maxjhandsome
/
llvm-project
forked from OSchip/llvm-project
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Releases Wiki Activity
llvm-project/llvm/test/CodeGen/WinEH/wineh-statenumbering-cleanu...

Ignoring revisions in .git-blame-ignore-revs. Click here to bypass and see the normal blame view.

62 lines
1.9 KiB
LLVM
Raw Normal View History

Fix invalid target triples in tests. (NFC) llvm-svn: 355349
2019-03-05 07:37:41 +08:00
; RUN: sed -e s/.Cxx:// %s | opt -mtriple=i386-pc-windows-msvc -S -x86-winehstate | FileCheck %s
; RUN: sed -e s/.SEH:// %s | opt -mtriple=i386-pc-windows-msvc -S -x86-winehstate | FileCheck %s
[WinEH] Fix cleanup state numbering Summary: - Recurse from cleanupendpads to their cleanuppads, to make sure the cleanuppad is visited if it has a cleanupendpad but no cleanupret. - Check for and avoid double-processing cleanuppads, to allow for them to have multiple cleanuprets (plus cleanupendpads). - Update Cxx state numbering to visit toplevel cleanupendpads and to recurse from cleanupendpads to their preds, to ensure we number any funclets in inlined cleanups. SEH state numbering already did this. Reviewers: rnk Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13374 llvm-svn: 249792
2015-10-09 08:46:08 +08:00
declare i32 @__CxxFrameHandler3(...)
declare i32 @_except_handler3(...)
declare void @dummy_filter()
declare void @f(i32)
; CHECK-LABEL: define void @test2(
;Cxx: define void @test2(i1 %b) personality i32 (...)* @__CxxFrameHandler3 {
;SEH: define void @test2(i1 %b) personality i32 (...)* @_except_handler3 {
entry:
; CHECK: entry:
; CHECK: store i32 1
; CHECK: invoke void @f(i32 1)
invoke void @f(i32 1)
to label %exit unwind label %cleanup.pad
cleanup.pad:
[IR] Reformulate LLVM's EH funclet IR While we have successfully implemented a funclet-oriented EH scheme on top of LLVM IR, our scheme has some notable deficiencies: - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are necessary in the current design but they are difficult to explain to others, even to seasoned LLVM experts. - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are optimization barriers. They cannot be split and force all potentially throwing call-sites to be invokes. This has a noticable effect on the quality of our code generation. - catchpad, while similar in some aspects to invoke, is fairly awkward. It is unsplittable, starts a funclet, and has control flow to other funclets. - The nesting relationship between funclets is currently a property of control flow edges. Because of this, we are forced to carefully analyze the flow graph to see if there might potentially exist illegal nesting among funclets. While we have logic to clone funclets when they are illegally nested, it would be nicer if we had a representation which forbade them upfront. Let's clean this up a bit by doing the following: - Instead, make catchpad more like cleanuppad and landingpad: no control flow, just a bunch of simple operands; catchpad would be splittable. - Introduce catchswitch, a control flow instruction designed to model the constraints of funclet oriented EH. - Make funclet scoping explicit by having funclet instructions consume the token produced by the funclet which contains them. - Remove catchendpad and cleanupendpad. Their presence can be inferred implicitly using coloring information. N.B. The state numbering code for the CLR has been updated but the veracity of it's output cannot be spoken for. An expert should take a look to make sure the results are reasonable. Reviewers: rnk, JosephTremoulet, andrew.w.kaylor Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15139 llvm-svn: 255422
2015-12-12 13:38:55 +08:00
%cleanup = cleanuppad within none []
[WinEH] Fix cleanup state numbering Summary: - Recurse from cleanupendpads to their cleanuppads, to make sure the cleanuppad is visited if it has a cleanupendpad but no cleanupret. - Check for and avoid double-processing cleanuppads, to allow for them to have multiple cleanuprets (plus cleanupendpads). - Update Cxx state numbering to visit toplevel cleanupendpads and to recurse from cleanupendpads to their preds, to ensure we number any funclets in inlined cleanups. SEH state numbering already did this. Reviewers: rnk Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13374 llvm-svn: 249792
2015-10-09 08:46:08 +08:00
br i1 %b, label %left, label %right
left:
