This reverts commit 80a34ae311 with fixes.
Previously, since bots turning on EXPENSIVE_CHECKS are essentially turning on
MachineVerifierPass by default on X86 and the fact that
inline-asm-avx-v-constraint-32bit.ll and inline-asm-avx512vl-v-constraint-32bit.ll
are not expected to generate functioning machine code, this would go
down to `report_fatal_error` in MachineVerifierPass. Here passing
`-verify-machineinstrs=0` to make the intent explicit.
This reverts commit 80a34ae311 with fixes.
On bots llvm-clang-x86_64-expensive-checks-ubuntu and
llvm-clang-x86_64-expensive-checks-debian only,
llc returns 0 for these two tests unexpectedly. I tweaked the RUN line a little
bit in the hope that LIT is the culprit since this change is not in the
codepath these tests are testing.
llvm\test\CodeGen\X86\inline-asm-avx-v-constraint-32bit.ll
llvm\test\CodeGen\X86\inline-asm-avx512vl-v-constraint-32bit.ll
This reverts commit rGcd5b308b828e, rGcd5b308b828e, rG8cedf0e2994c.
There are issues to be investigated for polly bots and bots turning on
EXPENSIVE_CHECKS.
Summary:
This patch could be treated as a rebase of D33960. It also fixes PR35547.
A fix for `llvm/test/Other/close-stderr.ll` is proposed in D68164. Seems
the consensus is that the test is passing by chance and I'm not
sure how important it is for us. So it is removed like in D33960 for now.
The rest of the test fixes are just adding `--crash` flag to `not` tool.
** The reason it fixes PR35547 is
`exit` does cleanup including calling class destructor whereas `abort`
does not do any cleanup. In multithreading environment such as ThinLTO or JIT,
threads may share states which mostly are ManagedStatic<>. If faulting thread
tearing down a class when another thread is using it, there are chances of
memory corruption. This is bad 1. It will stop error reporting like pretty
stack printer; 2. The memory corruption is distracting and nondeterministic in
terms of error message, and corruption type (depending one the timing, it
could be double free, heap free after use, etc.).
Reviewers: rnk, chandlerc, zturner, sepavloff, MaskRay, espindola
Reviewed By: rnk, MaskRay
Subscribers: wuzish, jholewinski, qcolombet, dschuff, jyknight, emaste, sdardis, nemanjai, jvesely, nhaehnle, sbc100, arichardson, jgravelle-google, aheejin, kbarton, fedor.sergeev, asb, rbar, johnrusso, simoncook, apazos, sabuasal, niosHD, jrtc27, zzheng, edward-jones, atanasyan, rogfer01, MartinMosbeck, brucehoult, the_o, PkmX, jocewei, jsji, lenary, s.egerton, pzheng, cfe-commits, MaskRay, filcab, davide, MatzeB, mehdi_amini, hiraditya, steven_wu, dexonsmith, rupprecht, seiya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm, #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67847
On SparcV8, it was previously the case that a variable-sized alloca
might overlap by 4-bytes the last fixed stack variable, effectively
because 92 (the number of bytes reserved for the register spill area) !=
96 (the offset added to SP for where to start a DYNAMIC_STACKALLOC).
It's not as simple as changing 96 to 92, because variables that should
be 8-byte aligned would then be misaligned.
For now, simply increase the allocation size by 8 bytes for each dynamic
allocation -- wastes space, but at least doesn't overlap. As the large
comment says, doing this more efficiently will require larger changes in
llvm.
Also adds some test cases showing that we continue to not support
dynamic stack allocation and over-alignment in the same function.
llvm-svn: 285131
Yuanfang Chen