the correct hoisting destination?

[john.brawn]

In D52827#1306034, @mkazantsev wrote:

This rehoisting stuff has been wary for me before, and now I'm completely hesitant about what is going on there. Why do we end up hoisting to some block that does not dominate its users? Do we have a strong reason of doing so rather than finding the correct hoisting destination?

Let's look at the @phi_conditional_use test in hoist-phi.ll as an example:

define i64 @phi_conditional_use(i32 %f, i32* %g) {
entry:
  %cmp1 = icmp eq i32 %f, 1
  %cmp2 = icmp eq i32 %f, 0
  br label %loop

loop:
  br i1 %cmp1, label %if.end, label %if.then

if.then:
  br label %if.end

if.end:
  %phi = phi i64 [ 0, %loop ], [ 1, %if.then ]
  br i1 %cmp2, label %loop.backedge, label %if.then2

if.then2:
  %d = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %g, i64 %phi
  store i32 1, i32* %d, align 4
  br label %loop.backedge

loop.backedge:
  br label %loop
}

When looking at %loop we note that the branch uses a loop invariant condition. Then when looking at %if.end we see that %phi has loop invariant operands, and is the merge point of the branch we noted, so we copy the control flow and hoist the phi:

define i64 @phi_conditional_use(i32 %f, i32* %g) {
entry:
  %cmp1 = icmp eq i32 %f, 1
  %cmp2 = icmp eq i32 %f, 0
  br i1 %cmp1, label %if.end.licm, label %if.then.licm

if.then.licm:
  br label %if.end.licm

if.end.licm:
  %phi = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ 1, %if.then.licm ]
  br label %loop

loop:
  br i1 %cmp1, label %if.end, label %if.then

if.then:
  br label %if.end

if.end:
  br i1 %cmp2, label %loop.backedge, label %if.then2

if.then2:
  %d = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %g, i64 %phi
  store i32 1, i32* %d, align 4
  br label %loop.backedge

loop.backedge:
  br label %loop
}

We then note that the branch at the end if %if.end has a loop invariant condition. We then look at %if.then2 and see that %d has loop invariant operands, and that it's in a block that's the target of a noted branch, so we duplicate control flow and hoist:

define i64 @phi_conditional_use(i32 %f, i32* %g) {
entry:
  %cmp1 = icmp eq i32 %f, 1
  %cmp2 = icmp eq i32 %f, 0
  br i1 %cmp1, label %if.end.licm, label %if.then.licm

if.then.licm:
  br label %if.end.licm

if.end.licm:
  %phi = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ 1, %if.then.licm ]
  br i1 %cmp2, label %loop.backedge.licm, label %if.then2.licm

if.then2.licm:
  %d = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %g, i64 %phi
  br label %loop.backedge.licm

loop.backedge.licm:
  br label %loop

loop:
  br i1 %cmp1, label %if.end, label %if.then

if.then:
  br label %if.end

if.end:
  br i1 %cmp2, label %loop.backedge, label %if.then2

if.then2:
  store i32 1, i32* %d, align 4
  br label %loop.backedge

loop.backedge:
  br label %loop
}

Now we look at the store in %if.then2, which has loop invariant operands but can't be hoisted as it's not safe to hoist the store.

We're now done hoisting things, but we have the problem that %d does not dominate the store in %if.then2. So we have to move it somewhere where it does dominate %if.then2, but we also have to make sure it's after %phi, as it uses that as an operand. So it has to go in %if.end.licm after %phi.

Some comments on all of this:

At the time that we hoist %d we don't know if its uses are also going to get hoisted. We _could_ do something like rewrite LICM to be a two-step process where it first makes note of which instructions are going to get hoisted, then hoists them using knowledge of if their uses are going to get hoisted to figure out where they get hoisted. But that would be a lot more disruption than the current patch.

We could change things to never hoist things into conditional blocks i.e. %d would be hoisted directly to %if.end.licm. There's two reasons I didn't do this:

• As explained in the comment at line 715, hoisting to conditional blocks could in the future be used as away to be able to hoist instructions that are unsafe to execute unconditionally, e.g. the store could actually be hoisted to %if.then2.licm as it would only get executed in the cases where the store in the loop would have been executed.
• It seems a little strange to just speculatively execute instructions without limit because you're hoisting them outside of the loop. It's what LICM currently does, but it's at odds with the current behaviour elsewhere e.g. in SimplifyCFG which does the same thing (except hoisting instructions to their immediate predecessor block instead of outside a loop) but has a lot of (inconsistent) heuristics for deciding if it's a good idea or not. Doing it like this means we can leave it up to later passes to figure out if the instructions should be unconditional.
• Additionally: doing this would means that "the hoisted version of a block X for the purpose of control flow and phis" and "which block to hoist instructions from block X into" could be different blocks whereas they're currently always the same block, which would need some extra code to handle (though of course at the same time the code to do rehoisting would get removed so it could turn out to be about the same complexity-wise).

[mkazantsev]

I don't really have strong objections against that. Thanks for your explanation. It could've been a Phi node insertion instead of rehoisting in this case, but I don't really see why rehoisting should be bad (other than we may end up executing code that never executes, but it's a general LICM flaw and not specific to this patch). I also see no bug in what we have now. So I'm ok with the idea.

I am not comfortable with reverting it back and forth, so I will request some re-design of your patch. Please make an option to switch off/on CFG hoisting. We will need it if this transform will expose some unexpected bugs in the future. Reverting patch that big may become hard in time. Then, I'm OK if you check in the current patch with this option switch by default (in tests, it can be set to true).

Then, you can check in a patch that turns it on by default.

[john.brawn]

Added an option to enable control flow hoisting, turned off by default.

[mkazantsev]

LGTM

[mstorsjo]

This caused a significant regression in compile time for some sources, see https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39836 for details. Building one source file went from 45 seconds to 140 seconds.

[mstorsjo]

Reverted in SVN r347867.

llvm/trunk/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.cpp

 //          pointer.  There are no calls in the loop which mod/ref the pointer.
 //     If these conditions are true, we can promote the loads and stores in the
 //     loop of the pointer to use a temporary alloca'd variable.  We then use
 //     the SSAUpdater to construct the appropriate SSA form for the value.
 //
 //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
 
 #include "llvm/Transforms/Scalar/LICM.h"
+#include "llvm/ADT/SetOperations.h"
 #include "llvm/ADT/Statistic.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/AliasAnalysis.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/AliasSetTracker.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/BasicAliasAnalysis.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/CaptureTracking.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/ConstantFolding.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/GlobalsModRef.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/GuardUtils.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/Loads.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/LoopInfo.h"
+#include "llvm/Analysis/LoopIterator.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/LoopPass.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/MemoryBuiltins.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/MemorySSA.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/OptimizationRemarkEmitter.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/ScalarEvolutionAliasAnalysis.h"
 #include "llvm/Analysis/TargetLibraryInfo.h"
 #include "llvm/Transforms/Utils/Local.h"

 #include "llvm/Transforms/Utils/LoopUtils.h"
 #include "llvm/Transforms/Utils/SSAUpdater.h"
 #include <algorithm>
 #include <utility>
 using namespace llvm;
 
 #define DEBUG_TYPE "licm"
 
+STATISTIC(NumCreatedBlocks, "Number of blocks created");
+STATISTIC(NumClonedBranches, "Number of branches cloned");
 STATISTIC(NumSunk, "Number of instructions sunk out of loop");
 STATISTIC(NumHoisted, "Number of instructions hoisted out of loop");
 STATISTIC(NumMovedLoads, "Number of load insts hoisted or sunk");
 STATISTIC(NumMovedCalls, "Number of call insts hoisted or sunk");
 STATISTIC(NumPromoted, "Number of memory locations promoted to registers");
 
 /// Memory promotion is enabled by default.
 static cl::opt<bool>
     DisablePromotion("disable-licm-promotion", cl::Hidden, cl::init(false),
                      cl::desc("Disable memory promotion in LICM pass"));
 
+static cl::opt<bool> ControlFlowHoisting(
+    "licm-control-flow-hoisting", cl::Hidden, cl::init(false),
+    cl::desc("Enable control flow (and PHI) hoisting in LICM"));
+
 static cl::opt<uint32_t> MaxNumUsesTraversed(
     "licm-max-num-uses-traversed", cl::Hidden, cl::init(8),
     cl::desc("Max num uses visited for identifying load "
              "invariance in loop using invariant start (default = 8)"));
 