[IR] Reformulate LLVM's EH funclet IR While we have successfully implemented a funclet-oriented EH scheme on top of LLVM IR, our scheme has some notable deficiencies: - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are necessary in the current design but they are difficult to explain to others, even to seasoned LLVM experts. - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are optimization barriers. They cannot be split and force all potentially throwing call-sites to be invokes. This has a noticable effect on the quality of our code generation. - catchpad, while similar in some aspects to invoke, is fairly awkward. It is unsplittable, starts a funclet, and has control flow to other funclets. - The nesting relationship between funclets is currently a property of control flow edges. Because of this, we are forced to carefully analyze the flow graph to see if there might potentially exist illegal nesting among funclets. While we have logic to clone funclets when they are illegally nested, it would be nicer if we had a representation which forbade them upfront. Let's clean this up a bit by doing the following: - Instead, make catchpad more like cleanuppad and landingpad: no control flow, just a bunch of simple operands; catchpad would be splittable. - Introduce catchswitch, a control flow instruction designed to model the constraints of funclet oriented EH. - Make funclet scoping explicit by having funclet instructions consume the token produced by the funclet which contains them. - Remove catchendpad and cleanupendpad. Their presence can be inferred implicitly using coloring information. N.B. The state numbering code for the CLR has been updated but the veracity of it's output cannot be spoken for. An expert should take a look to make sure the results are reasonable. Reviewers: rnk, JosephTremoulet, andrew.w.kaylor Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15139 llvm-svn: 255422
2015-12-12 13:38:55 +08:00
cleanupret from %cleanup unwind label %catch.pad
[WinEH] Fix cleanup state numbering Summary: - Recurse from cleanupendpads to their cleanuppads, to make sure the cleanuppad is visited if it has a cleanupendpad but no cleanupret. - Check for and avoid double-processing cleanuppads, to allow for them to have multiple cleanuprets (plus cleanupendpads). - Update Cxx state numbering to visit toplevel cleanupendpads and to recurse from cleanupendpads to their preds, to ensure we number any funclets in inlined cleanups. SEH state numbering already did this. Reviewers: rnk Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13374 llvm-svn: 249792
2015-10-09 08:46:08 +08:00
right:
[IR] Reformulate LLVM's EH funclet IR While we have successfully implemented a funclet-oriented EH scheme on top of LLVM IR, our scheme has some notable deficiencies: - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are necessary in the current design but they are difficult to explain to others, even to seasoned LLVM experts. - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are optimization barriers. They cannot be split and force all potentially throwing call-sites to be invokes. This has a noticable effect on the quality of our code generation. - catchpad, while similar in some aspects to invoke, is fairly awkward. It is unsplittable, starts a funclet, and has control flow to other funclets. - The nesting relationship between funclets is currently a property of control flow edges. Because of this, we are forced to carefully analyze the flow graph to see if there might potentially exist illegal nesting among funclets. While we have logic to clone funclets when they are illegally nested, it would be nicer if we had a representation which forbade them upfront. Let's clean this up a bit by doing the following: - Instead, make catchpad more like cleanuppad and landingpad: no control flow, just a bunch of simple operands; catchpad would be splittable. - Introduce catchswitch, a control flow instruction designed to model the constraints of funclet oriented EH. - Make funclet scoping explicit by having funclet instructions consume the token produced by the funclet which contains them. - Remove catchendpad and cleanupendpad. Their presence can be inferred implicitly using coloring information. N.B. The state numbering code for the CLR has been updated but the veracity of it's output cannot be spoken for. An expert should take a look to make sure the results are reasonable. Reviewers: rnk, JosephTremoulet, andrew.w.kaylor Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15139 llvm-svn: 255422
2015-12-12 13:38:55 +08:00
cleanupret from %cleanup unwind label %catch.pad
[WinEH] Fix cleanup state numbering Summary: - Recurse from cleanupendpads to their cleanuppads, to make sure the cleanuppad is visited if it has a cleanupendpad but no cleanupret. - Check for and avoid double-processing cleanuppads, to allow for them to have multiple cleanuprets (plus cleanupendpads). - Update Cxx state numbering to visit toplevel cleanupendpads and to recurse from cleanupendpads to their preds, to ensure we number any funclets in inlined cleanups. SEH state numbering already did this. Reviewers: rnk Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13374 llvm-svn: 249792
