llvm-project/llvm/test/Transforms/Inline/inline-funclets.ll

677 lines
25 KiB
LLVM
Raw Normal View History

[Inliner/WinEH] Honor implicit nounwinds Summary: Funclet EH tables require that a given funclet have only one unwind destination for exceptional exits. The verifier will therefore reject e.g. two cleanuprets with different unwind dests for the same cleanup, or two invokes exiting the same funclet but to different unwind dests. Because catchswitch has no 'nounwind' variant, and because IR producers are not *required* to annotate calls which will not unwind as 'nounwind', it is legal to nest a call or an "unwind to caller" catchswitch within a funclet pad that has an unwind destination other than caller; it is undefined behavior for such a call or catchswitch to unwind. Normally when inlining an invoke, calls in the inlined sequence are rewritten to invokes that unwind to the callsite invoke's unwind destination, and "unwind to caller" catchswitches in the inlined sequence are rewritten to unwind to the callsite invoke's unwind destination. However, if such a call or "unwind to caller" catchswitch is located in a callee funclet that has another exceptional exit with an unwind destination within the callee, applying the normal transformation would give that callee funclet multiple unwind destinations for its exceptional exits. There would be no way for EH table generation to determine which is the "true" exit, and the verifier would reject the function accordingly. Add logic to the inliner to detect these cases and leave such calls and "unwind to caller" catchswitches as calls and "unwind to caller" catchswitches in the inlined sequence. This fixes PR26147. Reviewers: rnk, andrew.w.kaylor, majnemer Subscribers: alexcrichton, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16319 llvm-svn: 258273
2016-01-20 10:15:15 +08:00
; RUN: opt -inline -S %s | FileCheck %s
; RUN: opt -passes='cgscc(inline)' -S %s | FileCheck %s
[Inliner/WinEH] Honor implicit nounwinds Summary: Funclet EH tables require that a given funclet have only one unwind destination for exceptional exits. The verifier will therefore reject e.g. two cleanuprets with different unwind dests for the same cleanup, or two invokes exiting the same funclet but to different unwind dests. Because catchswitch has no 'nounwind' variant, and because IR producers are not *required* to annotate calls which will not unwind as 'nounwind', it is legal to nest a call or an "unwind to caller" catchswitch within a funclet pad that has an unwind destination other than caller; it is undefined behavior for such a call or catchswitch to unwind. Normally when inlining an invoke, calls in the inlined sequence are rewritten to invokes that unwind to the callsite invoke's unwind destination, and "unwind to caller" catchswitches in the inlined sequence are rewritten to unwind to the callsite invoke's unwind destination. However, if such a call or "unwind to caller" catchswitch is located in a callee funclet that has another exceptional exit with an unwind destination within the callee, applying the normal transformation would give that callee funclet multiple unwind destinations for its exceptional exits. There would be no way for EH table generation to determine which is the "true" exit, and the verifier would reject the function accordingly. Add logic to the inliner to detect these cases and leave such calls and "unwind to caller" catchswitches as calls and "unwind to caller" catchswitches in the inlined sequence. This fixes PR26147. Reviewers: rnk, andrew.w.kaylor, majnemer Subscribers: alexcrichton, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16319 llvm-svn: 258273
2016-01-20 10:15:15 +08:00
declare void @g()
;;; Test with a call in a funclet that needs to remain a call
;;; when inlined because the funclet doesn't unwind to caller.
;;; CHECK-LABEL: define void @test1(
define void @test1() personality void ()* @g {
entry:
; CHECK-NEXT: entry:
invoke void @test1_inlinee()
to label %exit unwind label %cleanup
cleanup:
%pad = cleanuppad within none []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %pad) ]
cleanupret from %pad unwind to caller
exit:
ret void
}
define void @test1_inlinee() alwaysinline personality void ()* @g {
entry:
invoke void @g()
to label %exit unwind label %cleanup.inner
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g()
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %[[cleanup_inner:.+]]
cleanup.inner:
%pad.inner = cleanuppad within none []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %pad.inner) ]
cleanupret from %pad.inner unwind label %cleanup.outer
; CHECK: [[cleanup_inner]]:
; The call here needs to remain a call becuase pad.inner has a cleanupret
; that stays within the inlinee.