 // Default value of zero implies we use the regular alias set tracker mechanism
 // instead of the cross product using AA to identify aliasing of the memory
 // location we are interested in.
 static cl::opt<int>
 LICMN2Theshold("licm-n2-threshold", cl::Hidden, cl::init(0),
                cl::desc("How many instruction to cross product using AA"));
 
 static bool inSubLoop(BasicBlock *BB, Loop *CurLoop, LoopInfo *LI);
 static bool isNotUsedOrFreeInLoop(const Instruction &I, const Loop *CurLoop,
                                   const LoopSafetyInfo *SafetyInfo,
                                   TargetTransformInfo *TTI, bool &FreeInLoop);
 static void hoist(Instruction &I, const DominatorTree *DT, const Loop *CurLoop,
-                  ICFLoopSafetyInfo *SafetyInfo,
+                  BasicBlock *Dest, ICFLoopSafetyInfo *SafetyInfo,
                   OptimizationRemarkEmitter *ORE);
 static bool sink(Instruction &I, LoopInfo *LI, DominatorTree *DT,
                  const Loop *CurLoop, ICFLoopSafetyInfo *SafetyInfo,
                  OptimizationRemarkEmitter *ORE, bool FreeInLoop);
 static bool isSafeToExecuteUnconditionally(Instruction &Inst,
                                            const DominatorTree *DT,
                                            const Loop *CurLoop,
                                            const LoopSafetyInfo *SafetyInfo,
for (BasicBlock::iterator II = BB->end(); II != BB->begin();) {
           Changed = true;
         }
       }
     }
   }
   return Changed;
 }
 
+// This is a helper class for hoistRegion to make it able to hoist control flow
+// in order to be able to hoist phis. The way this works is that we initially
+// start hoisting to the loop preheader, and when we see a loop invariant branch
+// we make note of this. When we then come to hoist an instruction that's
+// conditional on such a branch we duplicate the branch and the relevant control
+// flow, then hoist the instruction into the block corresponding to its original
+// block in the duplicated control flow.
+class ControlFlowHoister {
+private:
+  // Information about the loop we are hoisting from
+  LoopInfo *LI;
+  DominatorTree *DT;
+  Loop *CurLoop;
+
+  // A map of blocks in the loop to the block their instructions will be hoisted
+  // to.
+  DenseMap<BasicBlock *, BasicBlock *> HoistDestinationMap;
+
+  // The branches that we can hoist, mapped to the block that marks a
+  // convergence point of their control flow.
+  DenseMap<BranchInst *, BasicBlock *> HoistableBranches;
+
+public:
+  ControlFlowHoister(LoopInfo *LI, DominatorTree *DT, Loop *CurLoop)
+      : LI(LI), DT(DT), CurLoop(CurLoop) {}
+
+  void registerPossiblyHoistableBranch(BranchInst *BI) {
+    // We can only hoist conditional branches with loop invariant operands.
+    if (!ControlFlowHoisting || !BI->isConditional() ||
+        !CurLoop->hasLoopInvariantOperands(BI))
+      return;
+
+    // The branch destinations need to be in the loop, and we don't gain
+    // anything by duplicating conditional branches with duplicate successors,
+    // as it's essentially the same as an unconditional branch.
+    BasicBlock *TrueDest = BI->getSuccessor(0);
+    BasicBlock *FalseDest = BI->getSuccessor(1);
+    if (!CurLoop->contains(TrueDest) || !CurLoop->contains(FalseDest) ||
+        TrueDest == FalseDest)
+      return;
+
+    // We can hoist BI if one branch destination is the successor of the other,
+    // or both have common successor which we check by seeing if the
+    // intersection of their successors is non-empty.
+    // TODO: This could be expanded to allowing branches where both ends
+    // eventually converge to a single block.
+    SmallPtrSet<BasicBlock *, 4> TrueDestSucc, FalseDestSucc;
+    TrueDestSucc.insert(succ_begin(TrueDest), succ_end(TrueDest));
+    FalseDestSucc.insert(succ_begin(FalseDest), succ_end(FalseDest));
+    BasicBlock *CommonSucc = nullptr;
+    if (TrueDestSucc.count(FalseDest)) {
+      CommonSucc = FalseDest;
+    } else if (FalseDestSucc.count(TrueDest)) {
+      CommonSucc = TrueDest;
+    } else {
+      set_intersect(TrueDestSucc, FalseDestSucc);
+      // If there's one common successor use that.
+      if (TrueDestSucc.size() == 1)
+        CommonSucc = *TrueDestSucc.begin();
+      // If there's more than one pick whichever appears first in the block list
+      // (we can't use the value returned by TrueDestSucc.begin() as it's
+      // unpredicatable which element gets returned).
+      else if (!TrueDestSucc.empty()) {
+        Function *F = TrueDest->getParent();
+        auto IsSucc = [&](BasicBlock &BB) { return TrueDestSucc.count(&BB); };
+        auto It = std::find_if(F->begin(), F->end(), IsSucc);
+        assert(It != F->end() && "Could not find successor in function");
+        CommonSucc = &*It;
+      }
+    }
+    // The common successor has to be dominated by the branch, as otherwise
+    // there will be some other path to the successor that will not be
+    // controlled by this branch so any phi we hoist would be controlled by the
+    // wrong condition. This also takes care of avoiding hoisting of loop back
+    // edges.
+    // TODO: In some cases this could be relaxed if the successor is dominated
+    // by another block that's been hoisted and we can guarantee that the
+    // control flow has been replicated exactly.
+    if (CommonSucc && DT->dominates(BI, CommonSucc))
+      HoistableBranches[BI] = CommonSucc;
+  }
+
+  bool canHoistPHI(PHINode *PN) {
+    // The phi must have loop invariant operands.
+    if (!ControlFlowHoisting || !CurLoop->hasLoopInvariantOperands(PN))
+      return false;
+    // We can hoist phis if the block they are in is the target of hoistable
+    // branches which cover all of the predecessors of the block.
+    SmallPtrSet<BasicBlock *, 8> PredecessorBlocks;
+    BasicBlock *BB = PN->getParent();
+    for (BasicBlock *PredBB : predecessors(BB))
+      PredecessorBlocks.insert(PredBB);
+    // If we have less predecessor blocks than predecessors then the phi will
+    // have more than one incoming value for the same block which we can't
+    // handle.
+    // TODO: This could be handled be erasing some of the duplicate incoming
+    // values.
+    if (PredecessorBlocks.size() != pred_size(BB))
+      return false;
+    for (auto &Pair : HoistableBranches) {
+      if (Pair.second == BB) {
+        // Which blocks are predecessors via this branch depends on if the
+        // branch is triangle-like or diamond-like.
+        if (Pair.first->getSuccessor(0) == BB) {
+          PredecessorBlocks.erase(Pair.first->getParent());
+          PredecessorBlocks.erase(Pair.first->getSuccessor(1));
+        } else if (Pair.first->getSuccessor(1) == BB) {
+          PredecessorBlocks.erase(Pair.first->getParent());
+          PredecessorBlocks.erase(Pair.first->getSuccessor(0));
+        } else {
+          PredecessorBlocks.erase(Pair.first->getSuccessor(0));
+          PredecessorBlocks.erase(Pair.first->getSuccessor(1));
+        }
+      }
+    }
+    // PredecessorBlocks will now be empty if for every predecessor of BB we
+    // found a hoistable branch source.
+    return PredecessorBlocks.empty();
+  }
+
+  BasicBlock *getOrCreateHoistedBlock(BasicBlock *BB) {
+    // If BB has already been hoisted, return that
+    if (HoistDestinationMap.count(BB))
+      return HoistDestinationMap[BB];
+
+    // Check if this block is conditional based on a pending branch
+    auto HasBBAsSuccessor =
+        [&](DenseMap<BranchInst *, BasicBlock *>::value_type &Pair) {
+          return BB != Pair.second && (Pair.first->getSuccessor(0) == BB ||
+                                       Pair.first->getSuccessor(1) == BB);
+        };
+    auto It = std::find_if(HoistableBranches.begin(), HoistableBranches.end(),
+                           HasBBAsSuccessor);
+
+    // If not involved in a pending branch, hoist to preheader
+    BasicBlock *InitialPreheader = CurLoop->getLoopPreheader();
+    if (It == HoistableBranches.end()) {
+      LLVM_DEBUG(dbgs() << "LICM using " << InitialPreheader->getName()
+                        << " as hoist destination for " << BB->getName()
+                        << "\n");
+      HoistDestinationMap[BB] = InitialPreheader;
+      return InitialPreheader;
+    }
+    BranchInst *BI = It->first;
+    assert(std::find_if(++It, HoistableBranches.end(), HasBBAsSuccessor) ==
+               HoistableBranches.end() &&
+           "BB is expected to be the target of at most one branch");
+
+    LLVMContext &C = BB->getContext();
+    BasicBlock *TrueDest = BI->getSuccessor(0);
+    BasicBlock *FalseDest = BI->getSuccessor(1);
+    BasicBlock *CommonSucc = HoistableBranches[BI];
+    BasicBlock *HoistTarget = getOrCreateHoistedBlock(BI->getParent());
+
+    // Create hoisted versions of blocks that currently don't have them
+    auto CreateHoistedBlock = [&](BasicBlock *Orig) {
+      if (HoistDestinationMap.count(Orig))
+        return HoistDestinationMap[Orig];
+      BasicBlock *New =
+          BasicBlock::Create(C, Orig->getName() + ".licm", Orig->getParent());
+      HoistDestinationMap[Orig] = New;
+      DT->addNewBlock(New, HoistTarget);
+      if (CurLoop->getParentLoop())
+        CurLoop->getParentLoop()->addBasicBlockToLoop(New, *LI);
+      ++NumCreatedBlocks;
+      LLVM_DEBUG(dbgs() << "LICM created " << New->getName()
+                        << " as hoist destination for " << Orig->getName()
+                        << "\n");
+      return New;
+    };
+    BasicBlock *HoistTrueDest = CreateHoistedBlock(TrueDest);
+    BasicBlock *HoistFalseDest = CreateHoistedBlock(FalseDest);
+    BasicBlock *HoistCommonSucc = CreateHoistedBlock(CommonSucc);
+
+    // Link up these blocks with branches.
+    if (!HoistCommonSucc->getTerminator()) {
+      // The new common successor we've generated will branch to whatever that
+      // hoist target branched to.
+      BasicBlock *TargetSucc = HoistTarget->getSingleSuccessor();
+      assert(TargetSucc && "Expected hoist target to have a single successor");
+      HoistCommonSucc->moveBefore(TargetSucc);
+      BranchInst::Create(TargetSucc, HoistCommonSucc);
+    }
+    if (!HoistTrueDest->getTerminator()) {
+      HoistTrueDest->moveBefore(HoistCommonSucc);
+      BranchInst::Create(HoistCommonSucc, HoistTrueDest);
+    }
+    if (!HoistFalseDest->getTerminator()) {
+      HoistFalseDest->moveBefore(HoistCommonSucc);
+      BranchInst::Create(HoistCommonSucc, HoistFalseDest);
+    }
+
+    // If BI is being cloned to what was originally the preheader then
+    // HoistCommonSucc will now be the new preheader.
+    if (HoistTarget == InitialPreheader) {
+      // Phis in the loop header now need to use the new preheader.
+      InitialPreheader->replaceSuccessorsPhiUsesWith(HoistCommonSucc);
+      // The new preheader dominates the loop header.
+      DomTreeNode *PreheaderNode = DT->getNode(HoistCommonSucc);
+      DomTreeNode *HeaderNode = DT->getNode(CurLoop->getHeader());
+      DT->changeImmediateDominator(HeaderNode, PreheaderNode);
+      // The preheader hoist destination is now the new preheader, with the
+      // exception of the hoist destination of this branch.
+      for (auto &Pair : HoistDestinationMap)
+        if (Pair.second == InitialPreheader && Pair.first != BI->getParent())
+          Pair.second = HoistCommonSucc;
+    }
+
+    // Now finally clone BI.
+    ReplaceInstWithInst(
+        HoistTarget->getTerminator(),
+        BranchInst::Create(HoistTrueDest, HoistFalseDest, BI->getCondition()));
+    ++NumClonedBranches;
+
+    assert(CurLoop->getLoopPreheader() &&
+           "Hoisting blocks should not have destroyed preheader");
+    return HoistDestinationMap[BB];
+  }
+};
+
 /// Walk the specified region of the CFG (defined by all blocks dominated by
 /// the specified block, and that are in the current loop) in depth first
 /// order w.r.t the DominatorTree.  This allows us to visit definitions before
 /// uses, allowing us to hoist a loop body in one pass without iteration.
 ///
 bool llvm::hoistRegion(DomTreeNode *N, AliasAnalysis *AA, LoopInfo *LI,
                        DominatorTree *DT, TargetLibraryInfo *TLI, Loop *CurLoop,
                        AliasSetTracker *CurAST, ICFLoopSafetyInfo *SafetyInfo,
                        OptimizationRemarkEmitter *ORE) {
   // Verify inputs.
   assert(N != nullptr && AA != nullptr && LI != nullptr && DT != nullptr &&
          CurLoop != nullptr && CurAST != nullptr && SafetyInfo != nullptr &&
          "Unexpected input to hoistRegion");
 