2015-10-09 08:46:08 +08:00
catch.pad:
[IR] Reformulate LLVM's EH funclet IR While we have successfully implemented a funclet-oriented EH scheme on top of LLVM IR, our scheme has some notable deficiencies: - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are necessary in the current design but they are difficult to explain to others, even to seasoned LLVM experts. - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are optimization barriers. They cannot be split and force all potentially throwing call-sites to be invokes. This has a noticable effect on the quality of our code generation. - catchpad, while similar in some aspects to invoke, is fairly awkward. It is unsplittable, starts a funclet, and has control flow to other funclets. - The nesting relationship between funclets is currently a property of control flow edges. Because of this, we are forced to carefully analyze the flow graph to see if there might potentially exist illegal nesting among funclets. While we have logic to clone funclets when they are illegally nested, it would be nicer if we had a representation which forbade them upfront. Let's clean this up a bit by doing the following: - Instead, make catchpad more like cleanuppad and landingpad: no control flow, just a bunch of simple operands; catchpad would be splittable. - Introduce catchswitch, a control flow instruction designed to model the constraints of funclet oriented EH. - Make funclet scoping explicit by having funclet instructions consume the token produced by the funclet which contains them. - Remove catchendpad and cleanupendpad. Their presence can be inferred implicitly using coloring information. N.B. The state numbering code for the CLR has been updated but the veracity of it's output cannot be spoken for. An expert should take a look to make sure the results are reasonable. Reviewers: rnk, JosephTremoulet, andrew.w.kaylor Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15139 llvm-svn: 255422
2015-12-12 13:38:55 +08:00
%cs1 = catchswitch within none [label %catch.body] unwind to caller
[WinEH] Fix cleanup state numbering Summary: - Recurse from cleanupendpads to their cleanuppads, to make sure the cleanuppad is visited if it has a cleanupendpad but no cleanupret. - Check for and avoid double-processing cleanuppads, to allow for them to have multiple cleanuprets (plus cleanupendpads). - Update Cxx state numbering to visit toplevel cleanupendpads and to recurse from cleanupendpads to their preds, to ensure we number any funclets in inlined cleanups. SEH state numbering already did this. Reviewers: rnk Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13374 llvm-svn: 249792
2015-10-09 08:46:08 +08:00
catch.body:
[IR] Reformulate LLVM's EH funclet IR While we have successfully implemented a funclet-oriented EH scheme on top of LLVM IR, our scheme has some notable deficiencies: - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are necessary in the current design but they are difficult to explain to others, even to seasoned LLVM experts. - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are optimization barriers. They cannot be split and force all potentially throwing call-sites to be invokes. This has a noticable effect on the quality of our code generation. - catchpad, while similar in some aspects to invoke, is fairly awkward. It is unsplittable, starts a funclet, and has control flow to other funclets. - The nesting relationship between funclets is currently a property of control flow edges. Because of this, we are forced to carefully analyze the flow graph to see if there might potentially exist illegal nesting among funclets. While we have logic to clone funclets when they are illegally nested, it would be nicer if we had a representation which forbade them upfront. Let's clean this up a bit by doing the following: - Instead, make catchpad more like cleanuppad and landingpad: no control flow, just a bunch of simple operands; catchpad would be splittable. - Introduce catchswitch, a control flow instruction designed to model the constraints of funclet oriented EH. - Make funclet scoping explicit by having funclet instructions consume the token produced by the funclet which contains them. - Remove catchendpad and cleanupendpad. Their presence can be inferred implicitly using coloring information. N.B. The state numbering code for the CLR has been updated but the veracity of it's output cannot be spoken for. An expert should take a look to make sure the results are reasonable. Reviewers: rnk, JosephTremoulet, andrew.w.kaylor Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15139 llvm-svn: 255422
2015-12-12 13:38:55 +08:00
;Cxx: %catch = catchpad within %cs1 [i8* null, i32 u0x40, i8* null]
;SEH: %catch = catchpad within %cs1 [void ()* @dummy_filter]