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[pad_inner:[^ ]+]] = cleanuppad within none
; CHECK-NEXT: call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[pad_inner]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: cleanupret from %[[pad_inner]] unwind label %[[cleanup_outer:.+]]
cleanup.outer:
%pad.outer = cleanuppad within none []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %pad.outer) ]
cleanupret from %pad.outer unwind to caller
; CHECK: [[cleanup_outer]]:
; The call and cleanupret here need to be redirected to caller cleanup
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[pad_outer:[^ ]+]] = cleanuppad within none
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[pad_outer]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %cleanup
; CHECK: cleanupret from %[[pad_outer]] unwind label %cleanup{{$}}
exit:
ret void
}
;;; Test with an "unwind to caller" catchswitch in a parent funclet
;;; that needs to remain "unwind to caller" because the parent
;;; doesn't unwind to caller.
;;; CHECK-LABEL: define void @test2(
define void @test2() personality void ()* @g {
entry:
; CHECK-NEXT: entry:
invoke void @test2_inlinee()
to label %exit unwind label %cleanup
cleanup:
%pad = cleanuppad within none []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %pad) ]
cleanupret from %pad unwind to caller
exit:
ret void
}
define void @test2_inlinee() alwaysinline personality void ()* @g {
entry:
invoke void @g()
to label %exit unwind label %cleanup1
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g()
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %[[cleanup1:.+]]
cleanup1:
%outer = cleanuppad within none []
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %outer) ]
to label %ret1 unwind label %catchswitch
; CHECK: [[cleanup1]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[outer:[^ ]+]] = cleanuppad within none
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[outer]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %[[catchswitch:.+]]
catchswitch:
%cs = catchswitch within %outer [label %catch] unwind to caller
; CHECK: [[catchswitch]]:
; The catchswitch here needs to remain "unwind to caller" since %outer
; has a cleanupret that remains within the inlinee.
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[cs:[^ ]+]] = catchswitch within %[[outer]] [label %[[catch:.+]]] unwind to caller
catch:
%inner = catchpad within %cs []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %inner) ]
catchret from %inner to label %ret1
; CHECK: [[catch]]:
; The call here needs to remain a call since it too is within %outer
; CHECK: %[[inner:[^ ]+]] = catchpad within %[[cs]]
; CHECK-NEXT: call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[inner]]) ]
ret1:
cleanupret from %outer unwind label %cleanup2
; CHECK: cleanupret from %[[outer]] unwind label %[[cleanup2:.+]]
cleanup2:
%later = cleanuppad within none []
cleanupret from %later unwind to caller
; CHECK: [[cleanup2]]:
; The cleanupret here needs to get redirected to the caller cleanup
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[later:[^ ]+]] = cleanuppad within none
; CHECK-NEXT: cleanupret from %[[later]] unwind label %cleanup{{$}}
exit:
ret void
}
;;; Test with a call in a cleanup that has no definitive unwind
;;; destination, that must be rewritten to an invoke.
;;; CHECK-LABEL: define void @test3(
define void @test3() personality void ()* @g {
entry:
; CHECK-NEXT: entry:
invoke void @test3_inlinee()
to label %exit unwind label %cleanup
cleanup:
%pad = cleanuppad within none []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %pad) ]
cleanupret from %pad unwind to caller
exit:
ret void
}
define void @test3_inlinee() alwaysinline personality void ()* @g {
entry:
invoke void @g()
to label %exit unwind label %cleanup
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g()
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %[[cleanup:.+]]
cleanup:
%pad = cleanuppad within none []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %pad) ]
unreachable
; CHECK: [[cleanup]]:
; The call must be rewritten to an invoke targeting the caller cleanup
; because it may well unwind to there.