-  // We want to visit parents before children. We will enque all the parents
-  // before their children in the worklist and process the worklist in order.
-  SmallVector<DomTreeNode *, 16> Worklist = collectChildrenInLoop(N, CurLoop);
+  ControlFlowHoister CFH(LI, DT, CurLoop);
 
+  // Keep track of instructions that have been hoisted, as they may need to be
+  // re-hoisted if they end up not dominating all of their uses.
+  SmallVector<Instruction *, 16> HoistedInstructions;
+
+  // For PHI hoisting to work we need to hoist blocks before their successors.
+  // We can do this by iterating through the blocks in the loop in reverse
+  // post-order.
+  LoopBlocksRPO Worklist(CurLoop);
+  Worklist.perform(LI);
   bool Changed = false;
-  for (DomTreeNode *DTN : Worklist) {
-    BasicBlock *BB = DTN->getBlock();
+  for (BasicBlock *BB : Worklist) {
     // Only need to process the contents of this block if it is not part of a
     // subloop (which would already have been processed).
     if (inSubLoop(BB, CurLoop, LI))
       continue;
 
     for (BasicBlock::iterator II = BB->begin(), E = BB->end(); II != E;) {
       Instruction &I = *II++;
       // Try constant folding this instruction.  If all the operands are
for (BasicBlock::iterator II = BB->begin(), E = BB->end(); II != E;) {
           eraseInstruction(I, *SafetyInfo, CurAST);
         Changed = true;
         continue;
       }
 
       // Try hoisting the instruction out to the preheader.  We can only do
       // this if all of the operands of the instruction are loop invariant and
       // if it is safe to hoist the instruction.
-      //
+      // TODO: It may be safe to hoist if we are hoisting to a conditional block
+      // and we have accurately duplicated the control flow from the loop header
+      // to that block.
       if (CurLoop->hasLoopInvariantOperands(&I) &&
           canSinkOrHoistInst(I, AA, DT, CurLoop, CurAST, true, ORE) &&
           isSafeToExecuteUnconditionally(
               I, DT, CurLoop, SafetyInfo, ORE,
               CurLoop->getLoopPreheader()->getTerminator())) {
-        hoist(I, DT, CurLoop, SafetyInfo, ORE);
+        hoist(I, DT, CurLoop, CFH.getOrCreateHoistedBlock(BB), SafetyInfo, ORE);
+        HoistedInstructions.push_back(&I);
         Changed = true;
         continue;
       }
 
       // Attempt to remove floating point division out of the loop by
       // converting it to a reciprocal multiplication.
       if (I.getOpcode() == Instruction::FDiv &&
           CurLoop->isLoopInvariant(I.getOperand(1)) &&
           I.hasAllowReciprocal()) {
         auto Divisor = I.getOperand(1);
         auto One = llvm::ConstantFP::get(Divisor->getType(), 1.0);
         auto ReciprocalDivisor = BinaryOperator::CreateFDiv(One, Divisor);
         ReciprocalDivisor->setFastMathFlags(I.getFastMathFlags());
         SafetyInfo->insertInstructionTo(I.getParent());
         ReciprocalDivisor->insertBefore(&I);
 
         auto Product =
             BinaryOperator::CreateFMul(I.getOperand(0), ReciprocalDivisor);
         Product->setFastMathFlags(I.getFastMathFlags());
         SafetyInfo->insertInstructionTo(I.getParent());
         Product->insertAfter(&I);
         I.replaceAllUsesWith(Product);
         eraseInstruction(I, *SafetyInfo, CurAST);
 
