[WebAssembly] Disable offset folding for function addresses

Wasm does not support function addresses with offsets, but isel can
generate folded SDValues in the form of (@func + offset) without this
patch.

Fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43133.

Reviewed By: dschuff, sbc100

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D107940
This commit is contained in:
Heejin Ahn 2021-08-11 18:18:13 -07:00
parent 1e11ccad83
commit 78e87970af
3 changed files with 43 additions and 0 deletions

View File

@ -770,6 +770,13 @@ bool WebAssemblyTargetLowering::isVectorLoadExtDesirable(SDValue ExtVal) const {
(ExtT == MVT::v2i64 && MemT == MVT::v2i32); (ExtT == MVT::v2i64 && MemT == MVT::v2i32);
} }
bool WebAssemblyTargetLowering::isOffsetFoldingLegal(
const GlobalAddressSDNode *GA) const {
// Wasm doesn't support function addresses with offsets
const GlobalValue *GV = GA->getGlobal();
return isa<Function>(GV) ? false : TargetLowering::isOffsetFoldingLegal(GA);
}
EVT WebAssemblyTargetLowering::getSetCCResultType(const DataLayout &DL, EVT WebAssemblyTargetLowering::getSetCCResultType(const DataLayout &DL,
LLVMContext &C, LLVMContext &C,
EVT VT) const { EVT VT) const {

View File

@ -102,6 +102,7 @@ private:
bool *Fast) const override; bool *Fast) const override;
bool isIntDivCheap(EVT VT, AttributeList Attr) const override; bool isIntDivCheap(EVT VT, AttributeList Attr) const override;
bool isVectorLoadExtDesirable(SDValue ExtVal) const override; bool isVectorLoadExtDesirable(SDValue ExtVal) const override;
bool isOffsetFoldingLegal(const GlobalAddressSDNode *GA) const override;
EVT getSetCCResultType(const DataLayout &DL, LLVMContext &Context, EVT getSetCCResultType(const DataLayout &DL, LLVMContext &Context,
EVT VT) const override; EVT VT) const override;
bool getTgtMemIntrinsic(IntrinsicInfo &Info, const CallInst &I, bool getTgtMemIntrinsic(IntrinsicInfo &Info, const CallInst &I,

View File

@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
; RUN: llc < %s -verify-machineinstrs | FileCheck %s
; Wasm does not currently support function addresses with offsets, so we
; shouldn't try to create a folded SDNode like (function + offset). This is a
; regression test for the folding bug and this should not crash in MCInstLower.
target triple = "wasm32-unknown-unknown"
; 'hidden' here should be present to reproduce the bug
declare hidden void @ham(i8*)
define void @bar(i8* %ptr) {
bb1:
br i1 undef, label %bb3, label %bb2
bb2:
; While lowering this switch, isel creates (@ham + 1) expression as a course
; of range optimization for switch, and tries to fold the expression, but
; wasm does not support with function addresses with offsets. This folding
; should be disabled.
; CHECK: i32.const ham
; CHECK-NEXT: i32.const 1
; CHECK-NEXT: i32.add
switch i32 ptrtoint (void (i8*)* @ham to i32), label %bb4 [
i32 -1, label %bb3
i32 0, label %bb3
]
bb3:
unreachable
bb4:
%tmp = load i8, i8* %ptr
unreachable
}