Apologies for the drive-by comment, but I happened to be searching for TBAA reviews after lamenting the current documentation and this popped up.

One minor change, but otherwise LGTM

I haven't delved into the ARM-specific code in detail, but the ComplexArithmeticGraph feels like it's reinventing a lot of Instruction-like infrastructure just to avoid having to do anything with complex intrinsics. I may be biased here in thinking that it would be be better to move to standardized complex intrinsics, and I understand why you don't want to go there, but there are two questions I have:

As Florian mentioned, I just re-uploaded a full stack of patches for complex intrinsics support, ranging from defining multiply and divide intrinsics, including an expansion for x86 architecture in both expansion to __mulsc3 and friends and full lowering to instructions, as well as building on top of them to finally get CX_LIMITED_RANGE support into clang. The most interesting patch is probably D119287, since that's the one that does all of the codegen work that this is largely doing, and I personally don't have sufficient expertise with ARM or AArch64 to design that code very well.

I think there are use cases for having a callgraph that errs on the side of adding edges that might not exist, but I'm happy enough to leave that for a later patch.

I've rolled the relevant call graph analysis changes from the prior commit into this updated patch.

Okay, I see the issue now. I originally developed this patch on a fork with a whole lot of extra changes, and that fork included some extra modifications to the callgraph that I had missed: https://github.com/intel/llvm/commit/971fecdc316930c0c1c79283d1094ee4c4ca41e0#diff-cae4e2b4043cd0f49ce29e77de22a5a5. I'll merge the callgraph-related changes in that patch back onto a clean patch for upstream.

The test has been passing for me. What error are you seeing?

No, I do not have commit access, so if you could commit it, it would be greatly appreciated.