r154191 switched to atexit() instead of global destructors, so the intent
was probably to check for _GLOBAL__D_a _not_ being in the output. There already
is a line for _ZN3barD1Ev further up, so just remove the CH_ECK line referring
to that.
The only circumstance in which clang emits _GLOBAL__D_a destructor symbols is
for -fapple-kext, and that is tested by test/CodeGenCXX/cxx-apple-kext.cpp.
llvm-svn: 208222
We previously treated ARM separately from the generic Itanium ABI for
initializing guard variables. This code duplication led to things like
the ARM path missing the memory barrier for threadsafe handling, and a
highly misleading comment about how we were (mis)using the generic ABI
for ARM64 when really it went through the ARM codepath.
This unifies the two code paths. Functionally, this changes the ARM
and ARM64 codepath to use one byte loads instead of 4 and 8,
respectively, and adds the missing atomic acquire to these loads.
Other architectures are unchanged.
llvm-svn: 206937
Clang implements the part of the ARM ABI saying that certain functions
(e.g., constructors and destructors) return "this", but Apple's version of
gcc and llvm-gcc did not. The libstdc++ dylib on iOS 5 was built with
llvm-gcc, which means that clang cannot safely assume that code from the C++
runtime will correctly follow the ABI. It is also possible to run into this
problem when linking with other libraries built with gcc or llvm-gcc. Even
though there is no way to reliably detect that situation, it is most likely
to come up when targeting older versions of iOS. Disabling the optimization
for any code targeting iOS 5 solves the libstdc++ problem and has a reasonably
good chance of fixing the issue for other older libraries as well.
<rdar://problem/16377159>
llvm-svn: 205272
This allows clang to use the backend parameter attribute 'returned' when generating 'this'-returning constructors and destructors in ARM and MSVC C++ ABIs.
llvm-svn: 185291
The backend will now use the generic 'returned' attribute to form tail calls where possible, as well as avoid save-restores of 'this' in some cases (specifically the cases that matter for the ARM C++ ABI).
This patch also reverts a prior front-end only partial implementation of these optimizations, since it's no longer required.
llvm-svn: 184205
For constructors/desctructors that return 'this', if there exists a callsite
that returns 'this' and is immediately before the return instruction, make
sure we are using the return value from the callsite.
We don't need to keep 'this' alive through the callsite. It also enables
optimizations in the backend, such as tail call optimization.
Updated from r177211.
rdar://12818789
llvm-svn: 177541
For constructors/desctructors that return 'this', if there exists a callsite
that returns 'this' and is immediately before the return instruction, make
sure we are using the return value from the callsite.
We don't need to keep 'this' alive through the callsite. It also enables
optimizations in the backend, such as tail call optimization.
rdar://12818789
llvm-svn: 177211
global destructor entry. For some reason this isn't enabled for
apple-kexts; it'd be good to have documentation for that.
Based on a patch by Nakamura Takumi!
llvm-svn: 154191
This model uses the 'landingpad' instruction, which is pinned to the top of the
landing pad. (A landing pad is defined as the destination of the unwind branch
of an invoke instruction.) All of the information needed to generate the correct
exception handling metadata during code generation is encoded into the
landingpad instruction.
The new 'resume' instruction takes the place of the llvm.eh.resume intrinsic
call. It's lowered in much the same way as the intrinsic is.
llvm-svn: 140049
to be careful to emit landing pads that are always prepared to handle a
cleanup path. This is correct mostly because of the fix to the LLVM
inliner, r132200.
llvm-svn: 132209
implement ARM array cookies. Also fix a few unfortunate bugs:
- throwing dtors in deletes prevented the allocation from being deleted
- adding the cookie to the new[] size was not being considered for
overflow (and, more seriously, was screwing up the earlier checks)
- deleting an array via a pointer to array of class type was not
causing any destructors to be run and was passing the unadjusted
pointer to the deallocator
- lots of address-space problems, in case anyone wants to support
free store in a variant address space :)
llvm-svn: 112814
David Blaikie