-        hoist(*ReciprocalDivisor, DT, CurLoop, SafetyInfo, ORE);
+        hoist(*ReciprocalDivisor, DT, CurLoop, CFH.getOrCreateHoistedBlock(BB),
+              SafetyInfo, ORE);
+        HoistedInstructions.push_back(ReciprocalDivisor);
         Changed = true;
         continue;
       }
 
       using namespace PatternMatch;
       if (((I.use_empty() &&
             match(&I, m_Intrinsic<Intrinsic::invariant_start>())) ||
            isGuard(&I)) &&
           CurLoop->hasLoopInvariantOperands(&I) &&
           SafetyInfo->isGuaranteedToExecute(I, DT, CurLoop) &&
           SafetyInfo->doesNotWriteMemoryBefore(I, CurLoop)) {
-        hoist(I, DT, CurLoop, SafetyInfo, ORE);
+        hoist(I, DT, CurLoop, CFH.getOrCreateHoistedBlock(BB), SafetyInfo, ORE);
+        HoistedInstructions.push_back(&I);
         Changed = true;
         continue;
       }
+
+      if (PHINode *PN = dyn_cast<PHINode>(&I)) {
+        if (CFH.canHoistPHI(PN)) {
+          // Redirect incoming blocks first to ensure that we create hoisted
+          // versions of those blocks before we hoist the phi.
+          for (unsigned int i = 0; i < PN->getNumIncomingValues(); ++i)
+            PN->setIncomingBlock(
+                i, CFH.getOrCreateHoistedBlock(PN->getIncomingBlock(i)));
+          hoist(*PN, DT, CurLoop, CFH.getOrCreateHoistedBlock(BB), SafetyInfo,
+                ORE);
+          assert(DT->dominates(PN, BB) && "Conditional PHIs not expected");
+          Changed = true;
+          continue;
         }
       }
 
+      // Remember possibly hoistable branches so we can actually hoist them
+      // later if needed.
+      if (BranchInst *BI = dyn_cast<BranchInst>(&I))
+        CFH.registerPossiblyHoistableBranch(BI);
+    }
+  }
+
+  // If we hoisted instructions to a conditional block they may not dominate
+  // their uses that weren't hoisted (such as phis where some operands are not
+  // loop invariant). If so make them unconditional by moving them to their
+  // immediate dominator. We iterate through the instructions in reverse order
+  // which ensures that when we rehoist an instruction we rehoist its operands,
+  // and also keep track of where in the block we are rehoisting to to make sure
+  // that we rehoist instructions before the instructions that use them.
+  Instruction *HoistPoint = nullptr;
+  for (Instruction *I : reverse(HoistedInstructions)) {
+    if (!llvm::all_of(I->uses(), [&](Use &U) { return DT->dominates(I, U); })) {
+      BasicBlock *Dominator =
+          DT->getNode(I->getParent())->getIDom()->getBlock();
+      LLVM_DEBUG(dbgs() << "LICM rehoisting to " << Dominator->getName() << ": "
+                        << *I << "\n");
+      if (!HoistPoint || HoistPoint->getParent() != Dominator) {
+        if (HoistPoint)
+          assert(DT->dominates(Dominator, HoistPoint->getParent()) &&
+                 "New hoist point expected to dominate old hoist point");
+        HoistPoint = Dominator->getTerminator();
+      }
+      moveInstructionBefore(*I, *HoistPoint, *SafetyInfo);
+      HoistPoint = I;
+      Changed = true;
+    }
+  }
+
+  // Now that we've finished hoisting make sure that LI and DT are still valid.
+#ifndef NDEBUG
+  assert(DT->verify(DominatorTree::VerificationLevel::Fast) &&
+         "Dominator tree verification failed");
+  LI->verify(*DT);
+#endif
+
   return Changed;
 }
 
 // Return true if LI is invariant within scope of the loop. LI is invariant if
 // CurLoop is dominated by an invariant.start representing the same memory
 // location and size as the memory location LI loads from, and also the
 // invariant.start has no uses.
 static bool isLoadInvariantInLoop(LoadInst *LI, DominatorTree *DT,
#endif
   }
   return Changed;
 }
 
 /// When an instruction is found to only use loop invariant operands that
 /// is safe to hoist, this instruction is called to do the dirty work.
 ///
 static void hoist(Instruction &I, const DominatorTree *DT, const Loop *CurLoop,
-                  ICFLoopSafetyInfo *SafetyInfo, OptimizationRemarkEmitter *ORE) {
-  auto *Preheader = CurLoop->getLoopPreheader();
-  LLVM_DEBUG(dbgs() << "LICM hoisting to " << Preheader->getName() << ": " << I
+                  BasicBlock *Dest, ICFLoopSafetyInfo *SafetyInfo,
+                  OptimizationRemarkEmitter *ORE) {
+  LLVM_DEBUG(dbgs() << "LICM hoisting to " << Dest->getName() << ": " << I
                     << "\n");
   ORE->emit([&]() {
     return OptimizationRemark(DEBUG_TYPE, "Hoisted", &I) << "hoisting "
                                                          << ore::NV("Inst", &I);
   });
 
   // Metadata can be dependent on conditions we are hoisting above.
   // Conservatively strip all metadata on the instruction unless we were
   // guaranteed to execute I if we entered the loop, in which case the metadata
   // is valid in the loop preheader.
   if (I.hasMetadataOtherThanDebugLoc() &&
       // The check on hasMetadataOtherThanDebugLoc is to prevent us from burning
       // time in isGuaranteedToExecute if we don't actually have anything to
       // drop.  It is a compile time optimization, not required for correctness.
       !SafetyInfo->isGuaranteedToExecute(I, DT, CurLoop))
     I.dropUnknownNonDebugMetadata();
 
-  // Move the new node to the Preheader, before its terminator.
-  moveInstructionBefore(I, *Preheader->getTerminator(), *SafetyInfo);
+  if (isa<PHINode>(I))
+    // Move the new node to the end of the phi list in the destination block.
+    moveInstructionBefore(I, *Dest->getFirstNonPHI(), *SafetyInfo);
+  else
+    // Move the new node to the destination block, before its terminator.
+    moveInstructionBefore(I, *Dest->getTerminator(), *SafetyInfo);
 
   // Do not retain debug locations when we are moving instructions to different
   // basic blocks, because we want to avoid jumpy line tables. Calls, however,
   // need to retain their debug locs because they may be inlined.
   // FIXME: How do we retain source locations without causing poor debugging
   // behavior?
   if (!isa<CallInst>(I))
     I.setDebugLoc(DebugLoc());