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[pad:[^ ]+]] = cleanuppad within none
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %cleanup{{$}}
exit:
ret void
}
;;; Test with a catchswitch in a cleanup that has no definitive
;;; unwind destination, that must be rewritten to unwind to the
;;; inlined invoke's unwind dest
;;; CHECK-LABEL: define void @test4(
define void @test4() personality void ()* @g {
entry:
; CHECK-NEXT: entry:
invoke void @test4_inlinee()
to label %exit unwind label %cleanup
cleanup:
%pad = cleanuppad within none []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %pad) ]
cleanupret from %pad unwind to caller
exit:
ret void
}
define void @test4_inlinee() alwaysinline personality void ()* @g {
entry:
invoke void @g()
to label %exit unwind label %cleanup
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g()
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %[[cleanup:.+]]
cleanup:
%clean = cleanuppad within none []
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %clean) ]
to label %unreachable unwind label %dispatch
; CHECK: [[cleanup]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[clean:[^ ]+]] = cleanuppad within none
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[clean]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %[[dispatch:.+]]
dispatch:
%cs = catchswitch within %clean [label %catch] unwind to caller
; CHECK: [[dispatch]]:
; The catchswitch must be rewritten to unwind to %cleanup in the caller
; because it may well unwind to there.
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[cs:[^ ]+]] = catchswitch within %[[clean]] [label %[[catch:.+]]] unwind label %cleanup{{$}}
catch:
catchpad within %cs []
br label %unreachable
unreachable:
unreachable
exit:
ret void
}
;;; Test with multiple levels of nesting, and unwind dests
;;; that need to be inferred from ancestors, descendants,
;;; and cousins.
;;; CHECK-LABEL: define void @test5(
define void @test5() personality void ()* @g {
entry:
; CHECK-NEXT: entry:
invoke void @test5_inlinee()
to label %exit unwind label %cleanup
cleanup:
%pad = cleanuppad within none []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %pad) ]
cleanupret from %pad unwind to caller
exit:
ret void
}
define void @test5_inlinee() alwaysinline personality void ()* @g {
entry:
invoke void @g()
to label %cont unwind label %noinfo.root
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g()
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[cont:[^ ]+]] unwind label %[[noinfo_root:.+]]
noinfo.root:
%noinfo.root.pad = cleanuppad within none []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %noinfo.root.pad) ]
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %noinfo.root.pad) ]
to label %noinfo.root.cont unwind label %noinfo.left
; CHECK: [[noinfo_root]]:
; Nothing under "noinfo.root" has a definitive unwind destination, so
; we must assume all of it may actually unwind, and redirect unwinds
; to the cleanup in the caller.
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[noinfo_root_pad:[^ ]+]] = cleanuppad within none []
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[noinfo_root_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[next:[^ ]+]] unwind label %cleanup{{$}}
; CHECK: [[next]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[noinfo_root_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[noinfo_root_cont:[^ ]+]] unwind label %[[noinfo_left:.+]]
noinfo.left:
%noinfo.left.pad = cleanuppad within %noinfo.root.pad []
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %noinfo.left.pad) ]
to label %unreachable unwind label %noinfo.left.child
; CHECK: [[noinfo_left]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[noinfo_left_pad:[^ ]+]] = cleanuppad within %[[noinfo_root_pad]]
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[noinfo_left_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %[[noinfo_left_child:.+]]
noinfo.left.child:
%noinfo.left.child.cs = catchswitch within %noinfo.left.pad [label %noinfo.left.child.catch] unwind to caller
; CHECK: [[noinfo_left_child]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[noinfo_left_child_cs:[^ ]+]] = catchswitch within %[[noinfo_left_pad]] [label %[[noinfo_left_child_catch:[^ ]+]]] unwind label %cleanup{{$}}
noinfo.left.child.catch:
%noinfo.left.child.pad = catchpad within %noinfo.left.child.cs []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %noinfo.left.child.pad) ]
br label %unreachable
; CHECK: [[noinfo_left_child_catch]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[noinfo_left_child_pad:[^ ]+]] = catchpad within %[[noinfo_left_child_cs]] []
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[noinfo_left_child_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %cleanup{{$}}
noinfo.root.cont:
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %noinfo.root.pad) ]
to label %unreachable unwind label %noinfo.right
