dynamic_allocators.
According to the OpenMP 5.0, 2.11.3 allocate Directive, Restrictions,
allocate directives that appear in a target region must specify an
allocator clause unless a requires directive with the dynamic_allocators
clause is present in the same compilation unit. Patch adds a check for a
presence of the requires directive with the dynamic_allocators clause.
llvm-svn: 356758
clause in target region.
According to the OpenMP 5.0, 2.11.3 allocate Directive, Restrictions,
allocate directives that appear in a target region must specify an
allocator clause unless a requires directive with the dynamic_allocators
clause is present in the same compilation unit.
llvm-svn: 356752
This is the result of discussions on the list about how to deal with intrinsics
which require codegen to disambiguate them via only the integer/fp overloads.
It causes problems for GlobalISel as some of that information is lost during
translation, while with other operations like IR instructions the information is
encoded into the instruction opcode.
This patch changes clang to emit the new faddp intrinsic if the vector operands
to the builtin have FP element types. LLVM IR AutoUpgrade has been taught to
upgrade existing calls to aarch64.neon.addp with fp vector arguments, and
we remove the workarounds introduced for GlobalISel in r355865.
This is a more permanent solution to PR40968.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59655
llvm-svn: 356722
in the include path.
Instead of making the incorrect claim that the included file has an
absolute path, describe the actual problem: the including file was found
either by absolute path, or relative to such a file, or relative to the
primary source file.
llvm-svn: 356712
Use the new cx8 feature flag that was added to the backend to represent support for cmpxchg8b. Use this flag to set the MaxAtomicInlineWidth.
This also assumes all the cmpxchg instructions are enabled for CK_Generic which is what cc1 defaults to when nothing is specified.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59566
llvm-svn: 356709
-malign-double is currently only implemented in the -cc1 interface. But its declared in Options.td so it is a driver option too. But you try to use it with the driver you'll get a message about the option being unused.
This patch teaches the driver to pass the option through to cc1 so it won't be unused. The Options.td says the option is x86 only but I didn't see any x86 specific code in its impementation in cc1 so not sure if the documentation is wrong or if I should only pass this option through the driver on x86 targets.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59624
llvm-svn: 356706
with notail on x86-64.
On x86-64, the epilogue code inserted before the tail jump blocks the
autoreleased return optimization.
rdar://problem/38675807
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59656
llvm-svn: 356705
For the global variables the allocate directive must specify only the
predefined allocator. This allocator must be translated into the correct
form of the address space for the targets that support different address
spaces.
llvm-svn: 356702
Previously implemented check required the reevaluation of the already
evaluated predefined allocator kind for the global variables. Patch
simplifies this evaluation and removes extra code.
llvm-svn: 356699
gcc and icc both implement popcntd and popcntq which we did not. gcc doesn't seem to require a feature flag for the _popcnt32/_popcnt64 spelling and will use a libcall if its not supported.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59567
llvm-svn: 356689
Summary:
`OMPClause` is the base class, it is not descendant from **any**
other class, therefore for it to work with e.g.
`VariadicDynCastAllOfMatcher<>`, it needs to be handled here.
Reviewers: sbenza, bkramer, pcc, klimek, hokein, gribozavr, aaron.ballman, george.karpenkov
Reviewed By: gribozavr, aaron.ballman
Subscribers: guansong, jdoerfert, alexfh, ABataev, cfe-commits
Tags: #openmp, #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57112
llvm-svn: 356675
After https://reviews.llvm.org/rL355317 we noticed that quite a decent
amount of code redeclares builtins (memcpy in particular, I believe
reduced from an MSVC header) with a calling convention specified.
This gets particularly troublesome when the user specifies a new
'default' calling convention on the command line.
When looking to add a diagnostic for this case, it was noticed that we
had 3 other diagnostics that differed only slightly. This patch ALSO
unifies those under a 'select'. Unfortunately, the order of words in
ONE of these diagnostics was reversed ("'thiscall' calling convention"
vs "calling convention 'thiscall'"), so this patch also standardizes on
the former.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59560
Change-Id: I79f99fe7c2301640755ffdd774b46eb44526bb22
llvm-svn: 356663
Summary:
This revision adds basic support for formatting C# files with clang-format, I know the barrier to entry is high here so I'm sending this revision in to test the water as to whether this might be something we'd consider landing.
Tracking in Bugzilla as:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40850
Justification:
C# code just looks ugly in comparison to the C++ code in our source tree which is clang-formatted.
