maxjhandsome
/
llvm-project
forked from OSchip/llvm-project
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Releases Wiki Activity
llvm-project/clang/test/CodeGenCXX/bitfield.cpp

481 lines
23 KiB
C++
Raw Normal View History

Remove more unused uses of -verify. llvm-svn: 185643
2013-07-04 22:58:42 +08:00
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown -emit-llvm -o - %s \
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// RUN: | FileCheck -check-prefix=CHECK-X86-64 %s
Remove more unused uses of -verify. llvm-svn: 185643
2013-07-04 22:58:42 +08:00
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple powerpc64-unknown-unknown -emit-llvm -o - %s \
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// RUN: | FileCheck -check-prefix=CHECK-PPC64 %s
Rework the bitfield access IR generation to address PR13619 and generally support the C++11 memory model requirements for bitfield accesses by relying more heavily on LLVM's memory model. The primary change this introduces is to move from a manually aligned and strided access pattern across the bits of the bitfield to a much simpler lump access of all bits in the bitfield followed by math to extract the bits relevant for the particular field. This simplifies the code significantly, but relies on LLVM to intelligently lowering these integers. I have tested LLVM's lowering both synthetically and in benchmarks. The lowering appears to be functional, and there are no really significant performance regressions. Different code patterns accessing bitfields will vary in how this impacts them. The only real regressions I'm seeing are a few patterns where the LLVM code generation for loads that feed directly into a mask operation don't take advantage of the x86 ability to do a smaller load and a cheap zero-extension. This doesn't regress any benchmark in the nightly test suite on my box past the noise threshold, but my box is quite noisy. I'll be watching the LNT numbers, and will look into further improvements to the LLVM lowering as needed. llvm-svn: 169489
2012-12-06 19:14:44 +08:00
//
// Tests for bitfield access patterns in C++ with special attention to
// conformance to C++11 memory model requirements.
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
namespace N0 {
// Test basic bitfield layout access across interesting byte and word
// boundaries on both little endian and big endian platforms.
struct __attribute__((packed)) S {
unsigned b00 : 14;
unsigned b01 : 2;
unsigned b20 : 6;
unsigned b21 : 2;
unsigned b30 : 30;
unsigned b31 : 2;
unsigned b70 : 6;
unsigned b71 : 2;
};
unsigned read00(S* s) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define i32 @_ZN2N06read00
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i64*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[val:.*]] = load i64, i64* %[[ptr]]
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[and:.*]] = and i64 %[[val]], 16383
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[trunc:.*]] = trunc i64 %[[and]] to i32
// CHECK-X86-64: ret i32 %[[trunc]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define zeroext i32 @_ZN2N06read00
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i64*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[val:.*]] = load i64, i64* %[[ptr]]
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i64 %[[val]], 50
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[trunc:.*]] = trunc i64 %[[shr]] to i32
// CHECK-PPC64: ret i32 %[[trunc]]
return s->b00;
}
unsigned read01(S* s) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define i32 @_ZN2N06read01
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i64*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[val:.*]] = load i64, i64* %[[ptr]]
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i64 %[[val]], 14
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[and:.*]] = and i64 %[[shr]], 3
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[trunc:.*]] = trunc i64 %[[and]] to i32
// CHECK-X86-64: ret i32 %[[trunc]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define zeroext i32 @_ZN2N06read01
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i64*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[val:.*]] = load i64, i64* %[[ptr]]
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i64 %[[val]], 48
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[and:.*]] = and i64 %[[shr]], 3
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[trunc:.*]] = trunc i64 %[[and]] to i32
// CHECK-PPC64: ret i32 %[[trunc]]
return s->b01;
}
unsigned read20(S* s) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define i32 @_ZN2N06read20
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i64*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[val:.*]] = load i64, i64* %[[ptr]]
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i64 %[[val]], 16
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[and:.*]] = and i64 %[[shr]], 63
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[trunc:.*]] = trunc i64 %[[and]] to i32
// CHECK-X86-64: ret i32 %[[trunc]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define zeroext i32 @_ZN2N06read20
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i64*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[val:.*]] = load i64, i64* %[[ptr]]
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i64 %[[val]], 42
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[and:.*]] = and i64 %[[shr]], 63
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[trunc:.*]] = trunc i64 %[[and]] to i32
// CHECK-PPC64: ret i32 %[[trunc]]
return s->b20;
}
unsigned read21(S* s) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define i32 @_ZN2N06read21
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i64*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[val:.*]] = load i64, i64* %[[ptr]]
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i64 %[[val]], 22
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[and:.*]] = and i64 %[[shr]], 3
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[trunc:.*]] = trunc i64 %[[and]] to i32
// CHECK-X86-64: ret i32 %[[trunc]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define zeroext i32 @_ZN2N06read21
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i64*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[val:.*]] = load i64, i64* %[[ptr]]
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i64 %[[val]], 40
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[and:.*]] = and i64 %[[shr]], 3
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[trunc:.*]] = trunc i64 %[[and]] to i32
// CHECK-PPC64: ret i32 %[[trunc]]
return s->b21;
}
unsigned read30(S* s) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define i32 @_ZN2N06read30
