Remove jumps over empty blocks.

src/IceCfgNode.cpp

Index: src/IceCfgNode.cpp
diff --git a/src/IceCfgNode.cpp b/src/IceCfgNode.cpp
index 60214c7e5fa1b3a72b695ebce74b05fc1e82e921..4fb336d03456b5ef778dfa9480cf7d5a0680c330 100644
--- a/src/IceCfgNode.cpp
+++ b/src/IceCfgNode.cpp
@@ -736,10 +736,9 @@ void CfgNode::contractIfEmpty() {
   // invalidate the iterator over this->InEdges).
   if (OutEdges.front() != this) {
     for (CfgNode *Pred : InEdges) {
-      for (auto I = Pred->OutEdges.begin(), E = Pred->OutEdges.end(); I != E;
-           ++I) {
-        if (*I == this) {
-          *I = OutEdges.front();
+      for (CfgNode *&I : Pred->OutEdges) {
+        if (I == this) {
+          I = OutEdges.front();
           OutEdges.front()->InEdges.push_back(Pred);
         }
       }
@@ -748,23 +747,30 @@ void CfgNode::contractIfEmpty() {
           I.repointEdges(this, OutEdges.front());
       }
     }
+
+    // Remove the in-edge to the successor to allow node reordering to make
+    // better decisions. For example it's more helpful to place a node after
+    // a reachable predecessor than an unreachable one (like the one we just
+    // contracted).
+    const auto SuccInEdgesBegin = OutEdges.front()->InEdges.begin();
+    const auto SuccInEdgesEnd = OutEdges.front()->InEdges.end();
+    OutEdges.front()->InEdges.erase(
+        std::find(SuccInEdgesBegin, SuccInEdgesEnd, this));
   }
   InEdges.clear();
-  // Don't bother removing the single out-edge, which would also
-  // require finding the corresponding in-edge in the successor and
-  // removing it.
 }
 
 void CfgNode::doBranchOpt(const CfgNode *NextNode) {
   TargetLowering *Target = Func->getTarget();
-  // Check every instruction for a branch optimization opportunity.
-  // It may be more efficient to iterate in reverse and stop after the
-  // first opportunity, unless there is some target lowering where we
-  // have the possibility of multiple such optimizations per block
-  // (currently not the case for x86 lowering).
-  for (Inst &I : Insts) {
+  // Find the first opportunity for branch optimization (which will be the last
+  // instruction in the block) and stop. This is sufficient unless there is some
+  // target lowering where we have the possibility of multiple optimizations per
+  // block. Take case with switch lowering as there are multiple unconditional

[jvoung (off chromium), 2015/07/23 00:01:23]

What do you mean by "Take case with switch lowering" ?

[ascull, 2015/07/23 00:11:19]

I mean 'take care'. Too much switching!

+  // branches and only the last can be deleted.
+  for (Inst &I : reverse_range(Insts)) {
     if (!I.isDeleted()) {
       Target->doBranchOpt(&I, NextNode);
+      return;
     }
   }
 }