Perform rudimentary check on graph size for no-change assertions.
Rationale:
This will find blatant violations of asserting a no-change
pass change if the graph size changed nevertheless.
Bug: 78171933
Test: test-art-host,target
Change-Id: I07b38e71c75dd6f728246d096976c8333b363329
diff --git a/compiler/optimizing/graph_checker.cc b/compiler/optimizing/graph_checker.cc
index fbcbe36..a689f35 100644
--- a/compiler/optimizing/graph_checker.cc
+++ b/compiler/optimizing/graph_checker.cc
@@ -58,6 +58,30 @@
!boundary->IsEntry();
}
+
+size_t GraphChecker::Run(bool pass_change, size_t last_size) {
+ size_t current_size = GetGraph()->GetReversePostOrder().size();
+ if (!pass_change) {
+ // Nothing changed for certain. Do a quick sanity check on that assertion
+ // for anything other than the first call (when last size was still 0).
+ if (last_size != 0) {
+ if (current_size != last_size) {
+ AddError(StringPrintf("Incorrect no-change assertion, "
+ "last graph size %zu vs current graph size %zu",
+ last_size, current_size));
+ }
+ }
+ // TODO: if we would trust the "false" value of the flag completely, we
+ // could skip checking the graph at this point.
+ }
+
+ // VisitReversePostOrder is used instead of VisitInsertionOrder,
+ // as the latter might visit dead blocks removed by the dominator
+ // computation.
+ VisitReversePostOrder();
+ return current_size;
+}
+
void GraphChecker::VisitBasicBlock(HBasicBlock* block) {
current_block_ = block;