llvm/trunk/test/Transforms/LICM/hoist-phi.ll

+; RUN: opt -S -licm < %s | FileCheck %s -check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-DISABLED
+; RUN: opt -S -licm -licm-control-flow-hoisting=1 < %s | FileCheck %s -check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-ENABLED
+; RUN: opt -S -licm -licm-control-flow-hoisting=0 < %s | FileCheck %s -check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-DISABLED
+; RUN: opt -passes='require<opt-remark-emit>,loop(licm)' -S < %s | FileCheck %s -check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-DISABLED
+; RUN: opt -passes='require<opt-remark-emit>,loop(licm)' -licm-control-flow-hoisting=1 -S < %s | FileCheck %s -check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-ENABLED
+; RUN: opt -passes='require<opt-remark-emit>,loop(licm)' -licm-control-flow-hoisting=0 -S < %s | FileCheck %s -check-prefixes=CHECK,CHECK-DISABLED
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: @triangle_phi
+define void @triangle_phi(i32 %x, i32* %p) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK: %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cmp1, label %[[IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[THEN_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK: %add = add i32 %x, 1
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[THEN_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: phi i32 [ %add, %[[IF_LICM]] ], [ %x, %entry ]
+; CHECK-ENABLED: store i32 %phi, i32* %p
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %cmp2 = icmp ne i32 %phi, 0
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if, label %then
+
+if:
+  %add = add i32 %x, 1
+  br label %then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi = phi i32 [ %add, %if ], [ %x, %loop ]
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %cmp2 = icmp ne i32 %phi, 0
+then:
+  %phi = phi i32 [ %add, %if ], [ %x, %loop ]
+  store i32 %phi, i32* %p
+  %cmp2 = icmp ne i32 %phi, 0
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %loop, label %end
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: end:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %[[PHI_LCSSA:.*]] = phi i32 [ %phi, %then ]
+; CHECK-DISABLED: store i32 %[[PHI_LCSSA]], i32* %p
+end:
+  ret void
+}
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: @diamond_phi
+define void @diamond_phi(i32 %x, i32* %p) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK: %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cmp1, label %[[IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[ELSE_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-DAG: %add = add i32 %x, 1
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM:.*]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[ELSE_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-DAG: %sub = sub i32 %x, 1
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[THEN_LICM]]
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi = phi i32 [ %add, %[[IF_LICM]] ], [ %sub, %[[ELSE_LICM]] ]
+; CHECK-ENABLED: store i32 %phi, i32* %p
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %cmp2 = icmp ne i32 %phi, 0
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if, label %else
+
+if:
+  %add = add i32 %x, 1
+  br label %then
+
+else:
+  %sub = sub i32 %x, 1
+  br label %then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi = phi i32 [ %add, %if ], [ %sub, %else ]
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %cmp2 = icmp ne i32 %phi, 0
+then:
+  %phi = phi i32 [ %add, %if ], [ %sub, %else ]
+  store i32 %phi, i32* %p
+  %cmp2 = icmp ne i32 %phi, 0
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %loop, label %end
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: end:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %[[PHI_LCSSA:.*]] = phi i32 [ %phi, %then ]
+; CHECK-DISABLED: store i32 %[[PHI_LCSSA]], i32* %p
+end:
+  ret void
+}
+
+; TODO: This is currently too complicated for us to be able to hoist the phi.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @three_way_phi
+define void @three_way_phi(i32 %x, i32* %p) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK-DAG: %add = add i32 %x, 1
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp2 = icmp sgt i32 %add, 0
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cmp1, label %[[IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[ELSE_LICM:.*]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM:.*]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[THEN_LICM]]:
+; CHECK: %sub = sub i32 %x, 1
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if, label %then
+
+if:
+  %add = add i32 %x, 1
+  %cmp2 = icmp sgt i32 %add, 0
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %if.if, label %then
+
+if.if:
+  %sub = sub i32 %x, 1
+  br label %then
+
+then:
+  %phi = phi i32 [ 0, %loop ], [ %add, %if ], [ %sub, %if.if ]
+  store i32 %phi, i32* %p
+  %cmp3 = icmp ne i32 %phi, 0
+  br i1 %cmp3, label %loop, label %end
+
+end:
+  ret void
+}
+
+; TODO: This is currently too complicated for us to be able to hoist the phi.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @tree_phi
+define void @tree_phi(i32 %x, i32* %p) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK-DAG: %add = add i32 %x, 1
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp2 = icmp sgt i32 %add, 0
+; CHECK-DAG: %sub = sub i32 %x, 1
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if, label %else
+
+if:
+  %add = add i32 %x, 1
+  %cmp2 = icmp sgt i32 %add, 0
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %if.if, label %if.else
+
+if.if:
+  br label %then
+
+if.else:
+  br label %then
+
+else:
+  %sub = sub i32 %x, 1
+  br label %then
+
+then:
+  %phi = phi i32 [ %add, %if.if ], [ 0, %if.else ], [ %sub, %else ]
+  store i32 %phi, i32* %p
+  %cmp3 = icmp ne i32 %phi, 0
+  br i1 %cmp3, label %loop, label %end
+
+end:
+  ret void
+}
+
+; TODO: We can hoist the first phi, but not the second.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @phi_phi
+define void @phi_phi(i32 %x, i32* %p) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK-DAG: %add = add i32 %x, 1
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp2 = icmp sgt i32 %add, 0
+; CHECK-DAG: %sub = sub i32 %x, 1
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cmp2, label %[[IF_IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[IF_ELSE_LICM:.*]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[IF_THEN_LICM:.*]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_ELSE_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[IF_THEN_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_THEN_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi1 = phi i32 [ %add, %[[IF_IF_LICM]] ], [ 0, %[[IF_ELSE_LICM]] ]
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if, label %else
+
+if:
+  %add = add i32 %x, 1
+  %cmp2 = icmp sgt i32 %add, 0
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %if.if, label %if.else
+
+if.if:
+  br label %if.then
+
+if.else:
+  br label %if.then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: if.then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi1 = phi i32 [ %add, %if.if ], [ 0, %if.else ]
+if.then:
+  %phi1 = phi i32 [ %add, %if.if ], [ 0, %if.else ]
+  br label %then
+
+else:
+  %sub = sub i32 %x, 1
+  br label %then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: then:
+; CHECK: %phi2 = phi i32 [ %phi1, %if.then ], [ %sub, %else ]
+then:
+  %phi2 = phi i32 [ %phi1, %if.then ], [ %sub, %else ]
+  store i32 %phi2, i32* %p
+  %cmp3 = icmp ne i32 %phi2, 0
+  br i1 %cmp3, label %loop, label %end
+
+end:
+  ret void
+}
+
+; Check that we correctly duplicate empty control flow.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @empty_triangle_phi
+define i8 @empty_triangle_phi(i32 %x, i32 %y) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK: %cmp1 = icmp eq i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cmp1, label %[[IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[THEN_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[THEN_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %[[IF_LICM]] ], [ 1, %entry ]
+; CHECK: %cmp2 = icmp eq i32 %y, 0
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %cmp1 = icmp eq i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if, label %then
+
+if:
+  br label %then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %if ], [ 1, %loop ]
+then:
+  %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %if ], [ 1, %loop ]
+  %cmp2 = icmp eq i32 %y, 0
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %end, label %loop
+
+end:
+  ret i8 %phi
+}
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: @empty_diamond_phi
+define i8 @empty_diamond_phi(i32 %x, i32 %y) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK: %cmp1 = icmp eq i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cmp1, label %[[IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[ELSE_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM:.*]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[ELSE_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[THEN_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %[[IF_LICM]] ], [ 1, %[[ELSE_LICM]] ]
+; CHECK: %cmp2 = icmp eq i32 %y, 0
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %cmp1 = icmp eq i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if, label %else
+
+if:
+  br label %then
+
+else:
+  br label %then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %if ], [ 1, %else ]
+then:
+  %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %if ], [ 1, %else ]
+  %cmp2 = icmp eq i32 %y, 0
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %end, label %loop
+
+end:
+  ret i8 %phi
+}
+
+; Check that we correctly handle the case that the first thing we try to hoist is a phi.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @empty_triangle_phi_first
+define i8 @empty_triangle_phi_first(i32 %x, i1 %cond) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cond, label %[[IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[THEN_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[THEN_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %[[IF_LICM]] ], [ 1, %entry ]
+; CHECK: %cmp = icmp eq i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  br i1 %cond, label %if, label %then
+
+if:
+  br label %then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %if ], [ 1, %loop ]
