[Bitcode] Change std::sort to llvm::sort in response to r327219

Summary:
r327219 added wrappers to std::sort which randomly shuffle the container before sorting.
This will help in uncovering non-determinism caused due to undefined sorting
order of objects having the same key.

To make use of that infrastructure we need to invoke llvm::sort instead of std::sort.

Note: This patch is one of a series of patches to replace *all* std::sort to llvm::sort.
Refer the comments section in D44363 for a list of all the required patches.

Reviewers: pcc, mehdi_amini, dexonsmith

Reviewed By: dexonsmith

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45132

llvm-svn: 329334
diff --git a/llvm/lib/Bitcode/Writer/BitcodeWriter.cpp b/llvm/lib/Bitcode/Writer/BitcodeWriter.cpp
index 3b37c31..357c497 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Bitcode/Writer/BitcodeWriter.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/Bitcode/Writer/BitcodeWriter.cpp
@@ -3484,7 +3484,7 @@
     NameVals.push_back(VE.getValueID(RI.getValue()));
   // Sort the refs for determinism output, the vector returned by FS->refs() has
   // been initialized from a DenseSet.
-  std::sort(NameVals.begin() + SizeBeforeRefs, NameVals.end());
+  llvm::sort(NameVals.begin() + SizeBeforeRefs, NameVals.end());
 
   Stream.EmitRecord(bitc::FS_PERMODULE_GLOBALVAR_INIT_REFS, NameVals,
                     FSModRefsAbbrev);
diff --git a/llvm/lib/Bitcode/Writer/ValueEnumerator.cpp b/llvm/lib/Bitcode/Writer/ValueEnumerator.cpp
index d99befc..b430b52 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Bitcode/Writer/ValueEnumerator.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/Bitcode/Writer/ValueEnumerator.cpp
@@ -183,7 +183,7 @@
     return;
 
   bool IsGlobalValue = OM.isGlobalValue(ID);
-  std::sort(List.begin(), List.end(), [&](const Entry &L, const Entry &R) {
+  llvm::sort(List.begin(), List.end(), [&](const Entry &L, const Entry &R) {
     const Use *LU = L.first;
     const Use *RU = R.first;
     if (LU == RU)
@@ -744,7 +744,7 @@
   // and then sort by the original/current ID.  Since the IDs are guaranteed to
   // be unique, the result of std::sort will be deterministic.  There's no need
   // for std::stable_sort.
-  std::sort(Order.begin(), Order.end(), [this](MDIndex LHS, MDIndex RHS) {
+  llvm::sort(Order.begin(), Order.end(), [this](MDIndex LHS, MDIndex RHS) {
     return std::make_tuple(LHS.F, getMetadataTypeOrder(LHS.get(MDs)), LHS.ID) <
            std::make_tuple(RHS.F, getMetadataTypeOrder(RHS.get(MDs)), RHS.ID);
   });