catchret from %catch to label %exit
[WinEH] Fix cleanup state numbering Summary: - Recurse from cleanupendpads to their cleanuppads, to make sure the cleanuppad is visited if it has a cleanupendpad but no cleanupret. - Check for and avoid double-processing cleanuppads, to allow for them to have multiple cleanuprets (plus cleanupendpads). - Update Cxx state numbering to visit toplevel cleanupendpads and to recurse from cleanupendpads to their preds, to ensure we number any funclets in inlined cleanups. SEH state numbering already did this. Reviewers: rnk Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13374 llvm-svn: 249792
2015-10-09 08:46:08 +08:00
exit:
ret void
}
; CHECK-LABEL: define void @test3(
;Cxx: define void @test3() personality i32 (...)* @__CxxFrameHandler3 {
;SEH: define void @test3() personality i32 (...)* @_except_handler3 {
entry:
; CHECK: entry:
[IR] Reformulate LLVM's EH funclet IR While we have successfully implemented a funclet-oriented EH scheme on top of LLVM IR, our scheme has some notable deficiencies: - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are necessary in the current design but they are difficult to explain to others, even to seasoned LLVM experts. - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are optimization barriers. They cannot be split and force all potentially throwing call-sites to be invokes. This has a noticable effect on the quality of our code generation. - catchpad, while similar in some aspects to invoke, is fairly awkward. It is unsplittable, starts a funclet, and has control flow to other funclets. - The nesting relationship between funclets is currently a property of control flow edges. Because of this, we are forced to carefully analyze the flow graph to see if there might potentially exist illegal nesting among funclets. While we have logic to clone funclets when they are illegally nested, it would be nicer if we had a representation which forbade them upfront. Let's clean this up a bit by doing the following: - Instead, make catchpad more like cleanuppad and landingpad: no control flow, just a bunch of simple operands; catchpad would be splittable. - Introduce catchswitch, a control flow instruction designed to model the constraints of funclet oriented EH. - Make funclet scoping explicit by having funclet instructions consume the token produced by the funclet which contains them. - Remove catchendpad and cleanupendpad. Their presence can be inferred implicitly using coloring information. N.B. The state numbering code for the CLR has been updated but the veracity of it's output cannot be spoken for. An expert should take a look to make sure the results are reasonable. Reviewers: rnk, JosephTremoulet, andrew.w.kaylor Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15139 llvm-svn: 255422
2015-12-12 13:38:55 +08:00
; CHECK: store i32 0
[WinEH] Fix cleanup state numbering Summary: - Recurse from cleanupendpads to their cleanuppads, to make sure the cleanuppad is visited if it has a cleanupendpad but no cleanupret. - Check for and avoid double-processing cleanuppads, to allow for them to have multiple cleanuprets (plus cleanupendpads). - Update Cxx state numbering to visit toplevel cleanupendpads and to recurse from cleanupendpads to their preds, to ensure we number any funclets in inlined cleanups. SEH state numbering already did this. Reviewers: rnk Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13374 llvm-svn: 249792
2015-10-09 08:46:08 +08:00
; CHECK: invoke void @f(i32 1)
invoke void @f(i32 1)
to label %exit unwind label %cleanup.pad
cleanup.pad:
; CHECK: cleanup.pad:
; CHECK: invoke void @f(i32 0)
[IR] Reformulate LLVM's EH funclet IR While we have successfully implemented a funclet-oriented EH scheme on top of LLVM IR, our scheme has some notable deficiencies: - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are necessary in the current design but they are difficult to explain to others, even to seasoned LLVM experts. - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are optimization barriers. They cannot be split and force all potentially throwing call-sites to be invokes. This has a noticable effect on the quality of our code generation. - catchpad, while similar in some aspects to invoke, is fairly awkward. It is unsplittable, starts a funclet, and has control flow to other funclets. - The nesting relationship between funclets is currently a property of control flow edges. Because of this, we are forced to carefully analyze the flow graph to see if there might potentially exist illegal nesting among funclets. While we have logic to clone funclets when they are illegally nested, it would be nicer if we had a representation which forbade them upfront. Let's clean this up a bit by doing the