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i64*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[val:.*]] = load i64, i64* %[[ptr]]
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i64 %[[val]], 24
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[and:.*]] = and i64 %[[shr]], 1073741823
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[trunc:.*]] = trunc i64 %[[and]] to i32
// CHECK-X86-64: ret i32 %[[trunc]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define zeroext i32 @_ZN2N06read30
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i64*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[val:.*]] = load i64, i64* %[[ptr]]
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i64 %[[val]], 10
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[and:.*]] = and i64 %[[shr]], 1073741823
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[trunc:.*]] = trunc i64 %[[and]] to i32
// CHECK-PPC64: ret i32 %[[trunc]]
return s->b30;
}
unsigned read31(S* s) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define i32 @_ZN2N06read31
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i64*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[val:.*]] = load i64, i64* %[[ptr]]
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i64 %[[val]], 54
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[and:.*]] = and i64 %[[shr]], 3
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[trunc:.*]] = trunc i64 %[[and]] to i32
// CHECK-X86-64: ret i32 %[[trunc]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define zeroext i32 @_ZN2N06read31
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i64*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[val:.*]] = load i64, i64* %[[ptr]]
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i64 %[[val]], 8
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[and:.*]] = and i64 %[[shr]], 3
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[trunc:.*]] = trunc i64 %[[and]] to i32
// CHECK-PPC64: ret i32 %[[trunc]]
return s->b31;
}
unsigned read70(S* s) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define i32 @_ZN2N06read70
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i64*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[val:.*]] = load i64, i64* %[[ptr]]
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i64 %[[val]], 56
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[and:.*]] = and i64 %[[shr]], 63
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[trunc:.*]] = trunc i64 %[[and]] to i32
// CHECK-X86-64: ret i32 %[[trunc]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define zeroext i32 @_ZN2N06read70
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i64*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[val:.*]] = load i64, i64* %[[ptr]]
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i64 %[[val]], 2
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[and:.*]] = and i64 %[[shr]], 63
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[trunc:.*]] = trunc i64 %[[and]] to i32
// CHECK-PPC64: ret i32 %[[trunc]]
return s->b70;
}
unsigned read71(S* s) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define i32 @_ZN2N06read71
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i64*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[val:.*]] = load i64, i64* %[[ptr]]
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i64 %[[val]], 62
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[trunc:.*]] = trunc i64 %[[shr]] to i32
// CHECK-X86-64: ret i32 %[[trunc]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define zeroext i32 @_ZN2N06read71
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i64*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[val:.*]] = load i64, i64* %[[ptr]]
Add a test case that I've been using to clarify the bitfield layout for both LE and BE targets. AFAICT, Clang get's this correct for PPC64. I've compared it to GCC 4.8 output for PPC64 (thanks Roman!) and to my limited ability to read power assembly, it looks functionally equivalent. It would be really good to fill in the assertions on this test case for x86-32, PPC32, ARM, etc., but I've reached the limit of my time and energy... Hopefully other folks can chip in as it would be good to have this in place to test any subsequent changes. To those who care about PPC64 performance, a side note: there is some *obnoxiously* bad code generated for these test cases. It would be worth someone's time to sit down and teach the PPC backend to pattern match these IR constructs better. It appears that things like '(shr %foo, <imm>)' turn into 'rldicl R, R, 64-<imm>, <imm>' or some such. They don't even get combined with other 'rldicl' instructions *immediately adjacent*. I'll add a couple of these patterns to the README, but I think it would be better to look at all the patterns produced by this and other bitfield access code, and systematically build up a collection of patterns that efficiently reduce them to the minimal code. llvm-svn: 169693
2012-12-09 18:08:22 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[and:.*]] = and i64 %[[val]], 3
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[trunc:.*]] = trunc i64 %[[and]] to i32
// CHECK-PPC64: ret i32 %[[trunc]]
return s->b71;
}
}
Rework the bitfield access IR generation to address PR13619 and generally support the C++11 memory model requirements for bitfield accesses by relying more heavily on LLVM's memory model. The primary change this introduces is to move from a manually aligned and strided access pattern across the bits of the bitfield to a much simpler lump access of all bits in the bitfield followed by math to extract the bits relevant for the particular field. This simplifies the code significantly, but relies on LLVM to intelligently lowering these integers. I have tested LLVM's lowering both synthetically and in benchmarks. The lowering appears to be functional, and there are no really significant performance regressions. Different code patterns accessing bitfields will vary in how this impacts them. The only real regressions I'm seeing are a few patterns where the LLVM code generation for loads that feed directly into a mask operation don't take advantage of the x86 ability to do a smaller load and a cheap zero-extension. This doesn't regress any benchmark in the nightly test suite on my box past the noise threshold, but my box is quite noisy. I'll be watching the LNT numbers, and will look into further improvements to the LLVM lowering as needed. llvm-svn: 169489
2012-12-06 19:14:44 +08:00
namespace N1 {
// Ensure that neither loads nor stores to bitfields are not widened into
// other memory locations. (PR13691)
//
// NOTE: We could potentially widen loads based on their alignment if we are
// comfortable requiring that subsequent memory locations within the
// alignment-widened load are not volatile.