; CHECK: [[noinfo_root_cont]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[noinfo_root_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %[[noinfo_right:.+]]
noinfo.right:
%noinfo.right.cs = catchswitch within %noinfo.root.pad [label %noinfo.right.catch] unwind to caller
; CHECK: [[noinfo_right]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[noinfo_right_cs:[^ ]+]] = catchswitch within %[[noinfo_root_pad]] [label %[[noinfo_right_catch:[^ ]+]]] unwind label %cleanup{{$}}
noinfo.right.catch:
%noinfo.right.pad = catchpad within %noinfo.right.cs []
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %noinfo.right.pad) ]
to label %unreachable unwind label %noinfo.right.child
; CHECK: [[noinfo_right_catch]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[noinfo_right_pad:[^ ]+]] = catchpad within %[[noinfo_right_cs]]
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[noinfo_right_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %[[noinfo_right_child:.+]]
noinfo.right.child:
%noinfo.right.child.pad = cleanuppad within %noinfo.right.pad []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %noinfo.right.child.pad) ]
br label %unreachable
; CHECK: [[noinfo_right_child]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[noinfo_right_child_pad:[^ ]+]] = cleanuppad within %[[noinfo_right_pad]]
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[noinfo_right_child_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %cleanup{{$}}
cont:
invoke void @g()
to label %exit unwind label %implicit.root
; CHECK: [[cont]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g()
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %[[implicit_root:.+]]
implicit.root:
%implicit.root.pad = cleanuppad within none []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %implicit.root.pad) ]
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %implicit.root.pad) ]
to label %implicit.root.cont unwind label %implicit.left
; CHECK: [[implicit_root]]:
; There's an unwind edge to %internal in implicit.right, and we need to propagate that
; fact down to implicit.right.grandchild, up to implicit.root, and down to
; implicit.left.child.catch, leaving all calls and "unwind to caller" catchswitches
; alone to so they don't conflict with the unwind edge in implicit.right
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[implicit_root_pad:[^ ]+]] = cleanuppad within none
; CHECK-NEXT: call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[implicit_root_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[implicit_root_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[implicit_root_cont:[^ ]+]] unwind label %[[implicit_left:.+]]
implicit.left:
%implicit.left.pad = cleanuppad within %implicit.root.pad []
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %implicit.left.pad) ]
to label %unreachable unwind label %implicit.left.child
; CHECK: [[implicit_left]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[implicit_left_pad:[^ ]+]] = cleanuppad within %[[implicit_root_pad:[^ ]+]]
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[implicit_left_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %[[implicit_left_child:.+]]
implicit.left.child:
%implicit.left.child.cs = catchswitch within %implicit.left.pad [label %implicit.left.child.catch] unwind to caller
; CHECK: [[implicit_left_child]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[implicit_left_child_cs:[^ ]+]] = catchswitch within %[[implicit_left_pad]] [label %[[implicit_left_child_catch:[^ ]+]]] unwind to caller
implicit.left.child.catch:
%implicit.left.child.pad = catchpad within %implicit.left.child.cs []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %implicit.left.child.pad) ]
br label %unreachable
; CHECK: [[implicit_left_child_catch]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[implicit_left_child_pad:[^ ]+]] = catchpad within %[[implicit_left_child_cs]]
; CHECK-NEXT: call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[implicit_left_child_pad]]) ]
implicit.root.cont:
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %implicit.root.pad) ]
to label %unreachable unwind label %implicit.right
; CHECK: [[implicit_root_cont]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[implicit_root_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %[[implicit_right:.+]]
implicit.right:
%implicit.right.cs = catchswitch within %implicit.root.pad [label %implicit.right.catch] unwind label %internal
; CHECK: [[implicit_right]]:
; This is the unwind edge (to %internal) whose existence needs to get propagated around the "implicit" tree
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[implicit_right_cs:[^ ]+]] = catchswitch within %[[implicit_root_pad]] [label %[[implicit_right_catch:[^ ]+]]] unwind label %[[internal:.+]]
implicit.right.catch:
%implicit.right.pad = catchpad within %implicit.right.cs []
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %implicit.right.pad) ]
to label %unreachable unwind label %implicit.right.child