I've struggled with Visual Studio reformatting to get a clean and consistent style, I want to format our C# code on saving like I do now for C++ and i want it to have the same style as defined in our .clang-format file, so it consistent as it can be with C++. (Braces/Breaking/Spaces/Indent etc..)
Using clang format without this patch leaves the code in a bad state, sometimes when the BreakStringLiterals is set, it fails to compile.
Mostly the C# is similar to Java, except instead of JavaAnnotations I try to reuse the TT_AttributeSquare.
Almost the most valuable portion is to have a new Language in order to partition the configuration for C# within a common .clang-format file, with the auto detection on the .cs extension. But there are other C# specific styles that could be added later if this is accepted. in particular how `{ set;get }` is formatted.
Reviewers: djasper, klimek, krasimir, benhamilton, JonasToth
Reviewed By: klimek
Subscribers: llvm-commits, mgorny, jdoerfert, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang, #clang-tools-extra
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58404
llvm-svn: 356662
This CL causes our creduce-clang-crash.py util to:
- try to preprocess the file before reducing
- try to remove some command line arguments
- now require a llvm bin directory, since the generated crash script
doesn't have an absolute path for clang
It also marks it as executable, since I forgot to do that in the last
commit. :)
Patch by Amy Huang!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59440
llvm-svn: 356636
When searching for construction contexts, i.e. figuring out which statements
define the object that is constructed by each construct-expression, ignore
transparent init-list expressions because they don't add anything to the
context. This allows the Static Analyzer to model construction, destruction,
materialization, lifetime extension correctly in more cases. Also fixes
a crash caused by incorrectly evaluating initial values of variables
initialized with such expressions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59573
llvm-svn: 356634
Summary: rL356570 introduced a test which only passes with the default openmp library, libomp, and fails with other openmp libraries, such as libgomp. Explicitly choose libomp.
Reviewers: lebedev.ri
Subscribers: guansong, jdoerfert, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59609
llvm-svn: 356614
gcc has these intrinsics in ia32intrin.h as well. And icc implements them
though they aren't documented in the Intel Intrinsics Guide.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59533
llvm-svn: 356609
allocators.
It is better to deduce omp_allocator_handle_t type from the predefined
allocators, because omp.h header might not define it explicitly. Plus,
it allows to identify the predefined allocators correctly when trying to
build the allcoator for the global variables.
llvm-svn: 356607
Before this commit, we emit unavailable errors for calls to functions during
overload resolution, and for references to all other declarations in
DiagnoseUseOfDecl. The early checks during overload resolution aren't as good as
the DiagnoseAvailabilityOfDecl based checks, as they error on the code from
PR40991. This commit fixes this by removing the early checking.
llvm.org/PR40991
rdar://48564179
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59394
llvm-svn: 356599
This diff previously exposed a bug in LLVM's IRLinker, breaking
buildbots that tried to self-host LLVM with monolithic LTO.
The bug is now in LLVM by D59552
Original commit message:
As PR17480 describes, clang does not support the used attribute
for member functions of class templates. This means that if the member
function is not used, its definition is never instantiated. This patch
changes clang to emit the definition if it has the used attribute.
Test Plan: Added a testcase
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56928
llvm-svn: 356598
Summary:
`ASTImporter::Imported` currently returns a Decl, but that return value is not used by the ASTImporter (or anywhere else)
nor is it documented.
Reviewers: balazske, martong, a.sidorin, shafik
Reviewed By: balazske, martong
Subscribers: rnkovacs, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59595
llvm-svn: 356592
Fails on MSVC buildbot (but not locally).
Not important as it is 'testing' something that isn't supported yet anyway:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41022
llvm-svn: 356577
Summary:
Sometime after 6.0.0 and the current trunk 9.0.0 the following code would be considered as objective C and not C++
Reported by: https://twitter.com/mattgodbolt/status/1096188576503644160
$ clang-format.exe test.h
Configuration file(s) do(es) not support Objective-C: C:\clang\build\.clang-format
--- test.h --
```
std::vector<std::pair<std::string,std::string>> C;
void foo()
{
for (auto && [A,B] : C)
{
std::string D = A + B;
}
}
```
The following code fixes this issue of incorrect detection
Reviewers: djasper, klimek, JonasToth, reuk
Reviewed By: klimek
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Tags: #clang-tools-extra
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59546
llvm-svn: 356575
Summary:
[OpenCL] Generate 'unroll.enable' metadata for __attribute__((opencl_unroll_hint))
For both !{!"llvm.loop.unroll.enable"} and !{!"llvm.loop.unroll.full"} the unroller
will try to fully unroll a loop unless the trip count is not known at compile time.