struct S {
char a;
unsigned b : 1;
char c;
};
unsigned read(S* s) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define i32 @_ZN2N14read
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed gep changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230783
2015-02-28 03:18:17 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = getelementptr inbounds %{{.*}}, %{{.*}}* %{{.*}}, i32 0, i32 1
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[val:.*]] = load i8, i8* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[and:.*]] = and i8 %[[val]], 1
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ext:.*]] = zext i8 %[[and]] to i32
// CHECK-X86-64: ret i32 %[[ext]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define zeroext i32 @_ZN2N14read
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed gep changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230783
2015-02-28 03:18:17 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = getelementptr inbounds %{{.*}}, %{{.*}}* %{{.*}}, i32 0, i32 1
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[val:.*]] = load i8, i8* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i8 %[[val]], 7
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ext:.*]] = zext i8 %[[shr]] to i32
// CHECK-PPC64: ret i32 %[[ext]]
Rework the bitfield access IR generation to address PR13619 and generally support the C++11 memory model requirements for bitfield accesses by relying more heavily on LLVM's memory model. The primary change this introduces is to move from a manually aligned and strided access pattern across the bits of the bitfield to a much simpler lump access of all bits in the bitfield followed by math to extract the bits relevant for the particular field. This simplifies the code significantly, but relies on LLVM to intelligently lowering these integers. I have tested LLVM's lowering both synthetically and in benchmarks. The lowering appears to be functional, and there are no really significant performance regressions. Different code patterns accessing bitfields will vary in how this impacts them. The only real regressions I'm seeing are a few patterns where the LLVM code generation for loads that feed directly into a mask operation don't take advantage of the x86 ability to do a smaller load and a cheap zero-extension. This doesn't regress any benchmark in the nightly test suite on my box past the noise threshold, but my box is quite noisy. I'll be watching the LNT numbers, and will look into further improvements to the LLVM lowering as needed. llvm-svn: 169489
2012-12-06 19:14:44 +08:00
return s->b;
}
void write(S* s, unsigned x) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define void @_ZN2N15write
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed gep changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230783
2015-02-28 03:18:17 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = getelementptr inbounds %{{.*}}, %{{.*}}* %{{.*}}, i32 0, i32 1
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[x_trunc:.*]] = trunc i32 %{{.*}} to i8
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[old:.*]] = load i8, i8* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[x_and:.*]] = and i8 %[[x_trunc]], 1
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[old_and:.*]] = and i8 %[[old]], -2
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[new:.*]] = or i8 %[[old_and]], %[[x_and]]
// CHECK-X86-64: store i8 %[[new]], i8* %[[ptr]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define void @_ZN2N15write
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed gep changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230783
2015-02-28 03:18:17 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = getelementptr inbounds %{{.*}}, %{{.*}}* %{{.*}}, i32 0, i32 1
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[x_trunc:.*]] = trunc i32 %{{.*}} to i8
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[old:.*]] = load i8, i8* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[x_and:.*]] = and i8 %[[x_trunc]], 1
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[x_shl:.*]] = shl i8 %[[x_and]], 7
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[old_and:.*]] = and i8 %[[old]], 127
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[new:.*]] = or i8 %[[old_and]], %[[x_shl]]
// CHECK-PPC64: store i8 %[[new]], i8* %[[ptr]]
Rework the bitfield access IR generation to address PR13619 and generally support the C++11 memory model requirements for bitfield accesses by relying more heavily on LLVM's memory model. The primary change this introduces is to move from a manually aligned and strided access pattern across the bits of the bitfield to a much simpler lump access of all bits in the bitfield followed by math to extract the bits relevant for the particular field. This simplifies the code significantly, but relies on LLVM to intelligently lowering these integers. I have tested LLVM's lowering both synthetically and in benchmarks. The lowering appears to be functional, and there are no really significant performance regressions. Different code patterns accessing bitfields will vary in how this impacts them. The only real regressions I'm seeing are a few patterns where the LLVM code generation for loads that feed directly into a mask operation don't take advantage of the x86 ability to do a smaller load and a cheap zero-extension. This doesn't regress any benchmark in the nightly test suite on my box past the noise threshold, but my box is quite noisy. I'll be watching the LNT numbers, and will look into further improvements to the LLVM lowering as needed. llvm-svn: 169489
2012-12-06 19:14:44 +08:00
s->b = x;
}
}
namespace N2 {
// Do widen loads and stores to bitfields when those bitfields have padding
// within the struct following them.