; CHECK: [[implicit_right_catch]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[implicit_right_pad:[^ ]+]] = catchpad within %[[implicit_right_cs]]
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[implicit_right_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %[[implicit_right_child:.+]]
implicit.right.child:
%implicit.right.child.pad = cleanuppad within %implicit.right.pad []
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %implicit.right.child.pad) ]
to label %unreachable unwind label %implicit.right.grandchild
; CHECK: [[implicit_right_child]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[implicit_right_child_pad:[^ ]+]] = cleanuppad within %[[implicit_right_pad]]
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[implicit_right_child_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %[[implicit_right_grandchild:.+]]
implicit.right.grandchild:
%implicit.right.grandchild.cs = catchswitch within %implicit.right.child.pad [label %implicit.right.grandchild.catch] unwind to caller
; CHECK: [[implicit_right_grandchild]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[implicit_right_grandchild_cs:[^ ]+]] = catchswitch within %[[implicit_right_child_pad]] [label %[[implicit_right_grandchild_catch:[^ ]+]]] unwind to caller
implicit.right.grandchild.catch:
%implicit.right.grandhcild.pad = catchpad within %implicit.right.grandchild.cs []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %implicit.right.grandhcild.pad) ]
br label %unreachable
; CHECK: [[implicit_right_grandchild_catch]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[implicit_right_grandhcild_pad:[^ ]+]] = catchpad within %[[implicit_right_grandchild_cs]]
; CHECK-NEXT: call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[implicit_right_grandhcild_pad]]) ]
internal:
%internal.pad = cleanuppad within none []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %internal.pad) ]
cleanupret from %internal.pad unwind to caller
; CHECK: [[internal]]:
; internal is a cleanup with a "return to caller" cleanuppad; that needs to get redirected
; to %cleanup in the caller, and the call needs to get similarly rewritten to an invoke.
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[internal_pad:[^ ]+]] = cleanuppad within none
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %internal.pad.i) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[next:[^ ]+]] unwind label %cleanup{{$}}
; CHECK: [[next]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: cleanupret from %[[internal_pad]] unwind label %cleanup{{$}}
unreachable:
unreachable
exit:
ret void
}
;;; Test with funclets that don't have information for themselves, but have
;;; descendants which unwind to other descendants (left.left unwinds to
;;; left.right, and right unwinds to far_right). Make sure that these local
;;; unwinds don't trip up processing of the ancestor nodes (left and root) that
;;; ultimately have no information.
;;; CHECK-LABEL: define void @test6(
define void @test6() personality void()* @ProcessCLRException {
entry:
; CHECK-NEXT: entry:
invoke void @test6_inlinee()
to label %exit unwind label %cleanup
cleanup:
%pad = cleanuppad within none []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %pad) ]
cleanupret from %pad unwind to caller
exit:
ret void
}
define void @test6_inlinee() alwaysinline personality void ()* @ProcessCLRException {
entry:
invoke void @g()
to label %exit unwind label %root
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g()
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %[[root:.+]]
root:
%root.pad = cleanuppad within none []
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %root.pad) ]
to label %root.cont unwind label %left
; CHECK: [[root]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[root_pad:.+]] = cleanuppad within none []
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[root_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[root_cont:.+]] unwind label %[[left:.+]]
left:
%left.cs = catchswitch within %root.pad [label %left.catch] unwind to caller
; CHECK: [[left]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[left_cs:.+]] = catchswitch within %[[root_pad]] [label %[[left_catch:.+]]] unwind label %cleanup
left.catch:
%left.cp = catchpad within %left.cs []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %left.cp) ]
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %left.cp) ]
to label %unreach unwind label %left.left
; CHECK: [[left_catch:.+]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[left_cp:.+]] = catchpad within %[[left_cs]] []
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[left_cp]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[lc_cont:.+]] unwind label %cleanup
; CHECK: [[lc_cont]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[left_cp]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[unreach:.+]] unwind label %[[left_left:.+]]
left.left:
%ll.pad = cleanuppad within %left.cp []
