[X86] Fix a few recursivelyDeleteUnusedNodes calls that were trying to delete nodes...

We looked through a truncate to get to the load. So we should be
deleting the truncate first.

There is a check that the node is really unused before deleting
so this didn't cause a functional issue.

diff --git a/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp b/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp
index 86825ce..5cf1a94 100644 (file)
--- a/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp
@@ -35705,7 +35705,7 @@ static SDValue combineTargetShuffle(SDValue N, SelectionDAG &DAG,
               LN->getMemOperand()->getFlags());
           DCI.CombineTo(N.getNode(), BcastLd);
           DAG.ReplaceAllUsesOfValueWith(SDValue(LN, 1), BcastLd.getValue(1));
-          DCI.recursivelyDeleteUnusedNodes(LN);
+          DCI.recursivelyDeleteUnusedNodes(Src.getNode());
           return N; // Return N so it doesn't get rechecked!
         }
       }
@@ -35722,7 +35722,7 @@ static SDValue combineTargetShuffle(SDValue N, SelectionDAG &DAG,
                                       LN->getMemoryVT(), LN->getMemOperand());
           DCI.CombineTo(N.getNode(), BcastLd);
           DAG.ReplaceAllUsesOfValueWith(SDValue(LN, 1), BcastLd.getValue(1));
-          DCI.recursivelyDeleteUnusedNodes(LN);
+          DCI.recursivelyDeleteUnusedNodes(Src.getNode());
           return N; // Return N so it doesn't get rechecked!
         }
       }
@@ -35750,7 +35750,7 @@ static SDValue combineTargetShuffle(SDValue N, SelectionDAG &DAG,
               LN->getMemOperand()->getFlags());
           DCI.CombineTo(N.getNode(), BcastLd);
           DAG.ReplaceAllUsesOfValueWith(SDValue(LN, 1), BcastLd.getValue(1));
-          DCI.recursivelyDeleteUnusedNodes(LN);
+          DCI.recursivelyDeleteUnusedNodes(Src.getNode());
           return N; // Return N so it doesn't get rechecked!
         }
       }