+then:
+  %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %if ], [ 1, %loop ]
+  %cmp = icmp eq i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cmp, label %end, label %loop
+
+end:
+  ret i8 %phi
+}
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: @empty_diamond_phi
+define i8 @empty_diamond_phi_first(i32 %x, i1 %cond) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cond, label %[[IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[ELSE_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM:.*]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[ELSE_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[THEN_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %[[IF_LICM]] ], [ 1, %[[ELSE_LICM]] ]
+; CHECK: %cmp = icmp eq i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  br i1 %cond, label %if, label %else
+
+if:
+  br label %then
+
+else:
+  br label %then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %if ], [ 1, %else ]
+then:
+  %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %if ], [ 1, %else ]
+  %cmp = icmp eq i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cmp, label %end, label %loop
+
+end:
+  ret i8 %phi
+}
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: @empty_triangle_phi_first
+define i8 @empty_triangle_phi_first_empty_loop_head(i32 %x, i1 %cond) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cond, label %[[IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[THEN_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[THEN_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %[[IF_LICM]] ], [ 1, %entry ]
+; CHECK: %cmp = icmp eq i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  br label %test
+
+test:
+  br i1 %cond, label %if, label %then
+
+if:
+  br label %then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %if ], [ 1, %test ]
+then:
+  %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %if ], [ 1, %test ]
+  %cmp = icmp eq i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cmp, label %end, label %loop
+
+end:
+  ret i8 %phi
+}
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: @empty_diamond_phi_first_empty_loop_head
+define i8 @empty_diamond_phi_first_empty_loop_head(i32 %x, i1 %cond) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cond, label %[[IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[ELSE_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM:.*]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[ELSE_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[THEN_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %[[IF_LICM]] ], [ 1, %[[ELSE_LICM]] ]
+; CHECK: %cmp = icmp eq i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  br label %test
+
+test:
+  br i1 %cond, label %if, label %else
+
+if:
+  br label %then
+
+else:
+  br label %then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %if ], [ 1, %else ]
+then:
+  %phi = phi i8 [ 0, %if ], [ 1, %else ]
+  %cmp = icmp eq i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cmp, label %end, label %loop
+
+end:
+  ret i8 %phi
+}
+
+; The phi is on one branch of a diamond while simultaneously at the end of a
+; triangle. Check that we duplicate the triangle and not the diamond.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @triangle_diamond
+define void @triangle_diamond(i32* %ptr, i32 %x, i32 %y) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp1 = icmp ne i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp2 = icmp ne i32 %y, 0
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cmp1, label %[[IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[THEN_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[THEN_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi = phi i32 [ 0, %[[IF_LICM]] ], [ 127, %entry ]
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %cmp1 = icmp ne i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if, label %then
+
+if:
+  %cmp2 = icmp ne i32 %y, 0
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %if.then, label %then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi = phi i32 [ 0, %if ], [ 127, %loop ]
+then:
+  %phi = phi i32 [ 0, %if ], [ 127, %loop ]
+  store i32 %phi, i32* %ptr
+  br label %end
+
+if.then:
+  br label %end
+
+end:
+  br label %loop
+}
+
+; As the previous, but the end of the diamond is the head of the loop.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @triangle_diamond_backedge
+define void @triangle_diamond_backedge(i32* %ptr, i32 %x, i32 %y) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp1 = icmp ne i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp2 = icmp ne i32 %y, 0
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cmp1, label %[[IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[THEN_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[THEN_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi = phi i32 [ 0, %[[IF_LICM]] ], [ 127, %entry ]
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %cmp1 = icmp ne i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if, label %then
+
+if:
+  %cmp2 = icmp ne i32 %y, 0
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %backedge, label %then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi = phi i32 [ 0, %if ], [ 127, %loop ]
+then:
+  %phi = phi i32 [ 0, %if ], [ 127, %loop ]
+  store i32 %phi, i32* %ptr
+  br label %loop
+
+backedge:
+  br label %loop
+}
+
+; TODO: The inner diamonds can be hoisted, but not currently the outer diamond
+; CHECK-LABEL: @diamonds_inside_diamond
+define void @diamonds_inside_diamond(i32 %x, i32* %p) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp3 = icmp slt i32 %x, -10
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cmp3, label %[[ELSE_IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[ELSE_ELSE_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[ELSE_IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[ELSE_THEN_LICM:.*]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[ELSE_ELSE_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[ELSE_THEN_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[ELSE_THEN_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi2 = phi i32 [ 2, %[[ELSE_IF_LICM]] ], [ 3, %[[ELSE_ELSE_LICM]] ]
+; CHECK: %cmp2 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 10
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cmp2, label %[[IF_IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[IF_ELSE_LICM:.*]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[IF_THEN_LICM:.*]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_ELSE_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[IF_THEN_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_THEN_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi1 = phi i32 [ 0, %[[IF_IF_LICM]] ], [ 1, %[[IF_ELSE_LICM]] ]
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if, label %else
+
+if:
+  %cmp2 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 10
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %if.if, label %if.else
+
+if.if:
+  br label %if.then
+
+if.else:
+  br label %if.then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: if.then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi1 = phi i32 [ 0, %if.if ], [ 1, %if.else ]
+if.then:
+  %phi1 = phi i32 [ 0, %if.if ], [ 1, %if.else ]
+  br label %then
+
+else:
+  %cmp3 = icmp slt i32 %x, -10
+  br i1 %cmp3, label %else.if, label %else.else
+
+else.if:
+  br label %else.then
+
+else.else:
+  br label %else.then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: else.then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi2 = phi i32 [ 2, %else.if ], [ 3, %else.else ]
+else.then:
+  %phi2 = phi i32 [ 2, %else.if ], [ 3, %else.else ]
+  br label %then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: then:
+; CHECK: %phi3 = phi i32 [ %phi1, %if.then ], [ %phi2, %else.then ]
+; CHECK: %cmp4 = icmp ne i32 %phi3, 0
+then:
+  %phi3 = phi i32 [ %phi1, %if.then ], [ %phi2, %else.then ]
+  store i32 %phi3, i32* %p
+  %cmp4 = icmp ne i32 %phi3, 0
+  br i1 %cmp4, label %loop, label %end
+
+end:
+  ret void
+}
+
+; We can hoist blocks that contain an edge that exits the loop by ignoring that
+; edge in the hoisted block.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @triangle_phi_loopexit
+define void @triangle_phi_loopexit(i32 %x, i32* %p) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-DAG: %add = add i32 %x, 1
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp2 = icmp sgt i32 10, %add
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cmp1, label %[[IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[THEN_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[THEN_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi = phi i32 [ %add, %[[IF_LICM]] ], [ %x, %entry ]
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if, label %then
+
+if:
+  %add = add i32 %x, 1
+  %cmp2 = icmp sgt i32 10, %add
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %then, label %end
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi = phi i32 [ %add, %if ], [ %x, %loop ]
+then:
+  %phi = phi i32 [ %add, %if ], [ %x, %loop ]
+  store i32 %phi, i32* %p
+  %cmp3 = icmp ne i32 %phi, 0
+  br i1 %cmp3, label %loop, label %end
+
+end:
+  ret void
+}
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: @diamond_phi_oneloopexit
+define void @diamond_phi_oneloopexit(i32 %x, i32* %p) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-DAG: %add = add i32 %x, 1
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp2 = icmp sgt i32 10, %add
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cmp1, label %[[IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[THEN_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM:.*]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[ELSE_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-DAG: %sub = sub i32 %x, 1
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[THEN_LICM]]
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi = phi i32 [ %add, %[[IF_LICM]] ], [ %sub, %[[ELSE_LICM]] ]
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %cmp3 = icmp ne i32 %phi, 0
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if, label %else
+
+if:
+  %add = add i32 %x, 1
+  %cmp2 = icmp sgt i32 10, %add
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %then, label %end
+
+else:
+  %sub = sub i32 %x, 1