cleanupret from %ll.pad unwind label %left.right
; CHECK: [[left_left]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[ll_pad:.+]] = cleanuppad within %[[left_cp]] []
; CHECK-NEXT: cleanupret from %[[ll_pad]] unwind label %[[left_right:.+]]
left.right:
%lr.pad = cleanuppad within %left.cp []
unreachable
; CHECK: [[left_right]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[lr_pad:.+]] = cleanuppad within %[[left_cp]] []
; CHECK-NEXT: unreachable
root.cont:
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %root.pad) ]
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %root.pad) ]
to label %unreach unwind label %right
; CHECK: [[root_cont]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[root_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[root_cont_cont:.+]] unwind label %cleanup
; CHECK: [[root_cont_cont]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[root_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[unreach]] unwind label %[[right:.+]]
right:
%right.pad = cleanuppad within %root.pad []
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %right.pad) ]
to label %unreach unwind label %right.child
; CHECK: [[right]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[right_pad:.+]] = cleanuppad within %[[root_pad]] []
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[right_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[unreach]] unwind label %[[right_child:.+]]
right.child:
%rc.pad = cleanuppad within %right.pad []
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %rc.pad) ]
to label %unreach unwind label %far_right
; CHECK: [[right_child]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[rc_pad:.+]] = cleanuppad within %[[right_pad]] []
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[rc_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[unreach]] unwind label %[[far_right:.+]]
far_right:
%fr.cs = catchswitch within %root.pad [label %fr.catch] unwind to caller
; CHECK: [[far_right]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[fr_cs:.+]] = catchswitch within %[[root_pad]] [label %[[fr_catch:.+]]] unwind label %cleanup
fr.catch:
%fr.cp = catchpad within %fr.cs []
unreachable
; CHECK: [[fr_catch]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[fr_cp:.+]] = catchpad within %[[fr_cs]] []
; CHECK-NEXT: unreachable
unreach:
unreachable
; CHECK: [[unreach]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: unreachable
exit:
ret void
}
;;; Test with a no-info funclet (right) which has a cousin (left.left) that
;;; unwinds to another cousin (left.right); make sure we don't trip over this
;;; when propagating unwind destination info to "right".
;;; CHECK-LABEL: define void @test7(
define void @test7() personality void()* @ProcessCLRException {
entry:
; CHECK-NEXT: entry:
invoke void @test7_inlinee()
to label %exit unwind label %cleanup
cleanup:
%pad = cleanuppad within none []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %pad) ]
cleanupret from %pad unwind to caller
exit:
ret void
}
define void @test7_inlinee() alwaysinline personality void ()* @ProcessCLRException {
entry:
invoke void @g()
to label %exit unwind label %root
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g()
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %[[root:.+]]
root:
%root.cp = cleanuppad within none []
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %root.cp) ]
to label %root.cont unwind label %child
; CHECK: [[root]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[root_cp:.+]] = cleanuppad within none []
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[root_cp]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[root_cont:.+]] unwind label %[[child:.+]]
root.cont:
cleanupret from %root.cp unwind to caller
; CHECK: [[root_cont]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: cleanupret from %[[root_cp]] unwind label %cleanup
child:
%child.cp = cleanuppad within %root.cp []
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %child.cp) ]
to label %child.cont unwind label %left
; CHECK: [[child]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[child_cp:.+]] = cleanuppad within %[[root_cp]] []
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[child_cp]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[child_cont:.+]] unwind label %[[left:.+]]
left:
%left.cp = cleanuppad within %child.cp []
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %left.cp) ]
to label %left.cont unwind label %left.left
; CHECK: [[left]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[left_cp:.+]] = cleanuppad within %[[child_cp]] []
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[left_cp]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[left_cont:.+]] unwind label %[[left_left:.+]]
left.left:
%ll.cp = cleanuppad within %left.cp []
cleanupret from %ll.cp unwind label %left.right
; CHECK: [[left_left]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[ll_cp:.+]] = cleanuppad within %[[left_cp]] []