struct S {
unsigned b : 24;
void *p;
};
unsigned read(S* s) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define i32 @_ZN2N24read
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i32*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[val:.*]] = load i32, i32* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[and:.*]] = and i32 %[[val]], 16777215
// CHECK-X86-64: ret i32 %[[and]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define zeroext i32 @_ZN2N24read
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i32*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[val:.*]] = load i32, i32* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i32 %[[val]], 8
// CHECK-PPC64: ret i32 %[[shr]]
Rework the bitfield access IR generation to address PR13619 and generally support the C++11 memory model requirements for bitfield accesses by relying more heavily on LLVM's memory model. The primary change this introduces is to move from a manually aligned and strided access pattern across the bits of the bitfield to a much simpler lump access of all bits in the bitfield followed by math to extract the bits relevant for the particular field. This simplifies the code significantly, but relies on LLVM to intelligently lowering these integers. I have tested LLVM's lowering both synthetically and in benchmarks. The lowering appears to be functional, and there are no really significant performance regressions. Different code patterns accessing bitfields will vary in how this impacts them. The only real regressions I'm seeing are a few patterns where the LLVM code generation for loads that feed directly into a mask operation don't take advantage of the x86 ability to do a smaller load and a cheap zero-extension. This doesn't regress any benchmark in the nightly test suite on my box past the noise threshold, but my box is quite noisy. I'll be watching the LNT numbers, and will look into further improvements to the LLVM lowering as needed. llvm-svn: 169489
2012-12-06 19:14:44 +08:00
return s->b;
}
void write(S* s, unsigned x) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define void @_ZN2N25write
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i32*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[old:.*]] = load i32, i32* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[x_and:.*]] = and i32 %{{.*}}, 16777215
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[old_and:.*]] = and i32 %[[old]], -16777216
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[new:.*]] = or i32 %[[old_and]], %[[x_and]]
// CHECK-X86-64: store i32 %[[new]], i32* %[[ptr]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define void @_ZN2N25write
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i32*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[old:.*]] = load i32, i32* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[x_and:.*]] = and i32 %{{.*}}, 16777215
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[x_shl:.*]] = shl i32 %[[x_and]], 8
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[old_and:.*]] = and i32 %[[old]], 255
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[new:.*]] = or i32 %[[old_and]], %[[x_shl]]
// CHECK-PPC64: store i32 %[[new]], i32* %[[ptr]]
Rework the bitfield access IR generation to address PR13619 and generally support the C++11 memory model requirements for bitfield accesses by relying more heavily on LLVM's memory model. The primary change this introduces is to move from a manually aligned and strided access pattern across the bits of the bitfield to a much simpler lump access of all bits in the bitfield followed by math to extract the bits relevant for the particular field. This simplifies the code significantly, but relies on LLVM to intelligently lowering these integers. I have tested LLVM's lowering both synthetically and in benchmarks. The lowering appears to be functional, and there are no really significant performance regressions. Different code patterns accessing bitfields will vary in how this impacts them. The only real regressions I'm seeing are a few patterns where the LLVM code generation for loads that feed directly into a mask operation don't take advantage of the x86 ability to do a smaller load and a cheap zero-extension. This doesn't regress any benchmark in the nightly test suite on my box past the noise threshold, but my box is quite noisy. I'll be watching the LNT numbers, and will look into further improvements to the LLVM lowering as needed. llvm-svn: 169489
2012-12-06 19:14:44 +08:00
s->b = x;
}
}
namespace N3 {
// Do widen loads and stores to bitfields through the trailing padding at the
// end of a struct.
struct S {
unsigned b : 24;
};
unsigned read(S* s) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define i32 @_ZN2N34read
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i32*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[val:.*]] = load i32, i32* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[and:.*]] = and i32 %[[val]], 16777215
// CHECK-X86-64: ret i32 %[[and]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define zeroext i32 @_ZN2N34read
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i32*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[val:.*]] = load i32, i32* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i32 %[[val]], 8
// CHECK-PPC64: ret i32 %[[shr]]
Rework the bitfield access IR generation to address PR13619 and generally support the C++11 memory model requirements for bitfield accesses by relying more heavily on LLVM's memory model. The primary change this introduces is to move from a manually aligned and strided access pattern across the bits of the bitfield to a much simpler lump access of all bits in the bitfield followed by math to extract the bits relevant for the particular field. This simplifies the code significantly, but relies on LLVM to intelligently lowering these integers. I have tested LLVM's lowering both synthetically and in benchmarks. The lowering appears to be functional, and there are no really significant performance regressions. Different code patterns accessing bitfields will vary in how this impacts them. The only real regressions I'm seeing are a few patterns where the LLVM code generation for loads that feed directly into a mask operation don't take advantage of the x86 ability to do a smaller load and a cheap zero-extension. This doesn't regress any benchmark in the nightly test suite on my box past the noise threshold, but my box is quite noisy. I'll be watching the LNT numbers, and will look into further improvements to the LLVM lowering as needed. llvm-svn: 169489
2012-12-06 19:14:44 +08:00
return s->b;
}
void write(S* s, unsigned x) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define void @_ZN2N35write
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i32*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[old:.*]] = load i32, i32* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[x_and:.*]] = and i32 %{{.*}}, 16777215
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[old_and:.*]] = and i32 %[[old]], -16777216
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[new:.*]] = or i32 %[[old_and]], %[[x_and]]
// CHECK-X86-64: store i32 %[[new]], i32* %[[ptr]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define void @_ZN2N35write
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i32*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[old:.*]] = load i32, i32* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[x_and:.*]] = and i32 %{{.*}}, 16777215
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[x_shl:.*]] = shl i32 %[[x_and]], 8
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[old_and:.*]] = and i32 %[[old]], 255
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[new:.*]] = or i32 %[[old_and]], %[[x_shl]]
// CHECK-PPC64: store i32 %[[new]], i32* %[[ptr]]
Rework the bitfield access IR generation to address PR13619 and generally support the C++11 memory model requirements for bitfield accesses by relying more heavily on LLVM's memory model. The primary change this introduces is to move from a manually aligned and strided access pattern across the bits of the bitfield to a much simpler lump access of all bits in the bitfield followed by math to extract the bits relevant for the particular field. This simplifies the code significantly, but relies on LLVM to intelligently lowering these integers. I have tested LLVM's lowering both synthetically and in benchmarks. The lowering appears to be functional, and there are no really significant performance regressions. Different code patterns accessing bitfields will vary in how this impacts them. The only real regressions I'm seeing are a few patterns where the LLVM code generation for loads that feed directly into a mask operation don't take advantage of the x86 ability to do a smaller load and a cheap zero-extension. This doesn't regress any benchmark in the nightly test suite on my box past the noise threshold, but my box is quite noisy. I'll be watching the LNT numbers, and will look into further improvements to the LLVM lowering as needed. llvm-svn: 169489
2012-12-06 19:14:44 +08:00
s->b = x;
}
}
namespace N4 {
// Do NOT widen loads and stores to bitfields into padding at the end of
// a class which might end up with members inside of it when inside a derived
// class.
