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/X86/win32-seh-catchpad.ll

232 lines
8.9 KiB
LLVM
Raw Normal View History

[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
; RUN: llc < %s | FileCheck %s
target datalayout = "e-m:x-p:32:32-i64:64-f80:32-n8:16:32-a:0:32-S32"
target triple = "i686-pc-windows-msvc"
define void @try_except() #0 personality i8* bitcast (i32 (...)* @_except_handler3 to i8*) {
entry:
%__exception_code = alloca i32, align 4
call void (...) @llvm.localescape(i32* %__exception_code)
invoke void @f(i32 1) #3
to label %invoke.cont unwind label %catch.dispatch
catch.dispatch: ; preds = %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
%cs1 = catchswitch within none [label %__except.ret] unwind to caller
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
__except.ret: ; preds = %catch.dispatch
[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
%0 = catchpad within %cs1 [i8* bitcast (i32 ()* @try_except_filter_catchall to i8*)]
catchret from %0 to label %__except
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
__except: ; preds = %__except.ret
call void @f(i32 2)
br label %__try.cont
__try.cont: ; preds = %__except, %invoke.cont
call void @f(i32 3)
ret void
invoke.cont: ; preds = %entry
br label %__try.cont
}
; CHECK-LABEL: _try_except:
; Store state #0
; CHECK: movl $0, -[[state:[0-9]+]](%ebp)
[X86] Enable call frame optimization ("mov to push") not only for optsize (PR26325) The size savings are significant, and from what I can tell, both ICC and GCC do this. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18573 llvm-svn: 264966
2016-03-31 07:38:01 +08:00
; CHECK: pushl $1
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
; CHECK: calll _f
; CHECK: movl $-1, -[[state]](%ebp)
[X86] Enable call frame optimization ("mov to push") not only for optsize (PR26325) The size savings are significant, and from what I can tell, both ICC and GCC do this. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18573 llvm-svn: 264966
2016-03-31 07:38:01 +08:00
; CHECK: pushl $3
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
; CHECK: calll _f
; CHECK: retl
; __except
; CHECK: movl $-1, -[[state]](%ebp)
[X86] Enable call frame optimization ("mov to push") not only for optsize (PR26325) The size savings are significant, and from what I can tell, both ICC and GCC do this. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18573 llvm-svn: 264966
2016-03-31 07:38:01 +08:00
; CHECK: pushl $2
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
; CHECK: calll _f
; CHECK: .section .xdata,"dr"
; CHECK: L__ehtable$try_except:
[WinEH] Add comments explaining the EH tables This is aids in debugging WinEH, similar functionality is present for DWARF EH. llvm-svn: 256455
2015-12-27 14:07:12 +08:00
; CHECK: .long -1 # ToState
; CHECK: .long _try_except_filter_catchall # Filter
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
; CHECK: .long LBB0_1
define internal i32 @try_except_filter_catchall() #0 {
entry:
%0 = call i8* @llvm.frameaddress(i32 1)
%1 = call i8* @llvm.x86.seh.recoverfp(i8* bitcast (void ()* @try_except to i8*), i8* %0)
%2 = call i8* @llvm.localrecover(i8* bitcast (void ()* @try_except to i8*), i8* %1, i32 0)
%__exception_code = bitcast i8* %2 to i32*
%3 = getelementptr inbounds i8, i8* %0, i32 -20
%4 = bitcast i8* %3 to i8**
%5 = load i8*, i8** %4, align 4
%6 = bitcast i8* %5 to { i32*, i8* }*
%7 = getelementptr inbounds { i32*, i8* }, { i32*, i8* }* %6, i32 0, i32 0
%8 = load i32*, i32** %7, align 4
%9 = load i32, i32* %8, align 4
store i32 %9, i32* %__exception_code, align 4
ret i32 1
}
define void @nested_exceptions() #0 personality i8* bitcast (i32 (...)* @_except_handler3 to i8*) {
entry:
%__exception_code = alloca i32, align 4
call void (...) @llvm.localescape(i32* %__exception_code)
invoke void @crash() #3
to label %__try.cont unwind label %catch.dispatch
catch.dispatch: ; preds = %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
%cs1 = catchswitch within none [label %__except.ret] unwind label %catch.dispatch.11
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
__except.ret: ; preds = %catch.dispatch
[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
%0 = catchpad within %cs1 [i8* bitcast (i32 ()* @nested_exceptions_filter_catchall to i8*)]
catchret from %0 to label %__try.cont
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
__try.cont: ; preds = %entry, %__except.ret
invoke void @crash() #3
to label %__try.cont.9 unwind label %catch.dispatch.5
catch.dispatch.5: ; preds = %__try.cont
[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
%cs2 = catchswitch within none [label %__except.ret.7] unwind label %catch.dispatch.11
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
__except.ret.7: ; preds = %catch.dispatch.5
[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
%1 = catchpad within %cs2 [i8* bitcast (i32 ()* @nested_exceptions_filter_catchall to i8*)]
catchret from %1 to label %__try.cont.9
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
__try.cont.9: ; preds = %__try.cont, %__except.ret.7
invoke void @crash() #3
to label %__try.cont.15 unwind label %catch.dispatch.11
catch.dispatch.11: ; preds = %catchendblock, %catchendblock.6, %__try.cont.9