In that case for '.full' metadata no unrolling will be processed, while for '.enable'
the loop will be partially unrolled with a heuristically chosen unroll factor.
See: docs/LanguageExtensions.rst
From https://www.khronos.org/registry/OpenCL/sdk/2.0/docs/man/xhtml/attributes-loopUnroll.html
__attribute__((opencl_unroll_hint))
for (int i=0; i<2; i++)
{
...
}
In the example above, the compiler will determine how much to unroll the loop.
Before the patch for __attribute__((opencl_unroll_hint)) was generated metadata
!{!"llvm.loop.unroll.full"}, which limits ability of loop unroller to decide, how
much to unroll the loop.
Reviewers: Anastasia, yaxunl
Reviewed By: Anastasia
Subscribers: zzheng, dmgreen, jdoerfert, cfe-commits, asavonic, AlexeySotkin
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59493
llvm-svn: 356571
Summary:
https://www.openmp.org/wp-content/uploads/OpenMP-API-Specification-5.0.pdf, page 3:
```
structured block
For C/C++, an executable statement, possibly compound, with a single entry at the
top and a single exit at the bottom, or an OpenMP construct.
COMMENT: See Section 2.1 on page 38 for restrictions on structured
blocks.
```
```
2.1 Directive Format
Some executable directives include a structured block. A structured block:
• may contain infinite loops where the point of exit is never reached;
• may halt due to an IEEE exception;
• may contain calls to exit(), _Exit(), quick_exit(), abort() or functions with a
_Noreturn specifier (in C) or a noreturn attribute (in C/C++);
• may be an expression statement, iteration statement, selection statement, or try block, provided
that the corresponding compound statement obtained by enclosing it in { and } would be a
structured block; and
Restrictions
Restrictions to structured blocks are as follows:
• Entry to a structured block must not be the result of a branch.
• The point of exit cannot be a branch out of the structured block.
C / C++
• The point of entry to a structured block must not be a call to setjmp().
• longjmp() and throw() must not violate the entry/exit criteria.
```
Of particular note here is the fact that OpenMP structured blocks are as-if `noexcept`,
in the same sense as with the normal `noexcept` functions in C++.
I.e. if throw happens, and it attempts to travel out of the `noexcept` function
(here: out of the current structured-block), then the program terminates.
Now, one of course can say that since it is explicitly prohibited by the Specification,
then any and all programs that violate this Specification contain undefined behavior,
and are unspecified, and thus no one should care about them. Just don't write broken code /s
But i'm not sure this is a reasonable approach.
I have personally had oss-fuzz issues of this origin - exception thrown inside
of an OpenMP structured-block that is not caught, thus causing program termination.
This issue isn't all that hard to catch, it's not any particularly different from
diagnosing the same situation with the normal `noexcept` function.
Now, clang static analyzer does not presently model exceptions.
But clang-tidy has a simplisic [[ https://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/bugprone-exception-escape.html | bugprone-exception-escape ]] check,
and it is even refactored as a `ExceptionAnalyzer` class for reuse.
So it would be trivial to use that analyzer to check for
exceptions escaping out of OpenMP structured blocks. (D59466)
All that sounds too great to be true. Indeed, there is a caveat.
Presently, it's practically impossible to do. To check a OpenMP structured block
you need to somehow 'get' the OpenMP structured block, and you can't because
it's simply not modelled in AST. `CapturedStmt`/`CapturedDecl` is not it's representation.
Now, it is of course possible to write e.g. some AST matcher that would e.g.
match every OpenMP executable directive, and then return the whatever `Stmt` is
the structured block of said executable directive, if any.
But i said //practically//. This isn't practical for the following reasons:
1. This **will** bitrot. That matcher will need to be kept up-to-date,
and refreshed with every new OpenMP spec version.
2. Every single piece of code that would want that knowledge would need to
have such matcher. Well, okay, if it is an AST matcher, it could be shared.
But then you still have `RecursiveASTVisitor` and friends.
`2 > 1`, so now you have code duplication.
So it would be reasonable (and is fully within clang AST spirit) to not
force every single consumer to do that work, but instead store that knowledge
in the correct, and appropriate place - AST, class structure.