+  br label %then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi = phi i32 [ %add, %if ], [ %sub, %else ]
+then:
+  %phi = phi i32 [ %add, %if ], [ %sub, %else ]
+  store i32 %phi, i32* %p
+  %cmp3 = icmp ne i32 %phi, 0
+  br i1 %cmp3, label %loop, label %end
+
+end:
+  ret void
+}
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: @diamond_phi_twoloopexit
+define void @diamond_phi_twoloopexit(i32 %x, i32* %p) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-DAG: %sub = sub i32 %x, 1
+; CHECK-DAG: %add = add i32 %x, 1
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp2 = icmp sgt i32 10, %add
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp3 = icmp sgt i32 10, %sub
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cmp1, label %[[IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[THEN_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM:.*]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[ELSE_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[THEN_LICM]]
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi = phi i32 [ %add, %[[IF_LICM]] ], [ %sub, %[[ELSE_LICM]] ]
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %cmp4 = icmp ne i32 %phi, 0
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %cmp1 = icmp sgt i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if, label %else
+
+if:
+  %add = add i32 %x, 1
+  %cmp2 = icmp sgt i32 10, %add
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %then, label %end
+
+else:
+  %sub = sub i32 %x, 1
+  %cmp3 = icmp sgt i32 10, %sub
+  br i1 %cmp3, label %then, label %end
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi = phi i32 [ %add, %if ], [ %sub, %else ]
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %cmp4 = icmp ne i32 %phi, 0
+then:
+  %phi = phi i32 [ %add, %if ], [ %sub, %else ]
+  store i32 %phi, i32* %p
+  %cmp4 = icmp ne i32 %phi, 0
+  br i1 %cmp4, label %loop, label %end
+
+end:
+  ret void
+}
+
+; The store cannot be hoisted, so add and shr cannot be hoisted into a
+; conditional block.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @conditional_use
+define void @conditional_use(i32 %x, i32* %p) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-DAG: %cond = icmp ugt i32 %x, 0
+; CHECK-DAG: %add = add i32 %x, 5
+; CHECK-DAG: %shr = ashr i32 %add, 1
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %cond = icmp ugt i32 %x, 0
+  br i1 %cond, label %if, label %else
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: if:
+; CHECK: store i32 %shr, i32* %p, align 4
+if:
+  %add = add i32 %x, 5
+  %shr = ashr i32 %add, 1
+  store i32 %shr, i32* %p, align 4
+  br label %then
+
+else:
+  br label %then
+
+then:
+  br label %loop
+}
+
+; A diamond with two triangles on the left and one on the right. This test is
+; to check that we have a unique loop preheader when we hoist the store (and so
+; don't fail an assertion).
+; CHECK-LABEL: @triangles_in_diamond
+define void @triangles_in_diamond(i32* %ptr) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK: store i32 0, i32* %ptr, align 4
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  br i1 undef, label %left_triangle_1, label %right_triangle
+
+left_triangle_1:
+  br i1 undef, label %left_triangle_1_if, label %left_triangle_2
+
+left_triangle_1_if:
+  br label %left_triangle_2
+
+left_triangle_2:
+  br i1 undef, label %left_triangle_2_if, label %left_triangle_2_then
+
+left_triangle_2_if:
+  br label %left_triangle_2_then
+
+left_triangle_2_then:
+  br label %loop.end
+
+right_triangle:
+  br i1 undef, label %right_triangle.if, label %right_triangle.then
+
+right_triangle.if:
+  br label %right_triangle.then
+
+right_triangle.then:
+  br label %loop.end
+
+loop.end:
+  store i32 0, i32* %ptr, align 4
+  br label %loop
+}
+
+; %cmp dominates its used after being hoisted, but not after %brmerge is rehoisted
+; CHECK-LABEL: @rehoist
+define void @rehoist(i8* %this, i32 %x) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-DAG: %sub = add nsw i32 %x, -1
+; CHECK-DAG: %fptr = bitcast i8* %this to void (i8*)*
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp = icmp eq i32 0, %sub
+; CHECK-DAG: %brmerge = or i1 %cmp, true
+entry:
+  %sub = add nsw i32 %x, -1
+  br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  br i1 undef, label %if1, label %else1
+
+if1:
+  %fptr = bitcast i8* %this to void (i8*)*
+  call void %fptr(i8* %this)
+  br label %then1
+
+else1:
+  br label %then1
+
+then1:
+  %cmp = icmp eq i32 0, %sub
+  br i1 %cmp, label %end, label %else2
+
+else2:
+  %brmerge = or i1 %cmp, true
+  br i1 %brmerge, label %if3, label %end
+
+if3:
+  br label %end
+
+end:
+  br label %loop
+}
+
+; A test case that uses empty blocks in a way that can cause control flow
+; hoisting to get confused.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @empty_blocks_multiple_conditional_branches
+define void @empty_blocks_multiple_conditional_branches(float %arg, float* %ptr) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry
+; CHECK-DAG: %div1 = fmul float %arg, 4.000000e+00
+; CHECK-DAG: %div2 = fmul float %arg, 2.000000e+00
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; The exact path to the phi isn't checked here, because it depends on whether
+; cond2 or cond3 is hoisted first
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi = phi float [ 0.000000e+00, %{{.*}} ], [ %div1, %{{.*}} ]
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  br i1 undef, label %backedge2, label %cond1
+
+cond1:
+  br i1 undef, label %cond1.if, label %cond1.else
+
+cond1.else:
+  br label %cond3
+
+cond1.if:
+  br label %cond1.if.next
+
+cond1.if.next:
+  br label %cond2
+
+cond2:
+  %div1 = fmul float %arg, 4.000000e+00
+  br i1 undef, label %cond2.if, label %cond2.then
+
+cond2.if:
+  br label %cond2.then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: cond2.then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi = phi float [ 0.000000e+00, %cond2 ], [ %div1, %cond2.if ]
+cond2.then:
+  %phi = phi float [ 0.000000e+00, %cond2 ], [ %div1, %cond2.if ]
+  store float %phi, float* %ptr
+  br label %backedge2
+
+cond3:
+  br i1 undef, label %cond3.then, label %cond3.if
+
+cond3.if:
+  %div2 = fmul float %arg, 2.000000e+00
+  store float %div2, float* %ptr
+  br label %cond3.then
+
+cond3.then:
+  br label %loop
+
+backedge2:
+  br label %loop
+}
+
+; We can't do much here, so mainly just check that we don't crash.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @many_path_phi
+define void @many_path_phi(i32* %ptr1, i32* %ptr2) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-DAG: %gep3 = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %ptr2, i32 2
+; CHECK-DAG: %gep2 = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %ptr2, i32 2
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %phi1 = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %phi2, %end ]
+  %cmp1 = icmp ugt i32 %phi1, 3
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %cond2, label %cond1
+
+cond1:
+  br i1 undef, label %end, label %cond1.else
+
+cond1.else:
+  %gep2 = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %ptr2, i32 2
+  %val2 = load i32, i32* %gep2, align 4
+  %cmp2 = icmp eq i32 %val2, 13
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %cond1.end, label %end
+
+cond1.end:
+  br label %end
+
+cond2:
+  br i1 undef, label %end, label %cond2.else
+
+cond2.else:
+  %gep3 = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %ptr2, i32 2
+  %val3 = load i32, i32* %gep3, align 4
+  %cmp3 = icmp eq i32 %val3, 13
+  br i1 %cmp3, label %cond2.end, label %end
+
+cond2.end:
+  br label %end
+
+end:
+  %phi2 = phi i32 [ 1, %cond1 ], [ 2, %cond1.else ], [ 3, %cond1.end ], [ 4, %cond2 ], [ 5, %cond2.else ], [ 6, %cond2.end ]
+  br label %loop
+}
+
+; Check that we correctly handle the hoisting of %gep when theres a critical
+; edge that branches to the preheader.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @crit_edge
+define void @crit_edge(i32* %ptr, i32 %idx, i1 %cond1, i1 %cond2) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK: %gep = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %ptr, i32 %idx
+; CHECK: br label %preheader
+entry:
+  br label %preheader
+
+preheader:
+  br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  br i1 %cond1, label %then, label %if
+
+if:
+  %gep = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %ptr, i32 %idx
+  %val = load i32, i32* %gep
+  br label %then
+
+then:
+  %phi = phi i32 [ %val, %if ], [ 0, %loop ]
+  store i32 %phi, i32* %ptr
+  br i1 %cond2, label %loop, label %crit_edge
+
+crit_edge:
+  br label %preheader
+}
+
+; Check that the conditional sub is correctly hoisted from the inner loop to the
+; preheader of the outer loop.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @hoist_from_innermost_loop
+define void @hoist_from_innermost_loop(i32 %nx, i32* %ptr) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-DAG: %sub = sub nsw i32 0, %nx
+; CHECK: br label %outer_loop
+entry:
+  br label %outer_loop
+
+outer_loop:
+  br label %middle_loop
+
+middle_loop:
+  br label %inner_loop
+
+inner_loop:
+  br i1 undef, label %inner_loop_end, label %if
+
+if:
+  %sub = sub nsw i32 0, %nx
+  store i32 %sub, i32* %ptr, align 4
+  br label %inner_loop_end
+
+inner_loop_end:
+  br i1 undef, label %inner_loop, label %middle_loop_end
+
+middle_loop_end:
+  br i1 undef, label %middle_loop, label %outer_loop_end
+
+outer_loop_end:
+  br label %outer_loop
+}
+
+; We have a diamond starting from %if, but %if.if is also reachable from %loop,
+; so %gep should not be conditionally hoisted.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @diamond_with_extra_in_edge
+define void @diamond_with_extra_in_edge(i32* %ptr1, i32* %ptr2, i32 %arg) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp2 = icmp ne i32 0, %arg
+; CHECK-DAG: %gep = getelementptr i32, i32* %ptr1, i32 4
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %phi1 = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %phi2, %then ]
+  %cmp1 = icmp ugt i32 16, %phi1
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if, label %if.if
+
+if:
+  %cmp2 = icmp ne i32 0, %arg
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %if.if, label %if.else
+
+if.if:
+  %gep = getelementptr i32, i32* %ptr1, i32 4
+  %val = load i32, i32* %gep, align 4
+  br label %then
+
+if.else:
+  br label %then
+
+then:
+  %phi2 = phi i32 [ %val, %if.if ], [ %phi1, %if.else ]
+  store i32 %phi2, i32* %ptr2, align 4
