The purpose of this test was to check boundary conditions for the size
of an ALU clause. This test is very sensitive to changes to the
optimizer or scheduler, because it requires an exact number of ALU
instructions in order to remain valid. It's not good to have a test
this sensitive, because it is confusing to developers who implement
optimizations and then 'break' the test.
I'm not sure if there is a good way to test these limits using lit, but
if I can come up with replacement test that isn't as sensitive I'll add
it back to the tree.
llvm-svn: 185084
+==============================================================================+
| How to organize the lit tests |
+==============================================================================+
- If you write a test for matching a single DAG opcode or intrinsic, it should
go in a file called {opcode_name,intrinsic_name}.ll (e.g. fadd.ll)
- If you write a test that matches several DAG opcodes and checks for a single
ISA instruction, then that test should go in a file called {ISA_name}.ll (e.g.
bfi_int.ll
- For all other tests, use your best judgement for organizing tests and naming
the files.
+==============================================================================+
| Naming conventions |
+==============================================================================+
- Use dash '-' and not underscore '_' to separate words in file names, unless
the file is named after a DAG opcode or ISA instruction that has an
underscore '_' in its name.
1baa03aba6