Now, there is another hoop we need to get through.
It isn't fully obvious //how// to model this.
The best solution would of course be to simply add a `OMPStructuredBlock` transparent
node. It would be optimal, it would give us two properties:
* Given this `OMPExecutableDirective`, what's it OpenMP structured block?
* It is trivial to check whether the `Stmt*` is a OpenMP structured block (`isa<OMPStructuredBlock>(ptr)`)
But OpenMP structured block isn't **necessarily** the first, direct child of `OMP*Directive`.
(even ignoring the clang's `CapturedStmt`/`CapturedDecl` that were inserted inbetween).
So i'm not sure whether or not we could re-create AST statements after they were already created?
There would be other costs to a new AST node: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40563#c12
```
1. You will need to break the representation of loops. The body should be replaced by the "structured block" entity.
2. You will need to support serialization/deserialization.
3. You will need to support template instantiation.
4. You will need to support codegen and take this new construct to account in each OpenMP directive.
```
Instead, there **is** an functionally-equivalent, alternative solution, consisting of two parts.
Part 1:
* Add a member function `isStandaloneDirective()` to the `OMPExecutableDirective` class,
that will tell whether this directive is stand-alone or not, as per the spec.
We need it because we can't just check for the existance of associated statements,
see code comment.
* Add a member function `getStructuredBlock()` to the OMPExecutableDirective` class itself,
that assert that this is not a stand-alone directive, and either return the correct loop body
if this is a loop-like directive, or the captured statement.
This way, given an `OMPExecutableDirective`, we can get it's structured block.
Also, since the knowledge is ingrained into the clang OpenMP implementation,
it will not cause any duplication, and //hopefully// won't bitrot.
Great we achieved 1 of 2 properties of `OMPStructuredBlock` approach.
Thus, there is a second part needed:
* How can we check whether a given `Stmt*` is `OMPStructuredBlock`?
Well, we can't really, in general. I can see this workaround:
```
class FunctionASTVisitor : public RecursiveASTVisitor<FunctionASTVisitor> {
using Base = RecursiveASTVisitor<FunctionASTVisitor>;
public:
bool VisitOMPExecDir(OMPExecDir *D) {
OmpStructuredStmts.emplace_back(D.getStructuredStmt());
}
bool VisitSOMETHINGELSE(???) {
if(InOmpStructuredStmt)
HI!
}
bool TraverseStmt(Stmt *Node) {
if (!Node)
return Base::TraverseStmt(Node);
if (OmpStructuredStmts.back() == Node)
++InOmpStructuredStmt;
Base::TraverseStmt(Node);
if (OmpStructuredStmts.back() == Node) {
OmpStructuredStmts.pop_back();
--InOmpStructuredStmt;
}
return true;
}
std::vector<Stmt*> OmpStructuredStmts;
int InOmpStructuredStmt = 0;
};
```
But i really don't see using it in practice.
It's just too intrusive; and again, requires knowledge duplication.
.. but no. The solution lies right on the ground.
Why don't we simply store this `i'm a openmp structured block` in the bitfield of the `Stmt` itself?
This does not appear to have any impact on the memory footprint of the clang AST,
since it's just a single extra bit in the bitfield. At least the static assertions don't fail.
Thus, indeed, we can achieve both of the properties without a new AST node.
We can cheaply set that bit right in sema, at the end of `Sema::ActOnOpenMPExecutableDirective()`,
by just calling the `getStructuredBlock()` that we just added.
Test coverage that demonstrates all this has been added.
This isn't as great with serialization though. Most of it does not use abbrevs,
so we do end up paying the full price (4 bytes?) instead of a single bit.
That price, of course, can be reclaimed by using abbrevs.
In fact, i suspect that //might// not just reclaim these bytes, but pack these PCH significantly.
I'm not seeing a third solution. If there is one, it would be interesting to hear about it.
("just don't write code that would require `isa<OMPStructuredBlock>(ptr)`" is not a solution.)
Fixes [[ https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40563 | PR40563 ]].
Reviewers: ABataev, rjmccall, hfinkel, rsmith, riccibruno, gribozavr
Reviewed By: ABataev, gribozavr
Subscribers: mgorny, aaron.ballman, steveire, guansong, jfb, jdoerfert, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang, #openmp
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59214
llvm-svn: 356570
Summary:
Split off from D59214.
Not a fully exhaustive test coverage, but better than what there currently is.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59306
llvm-svn: 356569
Carey Williams