; CHECK-NEXT: cleanupret from %[[ll_cp]] unwind label %[[left_right:.+]]
left.cont:
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %left.cp) ]
to label %unreach unwind label %left.right
; CHECK: [[left_cont]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[left_cp]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[unreach:.+]] unwind label %[[left_right]]
left.right:
%lr.cp = cleanuppad within %left.cp []
unreachable
; CHECK: [[left_right]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[lr_cp:.+]] = cleanuppad within %[[left_cp]] []
; CHECK-NEXT: unreachable
child.cont:
invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %child.cp) ]
to label %unreach unwind label %right
; CHECK: [[child_cont]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[child_cp]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[unreach]] unwind label %[[right:.+]]
right:
%right.cp = cleanuppad within %child.cp []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %right.cp) ]
unreachable
; CHECK: [[right]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[right_cp:.+]] = cleanuppad within %[[child_cp]]
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[right_cp]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: to label %[[right_cont:.+]] unwind label %cleanup
; CHECK: [[right_cont]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: unreachable
unreach:
unreachable
; CHECK: [[unreach]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: unreachable
exit:
ret void
}
[Inliner/WinEH] Honor implicit nounwinds Summary: Funclet EH tables require that a given funclet have only one unwind destination for exceptional exits. The verifier will therefore reject e.g. two cleanuprets with different unwind dests for the same cleanup, or two invokes exiting the same funclet but to different unwind dests. Because catchswitch has no 'nounwind' variant, and because IR producers are not *required* to annotate calls which will not unwind as 'nounwind', it is legal to nest a call or an "unwind to caller" catchswitch within a funclet pad that has an unwind destination other than caller; it is undefined behavior for such a call or catchswitch to unwind. Normally when inlining an invoke, calls in the inlined sequence are rewritten to invokes that unwind to the callsite invoke's unwind destination, and "unwind to caller" catchswitches in the inlined sequence are rewritten to unwind to the callsite invoke's unwind destination. However, if such a call or "unwind to caller" catchswitch is located in a callee funclet that has another exceptional exit with an unwind destination within the callee, applying the normal transformation would give that callee funclet multiple unwind destinations for its exceptional exits. There would be no way for EH table generation to determine which is the "true" exit, and the verifier would reject the function accordingly. Add logic to the inliner to detect these cases and leave such calls and "unwind to caller" catchswitches as calls and "unwind to caller" catchswitches in the inlined sequence. This fixes PR26147. Reviewers: rnk, andrew.w.kaylor, majnemer Subscribers: alexcrichton, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16319 llvm-svn: 258273
2016-01-20 10:15:15 +08:00
declare void @ProcessCLRException()
; Make sure the logic doesn't get tripped up when the inlined invoke is
; itself within a funclet in the caller.
; CHECK-LABEL: define void @test8(
define void @test8() personality void ()* @ProcessCLRException {
[Inliner/WinEH] Honor implicit nounwinds Summary: Funclet EH tables require that a given funclet have only one unwind destination for exceptional exits. The verifier will therefore reject e.g. two cleanuprets with different unwind dests for the same cleanup, or two invokes exiting the same funclet but to different unwind dests. Because catchswitch has no 'nounwind' variant, and because IR producers are not *required* to annotate calls which will not unwind as 'nounwind', it is legal to nest a call or an "unwind to caller" catchswitch within a funclet pad that has an unwind destination other than caller; it is undefined behavior for such a call or catchswitch to unwind. Normally when inlining an invoke, calls in the inlined sequence are rewritten to invokes that unwind to the callsite invoke's unwind destination, and "unwind to caller" catchswitches in the inlined sequence are rewritten to unwind to the callsite invoke's unwind destination. However, if such a call or "unwind to caller" catchswitch is located in a callee funclet that has another exceptional exit with an unwind destination within the callee, applying the normal transformation would give that callee funclet multiple unwind destinations for its exceptional exits. There would be no way for EH table generation to determine which is the "true" exit, and the verifier would reject the function accordingly. Add logic to the inliner to detect these cases and leave such calls and "unwind to caller" catchswitches as calls and "unwind to caller" catchswitches in the inlined sequence. This fixes PR26147. Reviewers: rnk, andrew.w.kaylor, majnemer Subscribers: alexcrichton, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16319 llvm-svn: 258273