struct Base {
virtual ~Base() {}
unsigned b : 24;
};
// Imagine some other translation unit introduces:
#if 0
struct Derived : public Base {
char c;
};
#endif
unsigned read(Base* s) {
// FIXME: We should widen this load as long as the function isn't being
Kill -faddress-sanitizer, -fthread-sanitizer and -fcatch-undefined-behavior flags. These flags are deprecated since at least Clang 3.3. Users should instead use -fsanitize= with appropriate values. llvm-svn: 204330
2014-03-20 18:48:29 +08:00
// instrumented by ThreadSanitizer.
Rework the bitfield access IR generation to address PR13619 and generally support the C++11 memory model requirements for bitfield accesses by relying more heavily on LLVM's memory model. The primary change this introduces is to move from a manually aligned and strided access pattern across the bits of the bitfield to a much simpler lump access of all bits in the bitfield followed by math to extract the bits relevant for the particular field. This simplifies the code significantly, but relies on LLVM to intelligently lowering these integers. I have tested LLVM's lowering both synthetically and in benchmarks. The lowering appears to be functional, and there are no really significant performance regressions. Different code patterns accessing bitfields will vary in how this impacts them. The only real regressions I'm seeing are a few patterns where the LLVM code generation for loads that feed directly into a mask operation don't take advantage of the x86 ability to do a smaller load and a cheap zero-extension. This doesn't regress any benchmark in the nightly test suite on my box past the noise threshold, but my box is quite noisy. I'll be watching the LNT numbers, and will look into further improvements to the LLVM lowering as needed. llvm-svn: 169489
2012-12-06 19:14:44 +08:00
//
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define i32 @_ZN2N44read
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed gep changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230783
2015-02-28 03:18:17 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[gep:.*]] = getelementptr inbounds {{.*}}, {{.*}}* %{{.*}}, i32 0, i32 1
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast [3 x i8]* %[[gep]] to i24*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[val:.*]] = load i24, i24* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ext:.*]] = zext i24 %[[val]] to i32
// CHECK-X86-64: ret i32 %[[ext]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define zeroext i32 @_ZN2N44read
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed gep changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230783
2015-02-28 03:18:17 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[gep:.*]] = getelementptr inbounds {{.*}}, {{.*}}* %{{.*}}, i32 0, i32 1
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast [3 x i8]* %[[gep]] to i24*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[val:.*]] = load i24, i24* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ext:.*]] = zext i24 %[[val]] to i32
// CHECK-PPC64: ret i32 %[[ext]]
Rework the bitfield access IR generation to address PR13619 and generally support the C++11 memory model requirements for bitfield accesses by relying more heavily on LLVM's memory model. The primary change this introduces is to move from a manually aligned and strided access pattern across the bits of the bitfield to a much simpler lump access of all bits in the bitfield followed by math to extract the bits relevant for the particular field. This simplifies the code significantly, but relies on LLVM to intelligently lowering these integers. I have tested LLVM's lowering both synthetically and in benchmarks. The lowering appears to be functional, and there are no really significant performance regressions. Different code patterns accessing bitfields will vary in how this impacts them. The only real regressions I'm seeing are a few patterns where the LLVM code generation for loads that feed directly into a mask operation don't take advantage of the x86 ability to do a smaller load and a cheap zero-extension. This doesn't regress any benchmark in the nightly test suite on my box past the noise threshold, but my box is quite noisy. I'll be watching the LNT numbers, and will look into further improvements to the LLVM lowering as needed. llvm-svn: 169489
2012-12-06 19:14:44 +08:00
return s->b;
}
void write(Base* s, unsigned x) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define void @_ZN2N45write
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed gep changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230783
2015-02-28 03:18:17 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[gep:.*]] = getelementptr inbounds {{.*}}, {{.*}}* %{{.*}}, i32 0, i32 1
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast [3 x i8]* %[[gep]] to i24*
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[new:.*]] = trunc i32 %{{.*}} to i24
// CHECK-X86-64: store i24 %[[new]], i24* %[[ptr]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define void @_ZN2N45write
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed gep changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230783
2015-02-28 03:18:17 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[gep:.*]] = getelementptr inbounds {{.*}}, {{.*}}* %{{.*}}, i32 0, i32 1
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast [3 x i8]* %[[gep]] to i24*
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[new:.*]] = trunc i32 %{{.*}} to i24
// CHECK-PPC64: store i24 %[[new]], i24* %[[ptr]]
Rework the bitfield access IR generation to address PR13619 and generally support the C++11 memory model requirements for bitfield accesses by relying more heavily on LLVM's memory model. The primary change this introduces is to move from a manually aligned and strided access pattern across the bits of the bitfield to a much simpler lump access of all bits in the bitfield followed by math to extract the bits relevant for the particular field. This simplifies the code significantly, but relies on LLVM to intelligently lowering these integers. I have tested LLVM's lowering both synthetically and in benchmarks. The lowering appears to be functional, and there are no really significant performance regressions. Different code patterns accessing bitfields will vary in how this impacts them. The only real regressions I'm seeing are a few patterns where the LLVM code generation for loads that feed directly into a mask operation don't take advantage of the x86 ability to do a smaller load and a cheap zero-extension. This doesn't regress any benchmark in the nightly test suite on my box past the noise threshold, but my box is quite noisy. I'll be watching the LNT numbers, and will look into further improvements to the LLVM lowering as needed. llvm-svn: 169489
2012-12-06 19:14:44 +08:00
s->b = x;
}
}
namespace N5 {
// Widen through padding at the end of a struct even if that struct
// participates in a union with another struct which has a separate field in
// that location. The reasoning is that if the operation is storing to that
// member of the union, it must be the active member, and thus we can write
// through the padding. If it is a load, it might be a load of a common
// prefix through a non-active member, but in such a case the extra bits
// loaded are masked off anyways.
