[ValueTracking] remove a FIXME for something we don't want to do; NFC
The comment was added with:
https://reviews.llvm.org/rL293773
...but there would be a cost to implement this and possibly no payoff.
llvm-svn: 293823
diff --git a/llvm/lib/Analysis/ValueTracking.cpp b/llvm/lib/Analysis/ValueTracking.cpp
index 6c44b0d..26032e7 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Analysis/ValueTracking.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/Analysis/ValueTracking.cpp
@@ -797,10 +797,6 @@
// FIXME: Publish a warning/remark that we have encountered UB or the compiler
// is broken.
- // FIXME: Implement a stronger version of "I give up" by invalidating/clearing
- // the assumption cache. This should indicate that the cache is corrupted so
- // future callers will not waste time repopulating it with faulty assumptions.
-
if ((KnownZero & KnownOne) != 0) {
KnownZero.clearAllBits();
KnownOne.clearAllBits();
diff --git a/llvm/test/Transforms/InstSimplify/assume.ll b/llvm/test/Transforms/InstSimplify/assume.ll
index 2edcc0c..4255238 100644
--- a/llvm/test/Transforms/InstSimplify/assume.ll
+++ b/llvm/test/Transforms/InstSimplify/assume.ll
@@ -28,8 +28,7 @@
; Similar to above: there's no way to know which assumption is truthful,
; so just don't crash. The second icmp+assume gets processed later, so that
-; determines the return value. This can be improved by permanently invalidating
-; the cached assumptions for this function.
+; determines the return value.
define i8 @conflicting_assumptions(i8 %x) {
; CHECK-LABEL: @conflicting_assumptions(