Closing in favor of https://reviews.llvm.org/D125611.

In D125611#3535537, @dblaikie wrote:

If you want to submit a follow-up patch to disable copy/move (construction and assignment) for IntervalMap, that'd be great, otherwise I can do that once this lands.

Changed type of M.

If we decide that this is the way to go, I'll add the other functions.

Changed the copy to a deep one.

This is a shallow copy. Let me change it to a deep one.

In D125611#3520595, @dblaikie wrote:

That seems likely to be a better solution - if that's closer to the root cause, less chance someone else will introduce a similarly problematic use of IntervalMap that way (since the use will be no longer problematic).

Proposed workaround: https://reviews.llvm.org/D125611.

Here's more info:

$ c++ --version
FreeBSD clang version 13.0.0 (git@github.com:llvm/llvm-project.git llvmorg-13.0.0-0-gd7b669b3a303)
Target: x86_64-unknown-freebsd13.0
Thread model: posix
InstalledDir: /usr/bin

This is on FreeBSD 13-STABLE, which I think uses clang 13. It's on my home computer, I'll check the details when I get home.

Use the proper diff file this time.

Replace the direct storage class examination with hasLocalStorage.

This fails to compile:

I'm not questioning the splitting, I'm just wondering if the terminology could be more self-explanatory. In AsmPrinter there is a check that an address-taken block must actually be present, but that's a hard requirement really only when there is a branch to it. So I was thinking that maybe "isIndirectBranchTarget" could be a better name, but I wasn't sure if it captured the intent.

This is great. I think there is an unaddressed comment, but otherwise LGTM.

The IR spec states that the value of blockaddress can only be used in an indirect branch/call, or in a comparison against null. The latter seems to fall under the "address materialized somewhere" that you mention in the referenced review. Is the motivation behind BlockAddressTarget to identify blocks that are targets of indirect branches? Otherwise, it's not clear to me why blockaddress(bb) == null is any different from storing the address of bb in an exception table, for example.

The Hexagon part looks ok.