union U {
struct X { unsigned b : 24; char c; } x;
struct Y { unsigned b : 24; } y;
};
unsigned read(U* u) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define i32 @_ZN2N54read
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i32*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[val:.*]] = load i32, i32* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[and:.*]] = and i32 %[[val]], 16777215
// CHECK-X86-64: ret i32 %[[and]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define zeroext i32 @_ZN2N54read
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i32*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[val:.*]] = load i32, i32* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[shr:.*]] = lshr i32 %[[val]], 8
// CHECK-PPC64: ret i32 %[[shr]]
Rework the bitfield access IR generation to address PR13619 and generally support the C++11 memory model requirements for bitfield accesses by relying more heavily on LLVM's memory model. The primary change this introduces is to move from a manually aligned and strided access pattern across the bits of the bitfield to a much simpler lump access of all bits in the bitfield followed by math to extract the bits relevant for the particular field. This simplifies the code significantly, but relies on LLVM to intelligently lowering these integers. I have tested LLVM's lowering both synthetically and in benchmarks. The lowering appears to be functional, and there are no really significant performance regressions. Different code patterns accessing bitfields will vary in how this impacts them. The only real regressions I'm seeing are a few patterns where the LLVM code generation for loads that feed directly into a mask operation don't take advantage of the x86 ability to do a smaller load and a cheap zero-extension. This doesn't regress any benchmark in the nightly test suite on my box past the noise threshold, but my box is quite noisy. I'll be watching the LNT numbers, and will look into further improvements to the LLVM lowering as needed. llvm-svn: 169489
2012-12-06 19:14:44 +08:00
return u->y.b;
}
void write(U* u, unsigned x) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define void @_ZN2N55write
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i32*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[old:.*]] = load i32, i32* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[x_and:.*]] = and i32 %{{.*}}, 16777215
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[old_and:.*]] = and i32 %[[old]], -16777216
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[new:.*]] = or i32 %[[old_and]], %[[x_and]]
// CHECK-X86-64: store i32 %[[new]], i32* %[[ptr]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define void @_ZN2N55write
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast %{{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i32*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[old:.*]] = load i32, i32* %[[ptr]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[x_and:.*]] = and i32 %{{.*}}, 16777215
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[x_shl:.*]] = shl i32 %[[x_and]], 8
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[old_and:.*]] = and i32 %[[old]], 255
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[new:.*]] = or i32 %[[old_and]], %[[x_shl]]
// CHECK-PPC64: store i32 %[[new]], i32* %[[ptr]]
Rework the bitfield access IR generation to address PR13619 and generally support the C++11 memory model requirements for bitfield accesses by relying more heavily on LLVM's memory model. The primary change this introduces is to move from a manually aligned and strided access pattern across the bits of the bitfield to a much simpler lump access of all bits in the bitfield followed by math to extract the bits relevant for the particular field. This simplifies the code significantly, but relies on LLVM to intelligently lowering these integers. I have tested LLVM's lowering both synthetically and in benchmarks. The lowering appears to be functional, and there are no really significant performance regressions. Different code patterns accessing bitfields will vary in how this impacts them. The only real regressions I'm seeing are a few patterns where the LLVM code generation for loads that feed directly into a mask operation don't take advantage of the x86 ability to do a smaller load and a cheap zero-extension. This doesn't regress any benchmark in the nightly test suite on my box past the noise threshold, but my box is quite noisy. I'll be watching the LNT numbers, and will look into further improvements to the LLVM lowering as needed. llvm-svn: 169489
2012-12-06 19:14:44 +08:00
u->y.b = x;
}
}
namespace N6 {
// Zero-length bitfields partition the memory locations of bitfields for the
// purposes of the memory model. That means stores must not span zero-length
// bitfields and loads may only span them when we are not instrumenting with
Kill -faddress-sanitizer, -fthread-sanitizer and -fcatch-undefined-behavior flags. These flags are deprecated since at least Clang 3.3. Users should instead use -fsanitize= with appropriate values. llvm-svn: 204330
2014-03-20 18:48:29 +08:00
// ThreadSanitizer.