+  br label %loop
+}
+
+; %loop/%if/%then form a triangle, but %loop/%if/%then/%end also form a diamond.
+; The triangle should be picked for conditional hoisting.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @both_triangle_and_diamond
+define void @both_triangle_and_diamond(i32* %ptr1, i32* %ptr2, i32 %arg) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp1 = icmp ne i32 0, %arg
+; CHECK-DAG: %gep = getelementptr i32, i32* %ptr1, i32 4
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cmp1, label %[[IF_LICM:.*]], label %[[THEN_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[THEN_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[THEN_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi2 = phi i32 [ 0, %[[IF_LICM]] ], [ 1, %entry ]
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %phi1 = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %phi3, %end ]
+  %cmp1 = icmp ne i32 0, %arg
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if, label %then
+
+if:
+  %gep = getelementptr i32, i32* %ptr1, i32 4
+  %val = load i32, i32* %gep, align 4
+  %cmp2 = icmp ugt i32 16, %phi1
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %end, label %then
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: then:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi2 = phi i32 [ 0, %if ], [ 1, %loop ]
+then:
+  %phi2 = phi i32 [ 0, %if ], [ 1, %loop ]
+  br label %end
+
+end:
+  %phi3 = phi i32 [ %phi2, %then ], [ %val, %if ]
+  store i32 %phi3, i32* %ptr2, align 4
+  br label %loop
+}
+
+; We shouldn't duplicate the branch at the end of %loop and should instead hoist
+; %val to %entry.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @same_destination_branch
+define i32 @same_destination_branch(i32 %arg1, i32 %arg2) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp1 = icmp ne i32 %arg2, 0
+; CHECK-DAG: %val = add i32 %arg1, 1
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: loop:
+; CHECK: %phi = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %add, %then ]
+loop:
+  %phi = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %add, %then ]
+  %add = add i32 %phi, 1
+  %cmp1 = icmp ne i32 %arg2, 0
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if, label %if
+
+if:
+  %val = add i32 %arg1, 1
+  br label %then
+
+then:
+  %cmp2 = icmp ne i32 %val, %phi
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %loop, label %end
+
+end:
+  ret i32 %val
+}
+
+; Diamond-like control flow but the left/right blocks actually have the same
+; destinations.
+; TODO: We could potentially hoist all of phi2-4, but currently only hoist phi2.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @diamond_like_same_destinations
+define i32 @diamond_like_same_destinations(i32 %arg1, i32 %arg2) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp1 = icmp ne i32 %arg1, 0
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp2 = icmp ugt i32 %arg2, 1
+; CHECK-DAG: %cmp3 = icmp ugt i32 %arg2, 2
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cmp1, label %[[LEFT1_LICM:.*]], label %[[RIGHT1_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[LEFT1_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[LEFT2_LICM:.*]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[RIGHT1_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[LEFT2_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[LEFT2_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi2 = phi i32 [ 0, %[[LEFT1_LICM]] ], [ 1, %[[RIGHT1_LICM]] ]
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %phi1 = phi i32 [ 0, %entry ], [ %add, %loopend ]
+  %add = add i32 %phi1, 1
+  %cmp1 = icmp ne i32 %arg1, 0
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %left1, label %right1
+
+left1:
+  %cmp2 = icmp ugt i32 %arg2, 1
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %left2, label %right2
+
+right1:
+  %cmp3 = icmp ugt i32 %arg2, 2
+  br i1 %cmp3, label %left2, label %right2
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: left2:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi2 = phi i32 [ 0, %left1 ], [ 1, %right1 ]
+left2:
+  %phi2 = phi i32 [ 0, %left1 ], [ 1, %right1 ]
+  br label %loopend
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: right2:
+; CHECK: %phi3 = phi i32 [ 2, %left1 ], [ 3, %right1 ]
+right2:
+  %phi3 = phi i32 [ 2, %left1 ], [ 3, %right1 ]
+  br label %loopend
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: loopend:
+; CHECK: %phi4 = phi i32 [ %phi2, %left2 ], [ %phi3, %right2 ]
+loopend:
+  %phi4 = phi i32 [ %phi2, %left2 ], [ %phi3, %right2 ]
+  %cmp4 = icmp ne i32 %phi1, 32
+  br i1 %cmp4, label %loop, label %end
+
+end:
+  ret i32 %phi4
+}
+
+; A phi with multiple incoming values for the same block due to a branch with
+; two destinations that are actually the same. We can't hoist this.
+; TODO: This could be hoisted by erasing one of the incoming values.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @phi_multiple_values_same_block
+define i32 @phi_multiple_values_same_block(i32 %arg) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK: %cmp = icmp sgt i32 %arg, 4
+; CHECK-NOT: phi
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+entry:
+  br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  %cmp = icmp sgt i32 %arg, 4
+  br i1 %cmp, label %if, label %then
+
+if:
+  br i1 undef, label %then, label %then
+
+then:
+  %phi = phi i32 [ %arg, %loop ], [ 1, %if ], [ 1, %if ]
+  br i1 undef, label %exit, label %loop
+
+exit:
+  ret i32 %phi
+}
+
+; %phi is conditionally used in %d, and the store that %d is used in cannot be
+; hoisted. This means that we have to rehoist %d, but have to make sure to
+; rehoist it after %phi.
+; CHECK-LABEL: @phi_conditional_use
+define i64 @phi_conditional_use(i32 %f, i32* %g) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK: %cmp1 = icmp eq i32 %f, 1
+; CHECK: %cmp2 = icmp eq i32 %f, 0
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cmp1, label %[[IF_END_LICM:.*]], label %[[IF_THEN_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  %cmp1 = icmp eq i32 %f, 1
+  %cmp2 = icmp eq i32 %f, 0
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_THEN_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[IF_END_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_END_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ 1, %[[IF_THEN_LICM]] ]
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %d = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %g, i64 %phi
+; CHECK-ENABLED: i1 %cmp2, label %[[LOOP_BACKEDGE_LICM:.*]], label %[[IF_THEN2_LICM:.*]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_THEN2_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[LOOP_BACKEDGE_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[LOOP_BACKEDGE_LICM]]:
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if.end, label %if.then
+
+if.then:
+  br label %if.end
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: if.end:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi = phi i64 [ 0, %loop ], [ 1, %if.then ]
+if.end:
+  %phi = phi i64 [ 0, %loop ], [ 1, %if.then ]
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %loop.backedge, label %if.then2
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: if.then2:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %d = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %g, i64 %phi
+if.then2:
+  %d = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %g, i64 %phi
+  store i32 1, i32* %d, align 4
+  br label %loop.backedge
+
+loop.backedge:
+  br label %loop
+}
+
+; As above, but we have two such phis
+; CHECK-LABEL: @phi_conditional_use_twice
+define i64 @phi_conditional_use_twice(i32 %f, i32* %g) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: entry:
+; CHECK: %cmp1 = icmp eq i32 %f, 1
+; CHECK: %cmp2 = icmp eq i32 %f, 0
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br i1 %cmp1, label %[[IF_END_LICM:.*]], label %[[IF_THEN_LICM:.*]]
+entry:
+  %cmp1 = icmp eq i32 %f, 1
+  %cmp2 = icmp eq i32 %f, 0
+  %cmp3 = icmp sgt i32 %f, 0
+  br label %loop
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_THEN_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[IF_END_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_END_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi1 = phi i64 [ 0, %entry ], [ 1, %[[IF_THEN_LICM]] ]
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %d = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %g, i64 %phi1
+; CHECK-ENABLED: i1 %cmp2, label %[[IF_END2_LICM:.*]], label %[[IF_THEN2_LICM:.*]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_THEN2_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[IF_END2_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_END2_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %phi2 = phi i64 [ 2, %[[IF_END_LICM]] ], [ 3, %[[IF_THEN2_LICM]] ]
+; CHECK-ENABLED: %e = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %g, i64 %phi2
+; CHECK-ENABLED: i1 %cmp3, label %[[LOOP_BACKEDGE_LICM:.*]], label %[[IF_THEN3_LICM:.*]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[IF_THEN3_LICM]]:
+; CHECK-ENABLED: br label %[[LOOP_BACKEDGE_LICM]]
+
+; CHECK-ENABLED: [[LOOP_BACKEDGE_LICM]]:
+; CHECK: br label %loop
+
+loop:
+  br i1 %cmp1, label %if.end, label %if.then
+
+if.then:
+  br label %if.end
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: if.end:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi1 = phi i64 [ 0, %loop ], [ 1, %if.then ]
+if.end:
+  %phi1 = phi i64 [ 0, %loop ], [ 1, %if.then ]
+  br i1 %cmp2, label %if.end2, label %if.then2
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: if.then2:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %d = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %g, i64 %phi1
+if.then2:
+  %d = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %g, i64 %phi1
+  store i32 1, i32* %d, align 4
+  br label %if.end2
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: if.end2:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %phi2 = phi i64 [ 2, %if.end ], [ 3, %if.then2 ]
+if.end2:
+  %phi2 = phi i64 [ 2, %if.end ], [ 3, %if.then2 ]
+  br i1 %cmp3, label %loop.backedge, label %if.then3
+
+; CHECK-LABEL: if.then3:
+; CHECK-DISABLED: %e = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %g, i64 %phi2
+if.then3:
+  %e = getelementptr inbounds i32, i32* %g, i64 %phi2
+  store i32 1, i32* %e, align 4
+  br label %loop.backedge
+
+loop.backedge:
+  br label %loop
+}