https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90887

--- Comment #5 from Ilia Mirkin <imirkin-FrUbXkNCsVf2fBVCVOL8/A@public.gmane.org> ---
(In reply to jr from comment #4)
> I've been thinking a little about a better way to fix this inbound edge
> ordering dependency. Unfortunately it seems that unless there is a way to
> efficiently recompute the information there always will be an invariant that
> has to be respected by graph transformations (and which attach and detach
> simply cannot guarantee on their own).

The way that LLVM deals with this is that the source actually contains a
reference to the inbound bb as well. That way you can do whatever you want with
the edges, each src of a phi node knows which bb it's coming from.

It'd be a bit of a pain to introduce here... my strategy so far has been to
hold my nose and just fix things up as they come, which I guess is what you've
done as well. I need to look at this logic very carefully though.

The fact that we were previously adding a FORWARD edge and aren't anymore is a
bit worrying -- the meaning of those things is explained somewhere btw -- TREE
== part of the MST; FORWARD/etc are various other edges.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.