// FIXME: We currently don't widen loads even without ThreadSanitizer, even
Rework the bitfield access IR generation to address PR13619 and generally support the C++11 memory model requirements for bitfield accesses by relying more heavily on LLVM's memory model. The primary change this introduces is to move from a manually aligned and strided access pattern across the bits of the bitfield to a much simpler lump access of all bits in the bitfield followed by math to extract the bits relevant for the particular field. This simplifies the code significantly, but relies on LLVM to intelligently lowering these integers. I have tested LLVM's lowering both synthetically and in benchmarks. The lowering appears to be functional, and there are no really significant performance regressions. Different code patterns accessing bitfields will vary in how this impacts them. The only real regressions I'm seeing are a few patterns where the LLVM code generation for loads that feed directly into a mask operation don't take advantage of the x86 ability to do a smaller load and a cheap zero-extension. This doesn't regress any benchmark in the nightly test suite on my box past the noise threshold, but my box is quite noisy. I'll be watching the LNT numbers, and will look into further improvements to the LLVM lowering as needed. llvm-svn: 169489
2012-12-06 19:14:44 +08:00
// though we could.
struct S {
unsigned b1 : 24;
unsigned char : 0;
unsigned char b2 : 8;
};
unsigned read(S* s) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define i32 @_ZN2N64read
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr1:.*]] = bitcast {{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i24*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[val1:.*]] = load i24, i24* %[[ptr1]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ext1:.*]] = zext i24 %[[val1]] to i32
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed gep changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230783
2015-02-28 03:18:17 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr2:.*]] = getelementptr inbounds {{.*}}, {{.*}}* %{{.*}}, i32 0, i32 1
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[val2:.*]] = load i8, i8* %[[ptr2]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ext2:.*]] = zext i8 %[[val2]] to i32
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[add:.*]] = add nsw i32 %[[ext1]], %[[ext2]]
// CHECK-X86-64: ret i32 %[[add]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define zeroext i32 @_ZN2N64read
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr1:.*]] = bitcast {{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i24*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[val1:.*]] = load i24, i24* %[[ptr1]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ext1:.*]] = zext i24 %[[val1]] to i32
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed gep changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230783
2015-02-28 03:18:17 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr2:.*]] = getelementptr inbounds {{.*}}, {{.*}}* %{{.*}}, i32 0, i32 1
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[val2:.*]] = load i8, i8* %[[ptr2]]
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ext2:.*]] = zext i8 %[[val2]] to i32
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[add:.*]] = add nsw i32 %[[ext1]], %[[ext2]]
// CHECK-PPC64: ret i32 %[[add]]
Rework the bitfield access IR generation to address PR13619 and generally support the C++11 memory model requirements for bitfield accesses by relying more heavily on LLVM's memory model. The primary change this introduces is to move from a manually aligned and strided access pattern across the bits of the bitfield to a much simpler lump access of all bits in the bitfield followed by math to extract the bits relevant for the particular field. This simplifies the code significantly, but relies on LLVM to intelligently lowering these integers. I have tested LLVM's lowering both synthetically and in benchmarks. The lowering appears to be functional, and there are no really significant performance regressions. Different code patterns accessing bitfields will vary in how this impacts them. The only real regressions I'm seeing are a few patterns where the LLVM code generation for loads that feed directly into a mask operation don't take advantage of the x86 ability to do a smaller load and a cheap zero-extension. This doesn't regress any benchmark in the nightly test suite on my box past the noise threshold, but my box is quite noisy. I'll be watching the LNT numbers, and will look into further improvements to the LLVM lowering as needed. llvm-svn: 169489
2012-12-06 19:14:44 +08:00
return s->b1 + s->b2;
}
void write(S* s, unsigned x) {
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define void @_ZN2N65write
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr1:.*]] = bitcast {{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i24*
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[new1:.*]] = trunc i32 %{{.*}} to i24
// CHECK-X86-64: store i24 %[[new1]], i24* %[[ptr1]]
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[new2:.*]] = trunc i32 %{{.*}} to i8
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed gep changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230783
2015-02-28 03:18:17 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr2:.*]] = getelementptr inbounds {{.*}}, {{.*}}* %{{.*}}, i32 0, i32 1
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: store i8 %[[new2]], i8* %[[ptr2]]
CHECK-LABEL-ify some code gen tests to improve diagnostic experience when tests fail. llvm-svn: 188447
2013-08-15 14:47:53 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define void @_ZN2N65write
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr1:.*]] = bitcast {{.*}}* %{{.*}} to i24*
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[new1:.*]] = trunc i32 %{{.*}} to i24
// CHECK-PPC64: store i24 %[[new1]], i24* %[[ptr1]]
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[new2:.*]] = trunc i32 %{{.*}} to i8
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed gep changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230783
2015-02-28 03:18:17 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr2:.*]] = getelementptr inbounds {{.*}}, {{.*}}* %{{.*}}, i32 0, i32 1
Fix the bitfield record layout in codegen for big endian targets. This was an egregious bug due to the several iterations of refactorings that took place. Size no longer meant what it original did by the time I finished, but this line of code never got updated. Unfortunately we had essentially zero tests for this in the regression test suite. =[ I've added a PPC64 run over the bitfield test case I've been primarily using. I'm still looking at adding more tests and making sure this is the *correct* bitfield access code on PPC64 linux, but it looks pretty close to me, and it is *worlds* better than before this patch as it no longer asserts! =] More commits to follow with at least additional tests and maybe more fixes. Sorry for the long breakage due to this.... llvm-svn: 169691
2012-12-09 15:26:04 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: store i8 %[[new2]], i8* %[[ptr2]]
Rework the bitfield access IR generation to address PR13619 and generally support the C++11 memory model requirements for bitfield accesses by relying more heavily on LLVM's memory model. The primary change this introduces is to move from a manually aligned and strided access pattern across the bits of the bitfield to a much simpler lump access of all bits in the bitfield followed by math to extract the bits relevant for the particular field. This simplifies the code significantly, but relies on LLVM to intelligently lowering these integers. I have tested LLVM's lowering both synthetically and in benchmarks. The lowering appears to be functional, and there are no really significant performance regressions. Different code patterns accessing bitfields will vary in how this impacts them. The only real regressions I'm seeing are a few patterns where the LLVM code generation for loads that feed directly into a mask operation don't take advantage of the x86 ability to do a smaller load and a cheap zero-extension. This doesn't regress any benchmark in the nightly test suite on my box past the noise threshold, but my box is quite noisy. I'll be watching the LNT numbers, and will look into further improvements to the LLVM lowering as needed. llvm-svn: 169489
2012-12-06 19:14:44 +08:00
s->b1 = x;
s->b2 = x;
}
}
Fixing PR18430 by checking that the size of bitfields plus padding does not grow into the following virtual base. Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2560 llvm-svn: 200359
2014-01-29 08:09:16 +08:00
namespace N7 {
// Similar to N4 except that this adds a virtual base to the picture. (PR18430)
// Do NOT widen loads and stores to bitfields into padding at the end of
// a class which might end up with members inside of it when inside a derived
// class.
