Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Utilize VN-based non-null knowledge better - #69808
Conversation
ghost
commented
May 25, 2022
Tagging subscribers to this area: @JulieLeeMSFT Issue DetailsPreviously, global non-null assertion propagation would give up on any non- Fix this by moving the IR checks after the VN check. We are expecting a moderate amount of positive diffs.
|
b535337 to
b874a31Compare
@dotnet/jit-contrib |
Previously, global non-null assertion propagation would give up on any non-"ADD(LCL_VAR, CONST)"-like trees. This is correct for actual assertion-based propagation (since we record assertions based on conservative VNs and those propagate only through locals), but is unnecessarily conservative when it comes to utilizing non-nullness provided by VN. Fix this by moving the IR checks after the VN check.
b874a31 to
21ea0b2Compare
Previously, global non-null assertion propagation would give up on any non-
ADD(LCL_VAR, CONST)-like trees. This is correct for actual assertion-based propagation (since we record assertions based on conservative VNs and those propagate only through locals), but is unnecessarily conservative when it comes to utilizing non-nullness provided by VN.Fix this by moving the IR checks after the VN check.
Diffs.