[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
%cs3 = catchswitch within none [label %__except.ret.13] unwind label %catch.dispatch.17
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
__except.ret.13: ; preds = %catch.dispatch.11
[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
%2 = catchpad within %cs3 [i8* bitcast (i32 ()* @nested_exceptions_filter_catchall to i8*)]
catchret from %2 to label %__try.cont.15
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
__try.cont.15: ; preds = %__try.cont.9, %__except.ret.13
invoke void @crash() #3
to label %__try.cont.35 unwind label %catch.dispatch.17
catch.dispatch.17: ; preds = %catchendblock.12, %__try.cont.15
[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
%cs4 = catchswitch within none [label %__except.ret.19] unwind to caller
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
__except.ret.19: ; preds = %catch.dispatch.17
[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
%3 = catchpad within %cs4 [i8* bitcast (i32 ()* @nested_exceptions_filter_catchall to i8*)]
catchret from %3 to label %__except.20
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
__except.20: ; preds = %__except.ret.19
invoke void @crash() #3
to label %__try.cont.27 unwind label %catch.dispatch.23
catch.dispatch.23: ; preds = %__except.20
[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
%cs5 = catchswitch within none [label %__except.ret.25] unwind to caller
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
__except.ret.25: ; preds = %catch.dispatch.23
[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
%4 = catchpad within %cs5 [i8* bitcast (i32 ()* @nested_exceptions_filter_catchall to i8*)]
catchret from %4 to label %__try.cont.27
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
__try.cont.27: ; preds = %__except.20, %__except.ret.25
invoke void @crash() #3
to label %__try.cont.35 unwind label %catch.dispatch.30
catch.dispatch.30: ; preds = %__try.cont.27
[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
%cs6 = catchswitch within none [label %__except.ret.32] unwind to caller
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
__except.ret.32: ; preds = %catch.dispatch.30
[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
%5 = catchpad within %cs6 [i8* bitcast (i32 ()* @nested_exceptions_filter_catchall to i8*)]
catchret from %5 to label %__try.cont.35
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
__try.cont.35: ; preds = %__try.cont.15, %__try.cont.27, %__except.ret.32
ret void
}
; This table is equivalent to the one produced by MSVC, even if it isn't in
; quite the same order.
; CHECK-LABEL: _nested_exceptions:
; CHECK: L__ehtable$nested_exceptions:
; CHECK: .long -1
; CHECK: .long _nested_exceptions_filter_catchall
; CHECK: .long LBB
[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: .long 0
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
; CHECK: .long _nested_exceptions_filter_catchall
; CHECK: .long LBB
[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: .long 1
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
; CHECK: .long _nested_exceptions_filter_catchall
; CHECK: .long LBB
[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: .long 1
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
; CHECK: .long _nested_exceptions_filter_catchall
; CHECK: .long LBB
[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: .long -1
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
; CHECK: .long _nested_exceptions_filter_catchall
; CHECK: .long LBB
[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: .long -1
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
; CHECK: .long _nested_exceptions_filter_catchall
; CHECK: .long LBB
declare void @crash() #0
define internal i32 @nested_exceptions_filter_catchall() #0 {
entry:
%0 = call i8* @llvm.frameaddress(i32 1)
%1 = call i8* @llvm.x86.seh.recoverfp(i8* bitcast (void ()* @nested_exceptions to i8*), i8* %0)
%2 = call i8* @llvm.localrecover(i8* bitcast (void ()* @nested_exceptions to i8*), i8* %1, i32 0)
%__exception_code3 = bitcast i8* %2 to i32*
%3 = getelementptr inbounds i8, i8* %0, i32 -20
%4 = bitcast i8* %3 to i8**
%5 = load i8*, i8** %4, align 4
%6 = bitcast i8* %5 to { i32*, i8* }*
%7 = getelementptr inbounds { i32*, i8* }, { i32*, i8* }* %6, i32 0, i32 0
%8 = load i32*, i32** %7, align 4
%9 = load i32, i32* %8, align 4
store i32 %9, i32* %__exception_code3, align 4
ret i32 1
}
[WinEH] Create a separate MBB for funclet prologues Our current emission strategy is to emit the funclet prologue in the CatchPad's normal destination. This is problematic because intra-funclet control flow to the normal destination is not erroneous and results in us reevaluating the prologue if said control flow is taken. Instead, use the CatchPad's location for the funclet prologue. This correctly models our desire to have unwind edges evaluate the prologue but edges to the normal destination result in typical control flow. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13424 llvm-svn: 249483
2015-10-07 07:31:59 +08:00
define void @code_in_catchpad() #0 personality i8* bitcast (i32 (...)* @_except_handler3 to i8*) {
entry:
invoke void @f(i32 1) #3
to label %__except unwind label %catch.dispatch
catch.dispatch: ; preds = %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
%cs1 = catchswitch within none [label %__except.ret] unwind to caller
[WinEH] Create a separate MBB for funclet prologues Our current emission strategy is to emit the funclet prologue in the CatchPad's normal destination. This is problematic because intra-funclet control flow to the normal destination is not erroneous and results in us reevaluating the prologue if said control flow is taken. Instead, use the CatchPad's location for the funclet prologue. This correctly models our desire to have unwind edges evaluate the prologue but edges to the normal destination result in typical control flow. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13424 llvm-svn: 249483
2015-10-07 07:31:59 +08:00
__except.ret: ; preds = %catch.dispatch
[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
%0 = catchpad within %cs1 [i8* bitcast (i32 ()* @try_except_filter_catchall to i8*)]
[WinEH] Use operand bundles to describe call sites SimplifyCFG allows tail merging with code which terminates in unreachable which, in turn, makes it possible for an invoke to end up in a funclet which it was not originally part of. Using operand bundles on invokes allows us to determine whether or not an invoke was part of a funclet in the source program. Furthermore, it allows us to unambiguously answer questions about the legality of inlining into call sites which the personality may have trouble with. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15517 llvm-svn: 255674
2015-12-16 05:27:27 +08:00
call void @f(i32 2) [ "funclet"(token %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
catchret from %0 to label %__except
[WinEH] Create a separate MBB for funclet prologues Our current emission strategy is to emit the funclet prologue in the CatchPad's normal destination. This is problematic because intra-funclet control flow to the normal destination is not erroneous and results in us reevaluating the prologue if said control flow is taken. Instead, use the CatchPad's location for the funclet prologue. This correctly models our desire to have unwind edges evaluate the prologue but edges to the normal destination result in typical control flow. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13424 llvm-svn: 249483
2015-10-07 07:31:59 +08:00
__except:
ret void
}
; CHECK-LABEL: _code_in_catchpad:
[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: # %__except.ret
[WinEH] Create a separate MBB for funclet prologues Our current emission strategy is to emit the funclet prologue in the CatchPad's normal destination. This is problematic because intra-funclet control flow to the normal destination is not erroneous and results in us reevaluating the prologue if said control flow is taken. Instead, use the CatchPad's location for the funclet prologue. This correctly models our desire to have unwind edges evaluate the prologue but edges to the normal destination result in typical control flow. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13424 llvm-svn: 249483
2015-10-07 07:31:59 +08:00
; CHECK-NEXT: movl -24(%ebp), %esp
; CHECK-NEXT: addl $12, %ebp
; CHECK-NEXT: movl $-1, -16(%ebp)
[X86] Enable call frame optimization ("mov to push") not only for optsize (PR26325) The size savings are significant, and from what I can tell, both ICC and GCC do this. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18573 llvm-svn: 264966
2016-03-31 07:38:01 +08:00
; CHECK-NEXT: pushl $2
[WinEH] Create a separate MBB for funclet prologues Our current emission strategy is to emit the funclet prologue in the CatchPad's normal destination. This is problematic because intra-funclet control flow to the normal destination is not erroneous and results in us reevaluating the prologue if said control flow is taken. Instead, use the CatchPad's location for the funclet prologue. This correctly models our desire to have unwind edges evaluate the prologue but edges to the normal destination result in typical control flow. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13424 llvm-svn: 249483
2015-10-07 07:31:59 +08:00
; CHECK-NEXT: calll _f
[SEH] Emit 32-bit SEH tables for the new EH IR The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them is incredibly simple. The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so it will be implemented later. llvm-svn: 247192
2015-09-10 05:10:03 +08:00
; Function Attrs: nounwind readnone
declare i8* @llvm.frameaddress(i32) #1
; Function Attrs: nounwind readnone
declare i8* @llvm.x86.seh.recoverfp(i8*, i8*) #1
; Function Attrs: nounwind readnone
declare i8* @llvm.localrecover(i8*, i8*, i32) #1
declare void @f(i32) #0
declare i32 @_except_handler3(...)
; Function Attrs: nounwind
declare void @llvm.localescape(...) #2
attributes #0 = { "disable-tail-calls"="false" "less-precise-fpmad"="false" "no-frame-pointer-elim"="false" "no-infs-fp-math"="false" "no-nans-fp-math"="false" "no-realign-stack" "stack-protector-buffer-size"="8" "unsafe-fp-math"="false" "use-soft-float"="false" }
attributes #1 = { nounwind readnone }
attributes #2 = { nounwind }
attributes #3 = { noinline }