struct B1 {
virtual void f();
unsigned b1 : 24;
};
struct B2 : virtual B1 {
virtual ~B2();
unsigned b : 24;
};
// Imagine some other translation unit introduces:
#if 0
struct Derived : public B2 {
char c;
};
#endif
unsigned read(B2* s) {
// FIXME: We should widen this load as long as the function isn't being
Kill -faddress-sanitizer, -fthread-sanitizer and -fcatch-undefined-behavior flags. These flags are deprecated since at least Clang 3.3. Users should instead use -fsanitize= with appropriate values. llvm-svn: 204330
2014-03-20 18:48:29 +08:00
// instrumented by ThreadSanitizer.
Fixing PR18430 by checking that the size of bitfields plus padding does not grow into the following virtual base. Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2560 llvm-svn: 200359
2014-01-29 08:09:16 +08:00
//
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define i32 @_ZN2N74read
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed gep changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230783
2015-02-28 03:18:17 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[gep:.*]] = getelementptr inbounds {{.*}}, {{.*}}* %{{.*}}, i32 0, i32 1
Fixing PR18430 by checking that the size of bitfields plus padding does not grow into the following virtual base. Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2560 llvm-svn: 200359
2014-01-29 08:09:16 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast [3 x i8]* %[[gep]] to i24*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[val:.*]] = load i24, i24* %[[ptr]]
Fixing PR18430 by checking that the size of bitfields plus padding does not grow into the following virtual base. Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2560 llvm-svn: 200359
2014-01-29 08:09:16 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ext:.*]] = zext i24 %[[val]] to i32
// CHECK-X86-64: ret i32 %[[ext]]
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define zeroext i32 @_ZN2N74read
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed gep changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230783
2015-02-28 03:18:17 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[gep:.*]] = getelementptr inbounds {{.*}}, {{.*}}* %{{.*}}, i32 0, i32 1
Fixing PR18430 by checking that the size of bitfields plus padding does not grow into the following virtual base. Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2560 llvm-svn: 200359
2014-01-29 08:09:16 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast [3 x i8]* %[[gep]] to i24*
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed load changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230795
2015-02-28 05:19:58 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[val:.*]] = load i24, i24* %[[ptr]]
Fixing PR18430 by checking that the size of bitfields plus padding does not grow into the following virtual base. Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2560 llvm-svn: 200359
2014-01-29 08:09:16 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ext:.*]] = zext i24 %[[val]] to i32
// CHECK-PPC64: ret i32 %[[ext]]
return s->b;
}
void write(B2* s, unsigned x) {
// CHECK-X86-64-LABEL: define void @_ZN2N75write
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed gep changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230783
2015-02-28 03:18:17 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[gep:.*]] = getelementptr inbounds {{.*}}, {{.*}}* %{{.*}}, i32 0, i32 1
Fixing PR18430 by checking that the size of bitfields plus padding does not grow into the following virtual base. Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2560 llvm-svn: 200359
2014-01-29 08:09:16 +08:00
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast [3 x i8]* %[[gep]] to i24*
// CHECK-X86-64: %[[new:.*]] = trunc i32 %{{.*}} to i24
// CHECK-X86-64: store i24 %[[new]], i24* %[[ptr]]
// CHECK-PPC64-LABEL: define void @_ZN2N75write
Update Clang tests to handle explicitly typed gep changes in LLVM. llvm-svn: 230783
2015-02-28 03:18:17 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[gep:.*]] = getelementptr inbounds {{.*}}, {{.*}}* %{{.*}}, i32 0, i32 1
Fixing PR18430 by checking that the size of bitfields plus padding does not grow into the following virtual base. Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2560 llvm-svn: 200359
2014-01-29 08:09:16 +08:00
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[ptr:.*]] = bitcast [3 x i8]* %[[gep]] to i24*
// CHECK-PPC64: %[[new:.*]] = trunc i32 %{{.*}} to i24
// CHECK-PPC64: store i24 %[[new]], i24* %[[ptr]]
s->b = x;
}
}