[turbofan] Remove last_use_ field from Node.

[turbofan] Remove last_use_ field from Node.

R=mstarzinger@chromium.org
BUG=

Committed: https://crrev.com/cd339784800a6e7514277abf68dfe37ead32240e
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#27319}

[Michael Starzinger, 2015-03-19 09:40:09]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
File test/unittests/compiler/node-properties-unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
test/unittests/compiler/node-properties-unittest.cc:61:
EXPECT_THAT(start->uses(), ElementsAre(use_effect, node));
Can we use UnorderedElementsAre here instead and address the TODO right away?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
test/unittests/compiler/node-properties-unittest.cc:77:
EXPECT_THAT(start->uses(), ElementsAre(use_control, node));
Likewise.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
File test/unittests/compiler/node-unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
test/unittests/compiler/node-unittest.cc:60: EXPECT_EQ(n1, UseAt(n0, 0));
Can we use EXPECT_THAT(n1->uses(), ElementsAre(n0)) here?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
test/unittests/compiler/node-unittest.cc:67: EXPECT_EQ(n1, UseAt(n0, 1));
Can we use EXPECT_THAT(n0->uses(), ElementsAre(n0, n1)) here?

[Benedikt Meurer, 2015-03-19 09:43:50]

bmeurer@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ bmeurer@chromium.org

[Benedikt Meurer, 2015-03-19 09:43:51]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
File test/unittests/compiler/node-test-utils.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
test/unittests/compiler/node-test-utils.cc:561:
NodeMatcher::MatchAndExplain(node, listener) &&
This was already checked above, can be removed here.

[Benedikt Meurer, 2015-03-19 09:46:23]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
File test/unittests/compiler/node-unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
test/unittests/compiler/node-unittest.cc:46: static Node* UseAt(Node* node, int
index) {
There should be no need for this helper method.

[titzer, 2015-03-19 10:10:32]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
File test/unittests/compiler/node-properties-unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
test/unittests/compiler/node-properties-unittest.cc:61:
EXPECT_THAT(start->uses(), ElementsAre(use_effect, node));
On 2015/03/19 09:40:08, Michael Starzinger wrote:
> Can we use UnorderedElementsAre here instead and address the TODO right away?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
test/unittests/compiler/node-properties-unittest.cc:77:
EXPECT_THAT(start->uses(), ElementsAre(use_control, node));
On 2015/03/19 09:40:08, Michael Starzinger wrote:
> Likewise.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
File test/unittests/compiler/node-test-utils.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
test/unittests/compiler/node-test-utils.cc:561:
NodeMatcher::MatchAndExplain(node, listener) &&
On 2015/03/19 09:43:51, Benedikt Meurer wrote:
> This was already checked above, can be removed here.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
File test/unittests/compiler/node-unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
test/unittests/compiler/node-unittest.cc:46: static Node* UseAt(Node* node, int
index) {
On 2015/03/19 09:46:23, Benedikt Meurer wrote:
> There should be no need for this helper method.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
test/unittests/compiler/node-unittest.cc:60: EXPECT_EQ(n1, UseAt(n0, 0));
On 2015/03/19 09:40:09, Michael Starzinger wrote:
> Can we use EXPECT_THAT(n1->uses(), ElementsAre(n0)) here?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/1/test/unittests/compiler/nod...
test/unittests/compiler/node-unittest.cc:67: EXPECT_EQ(n1, UseAt(n0, 1));
On 2015/03/19 09:40:08, Michael Starzinger wrote:
> Can we use EXPECT_THAT(n0->uses(), ElementsAre(n0, n1)) here?

Done.

[Michael Starzinger, 2015-03-19 10:16:18]

LGTM.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/20001/test/unittests/compiler...
File test/unittests/compiler/node-properties-unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/20001/test/unittests/compiler...
test/unittests/compiler/node-properties-unittest.cc:12: using
testing::UnorderedElementsAre;
nit: Please alpha-sort.

[titzer, 2015-03-19 10:19:26]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/20001/test/unittests/compiler...
File test/unittests/compiler/node-properties-unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/diff/20001/test/unittests/compiler...
test/unittests/compiler/node-properties-unittest.cc:12: using
testing::UnorderedElementsAre;
On 2015/03/19 10:16:18, Michael Starzinger wrote:
> nit: Please alpha-sort.

Done.

[titzer, 2015-03-19 10:20:07]

The CQ bit was checked by titzer@chromium.org

[titzer, 2015-03-19 10:20:07]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
mstarzinger@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/#ps80001
(title: " ")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-19 10:20:18]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1022783002/80001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-19 10:57:37]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-19 10:57:38]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  v8_linux_gcc_compile_rel on tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_linux_gcc_compile_rel/bu...)

[titzer, 2015-03-19 14:28:12]

The CQ bit was checked by titzer@chromium.org

[titzer, 2015-03-19 14:28:12]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
mstarzinger@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/#ps100001
(title: " ")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-19 14:28:24]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1022783002/100001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-19 14:43:40]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-19 14:43:41]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  v8_linux_gcc_compile_rel on tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_linux_gcc_compile_rel/bu...)

[titzer, 2015-03-19 14:56:05]

The CQ bit was checked by titzer@chromium.org

[titzer, 2015-03-19 14:56:06]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
mstarzinger@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1022783002/#ps120001
(title: " ")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-19 14:56:16]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1022783002/120001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-19 15:44:35]

Committed patchset #7 (id:120001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-19 15:44:45]

Patchset 7 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/cd339784800a6e7514277abf68dfe37ead32240e
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#27319}