following: - Instead, make catchpad more like cleanuppad and landingpad: no control flow, just a bunch of simple operands; catchpad would be splittable. - Introduce catchswitch, a control flow instruction designed to model the constraints of funclet oriented EH. - Make funclet scoping explicit by having funclet instructions consume the token produced by the funclet which contains them. - Remove catchendpad and cleanupendpad. Their presence can be inferred implicitly using coloring information. N.B. The state numbering code for the CLR has been updated but the veracity of it's output cannot be spoken for. An expert should take a look to make sure the results are reasonable. Reviewers: rnk, JosephTremoulet, andrew.w.kaylor Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15139 llvm-svn: 255422
2015-12-12 13:38:55 +08:00
%cleanup = cleanuppad within none []
[WinEH] Fix cleanup state numbering Summary: - Recurse from cleanupendpads to their cleanuppads, to make sure the cleanuppad is visited if it has a cleanupendpad but no cleanupret. - Check for and avoid double-processing cleanuppads, to allow for them to have multiple cleanuprets (plus cleanupendpads). - Update Cxx state numbering to visit toplevel cleanupendpads and to recurse from cleanupendpads to their preds, to ensure we number any funclets in inlined cleanups. SEH state numbering already did this. Reviewers: rnk Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13374 llvm-svn: 249792
2015-10-09 08:46:08 +08:00
invoke void @f(i32 0)
[IR] Reformulate LLVM's EH funclet IR While we have successfully implemented a funclet-oriented EH scheme on top of LLVM IR, our scheme has some notable deficiencies: - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are necessary in the current design but they are difficult to explain to others, even to seasoned LLVM experts. - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are optimization barriers. They cannot be split and force all potentially throwing call-sites to be invokes. This has a noticable effect on the quality of our code generation. - catchpad, while similar in some aspects to invoke, is fairly awkward. It is unsplittable, starts a funclet, and has control flow to other funclets. - The nesting relationship between funclets is currently a property of control flow edges. Because of this, we are forced to carefully analyze the flow graph to see if there might potentially exist illegal nesting among funclets. While we have logic to clone funclets when they are illegally nested, it would be nicer if we had a representation which forbade them upfront. Let's clean this up a bit by doing the following: - Instead, make catchpad more like cleanuppad and landingpad: no control flow, just a bunch of simple operands; catchpad would be splittable. - Introduce catchswitch, a control flow instruction designed to model the constraints of funclet oriented EH. - Make funclet scoping explicit by having funclet instructions consume the token produced by the funclet which contains them. - Remove catchendpad and cleanupendpad. Their presence can be inferred implicitly using coloring information. N.B. The state numbering code for the CLR has been updated but the veracity of it's output cannot be spoken for. An expert should take a look to make sure the results are reasonable. Reviewers: rnk, JosephTremoulet, andrew.w.kaylor Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15139 llvm-svn: 255422
2015-12-12 13:38:55 +08:00
to label %unreachable unwind label %catch.pad
[WinEH] Fix cleanup state numbering Summary: - Recurse from cleanupendpads to their cleanuppads, to make sure the cleanuppad is visited if it has a cleanupendpad but no cleanupret. - Check for and avoid double-processing cleanuppads, to allow for them to have multiple cleanuprets (plus cleanupendpads). - Update Cxx state numbering to visit toplevel cleanupendpads and to recurse from cleanupendpads to their preds, to ensure we number any funclets in inlined cleanups. SEH state numbering already did this. Reviewers: rnk Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13374 llvm-svn: 249792
2015-10-09 08:46:08 +08:00
unreachable:
unreachable
catch.pad:
[IR] Reformulate LLVM's EH funclet IR While we have successfully implemented a funclet-oriented EH scheme on top of LLVM IR, our scheme has some notable deficiencies: - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are necessary in the current design but they are difficult to explain to others, even to seasoned LLVM experts. - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are optimization barriers. They cannot be split and force all potentially throwing call-sites to be invokes. This has a noticable effect on the quality of our code generation. - catchpad, while similar in some aspects to invoke, is fairly awkward. It is unsplittable, starts a funclet, and has control flow to other funclets. - The nesting relationship between funclets is currently a property of control flow edges. Because of this, we are forced to carefully analyze the flow graph to see if there might potentially exist illegal nesting among funclets. While we have logic to clone funclets when they are illegally nested, it would be nicer if we had a representation which forbade them upfront. Let's clean this up a bit by doing the following: - Instead, make catchpad more like cleanuppad and landingpad: no control flow, just a bunch of simple operands; catchpad would be splittable. - Introduce catchswitch, a control flow instruction designed to model the constraints of funclet oriented EH. - Make funclet scoping explicit by having funclet instructions consume the token produced by the funclet which contains them. - Remove catchendpad and cleanupendpad. Their presence can be inferred implicitly using coloring information. N.B. The state numbering code for the CLR has been updated but the veracity of it's output cannot be spoken for. An expert should take a look to make sure the results are reasonable. Reviewers: rnk, JosephTremoulet, andrew.w.kaylor Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15139 llvm-svn: 255422
2015-12-12 13:38:55 +08:00
%cs1 = catchswitch within none [label %catch.body] unwind to caller
[WinEH] Fix cleanup state numbering Summary: - Recurse from cleanupendpads to their cleanuppads, to make sure the cleanuppad is visited if it has a cleanupendpad but no cleanupret. - Check for and avoid double-processing cleanuppads, to allow for them to have multiple cleanuprets (plus cleanupendpads). - Update Cxx state numbering to visit toplevel cleanupendpads and to recurse from cleanupendpads to their preds, to ensure we number any funclets in inlined cleanups. SEH state numbering already did this. Reviewers: rnk Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13374 llvm-svn: 249792
2015-10-09 08:46:08 +08:00
catch.body:
[IR] Reformulate LLVM's EH funclet IR While we have successfully implemented a funclet-oriented EH scheme on top of LLVM IR, our scheme has some notable deficiencies: - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are necessary in the current design but they are difficult to explain to others, even to seasoned LLVM experts. - catchendpad and cleanupendpad are optimization barriers. They cannot be split and force all potentially throwing call-sites to be invokes. This has a noticable effect on the quality of our code generation. - catchpad, while similar in some aspects to invoke, is fairly awkward. It is unsplittable, starts a funclet, and has control flow to other funclets. - The nesting relationship between funclets is currently a property of control flow edges. Because of this, we are forced to carefully analyze the flow graph to see if there might potentially exist illegal nesting among funclets. While we have logic to clone funclets when they are illegally nested, it would be nicer if we had a representation which forbade them upfront. Let's clean this up a bit by doing the following: - Instead, make catchpad more like cleanuppad and landingpad: no control flow, just a bunch of simple operands; catchpad would be splittable. - Introduce catchswitch, a control flow instruction designed to model the constraints of funclet oriented EH. - Make funclet scoping explicit by having funclet instructions consume the token produced by the funclet which contains them. - Remove catchendpad and cleanupendpad. Their presence can be inferred implicitly using coloring information. N.B. The state numbering code for the CLR has been updated but the veracity of it's output cannot be spoken for. An expert should take a look to make sure the results are reasonable. Reviewers: rnk, JosephTremoulet, andrew.w.kaylor Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15139 llvm-svn: 255422
2015-12-12 13:38:55 +08:00
;Cxx: %catch = catchpad within %cs1 [i8* null, i32 u0x40, i8* null]
;SEH: %catch = catchpad within %cs1 [void ()* @dummy_filter]
catchret from %catch to label %exit
[WinEH] Fix cleanup state numbering Summary: - Recurse from cleanupendpads to their cleanuppads, to make sure the cleanuppad is visited if it has a cleanupendpad but no cleanupret. - Check for and avoid double-processing cleanuppads, to allow for them to have multiple cleanuprets (plus cleanupendpads). - Update Cxx state numbering to visit toplevel cleanupendpads and to recurse from cleanupendpads to their preds, to ensure we number any funclets in inlined cleanups. SEH state numbering already did this. Reviewers: rnk Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13374 llvm-svn: 249792
2015-10-09 08:46:08 +08:00
exit:
ret void
}