2016-01-20 10:15:15 +08:00
entry:
invoke void @g()
to label %exit unwind label %callsite_parent
callsite_parent:
%callsite_parent.pad = cleanuppad within none []
; CHECK: %callsite_parent.pad = cleanuppad within none
invoke void @test8_inlinee() [ "funclet"(token %callsite_parent.pad) ]
[Inliner/WinEH] Honor implicit nounwinds Summary: Funclet EH tables require that a given funclet have only one unwind destination for exceptional exits. The verifier will therefore reject e.g. two cleanuprets with different unwind dests for the same cleanup, or two invokes exiting the same funclet but to different unwind dests. Because catchswitch has no 'nounwind' variant, and because IR producers are not *required* to annotate calls which will not unwind as 'nounwind', it is legal to nest a call or an "unwind to caller" catchswitch within a funclet pad that has an unwind destination other than caller; it is undefined behavior for such a call or catchswitch to unwind. Normally when inlining an invoke, calls in the inlined sequence are rewritten to invokes that unwind to the callsite invoke's unwind destination, and "unwind to caller" catchswitches in the inlined sequence are rewritten to unwind to the callsite invoke's unwind destination. However, if such a call or "unwind to caller" catchswitch is located in a callee funclet that has another exceptional exit with an unwind destination within the callee, applying the normal transformation would give that callee funclet multiple unwind destinations for its exceptional exits. There would be no way for EH table generation to determine which is the "true" exit, and the verifier would reject the function accordingly. Add logic to the inliner to detect these cases and leave such calls and "unwind to caller" catchswitches as calls and "unwind to caller" catchswitches in the inlined sequence. This fixes PR26147. Reviewers: rnk, andrew.w.kaylor, majnemer Subscribers: alexcrichton, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16319 llvm-svn: 258273
2016-01-20 10:15:15 +08:00
to label %ret unwind label %cleanup
ret:
cleanupret from %callsite_parent.pad unwind label %cleanup
cleanup:
%pad = cleanuppad within none []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %pad) ]
cleanupret from %pad unwind to caller
exit:
ret void
}
define void @test8_inlinee() alwaysinline personality void ()* @ProcessCLRException {
[Inliner/WinEH] Honor implicit nounwinds Summary: Funclet EH tables require that a given funclet have only one unwind destination for exceptional exits. The verifier will therefore reject e.g. two cleanuprets with different unwind dests for the same cleanup, or two invokes exiting the same funclet but to different unwind dests. Because catchswitch has no 'nounwind' variant, and because IR producers are not *required* to annotate calls which will not unwind as 'nounwind', it is legal to nest a call or an "unwind to caller" catchswitch within a funclet pad that has an unwind destination other than caller; it is undefined behavior for such a call or catchswitch to unwind. Normally when inlining an invoke, calls in the inlined sequence are rewritten to invokes that unwind to the callsite invoke's unwind destination, and "unwind to caller" catchswitches in the inlined sequence are rewritten to unwind to the callsite invoke's unwind destination. However, if such a call or "unwind to caller" catchswitch is located in a callee funclet that has another exceptional exit with an unwind destination within the callee, applying the normal transformation would give that callee funclet multiple unwind destinations for its exceptional exits. There would be no way for EH table generation to determine which is the "true" exit, and the verifier would reject the function accordingly. Add logic to the inliner to detect these cases and leave such calls and "unwind to caller" catchswitches as calls and "unwind to caller" catchswitches in the inlined sequence. This fixes PR26147. Reviewers: rnk, andrew.w.kaylor, majnemer Subscribers: alexcrichton, llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16319 llvm-svn: 258273
2016-01-20 10:15:15 +08:00
entry:
invoke void @g()
to label %exit unwind label %inlinee_cleanup
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %callsite_parent.pad) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %[[inlinee_cleanup:.+]]
inlinee_cleanup:
%inlinee.pad = cleanuppad within none []
call void @g() [ "funclet"(token %inlinee.pad) ]
unreachable
; CHECK: [[inlinee_cleanup]]:
; CHECK-NEXT: %[[inlinee_pad:[^ ]+]] = cleanuppad within %callsite_parent.pad
; CHECK-NEXT: invoke void @g() [ "funclet"(token %[[inlinee_pad]]) ]
; CHECK-NEXT: unwind label %cleanup{{$}}
exit:
ret void
}