This header includes CodeGen headers, and is not, itself, included by
any Target headers, so move it into CodeGen to match the layering of its
implementation.
llvm-svn: 317647
This header already includes a CodeGen header and is implemented in
lib/CodeGen, so move the header there to match.
This fixes a link error with modular codegeneration builds - where a
header and its implementation are circularly dependent and so need to be
in the same library, not split between two like this.
llvm-svn: 317379
The code assumed that we process instructions in basic block order. FastISel
processes instructions in reverse basic block order. We need to pre-assign
virtual registers before selecting otherwise we get def-use relationships wrong.
This only affects code with swifterror registers.
rdar://32659327
llvm-svn: 305484
Summary:
For inalloca functions, this is a very common code pattern:
%argpack = type <{ i32, i32, i32 }>
define void @f(%argpack* inalloca %args) {
entry:
%a = getelementptr inbounds %argpack, %argpack* %args, i32 0, i32 0
%b = getelementptr inbounds %argpack, %argpack* %args, i32 0, i32 1
%c = getelementptr inbounds %argpack, %argpack* %args, i32 0, i32 2
tail call void @llvm.dbg.declare(metadata i32* %a, ... "a")
tail call void @llvm.dbg.declare(metadata i32* %c, ... "b")
tail call void @llvm.dbg.declare(metadata i32* %b, ... "c")
Even though these GEPs can be simplified to a constant offset from EBP
or RSP, we don't do that at -O0, and each GEP is computed into a
register. Registers used to compute argument addresses are typically
spilled and clobbered very quickly after the initial computation, so
live debug variable tracking loses information very quickly if we use
DBG_VALUE instructions.
This change moves processing of dbg.declare between argument lowering
and basic block isel, so that we can ask if an argument has a frame
index or not. If the argument lives in a register as is the case for
byval arguments on some targets, then we don't put it in the side table
and during ISel we emit DBG_VALUE instructions.
Reviewers: aprantl
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32980
llvm-svn: 302483
This patch adds zext, sext, and trunc methods to KnownBits and uses them where possible.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32784
llvm-svn: 302088
This patch replaces the separate APInts for KnownZero/KnownOne with a single KnownBits struct. This is similar to what was done to ValueTracking's version recently.
This is largely a mechanical transformation from KnownZero to Known.Zero.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32569
llvm-svn: 301620
Recommitting r288293 with some extra fixes for GlobalISel code.
Most of the exception handling members in MachineModuleInfo is actually
per function data (talks about the "current function") so it is better
to keep it at the function instead of the module.
This is a necessary step to have machine module passes work properly.
Also:
- Rename TidyLandingPads() to tidyLandingPads()
- Use doxygen member groups instead of "//===- EH ---"... so it is clear
where a group ends.
- I had to add an ugly const_cast at two places in the AsmPrinter
because the available MachineFunction pointers are const, but the code
wants to call tidyLandingPads() in between
(markFunctionEnd()/endFunction()).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27227
llvm-svn: 288405
Most of the exception handling members in MachineModuleInfo is actually
per function data (talks about the "current function") so it is better
to keep it at the function instead of the module.
This is a necessary step to have machine module passes work properly.
Also:
- Rename TidyLandingPads() to tidyLandingPads()
- Use doxygen member groups instead of "//===- EH ---"... so it is clear
where a group ends.
- I had to add an ugly const_cast at two places in the AsmPrinter
because the available MachineFunction pointers are const, but the code
wants to call tidyLandingPads() in between
(markFunctionEnd()/endFunction()).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27227
llvm-svn: 288293
VariableDbgInfo is per function data, so it makes sense to have it with
the function instead of the module.
This is a necessary step to have machine module passes work properly.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27186
llvm-svn: 288292
They're not SelectionDAG- or FunctionLoweringInfo-specific. They
are, however, specific to building MMI from IR.
We could make them members, but it's nice having MMI be a "simple" data
structure and this logic kept separate.
This also lets us reuse them from GlobalISel.
llvm-svn: 287167
The code used llvm basic block predecessors to decided where to insert phi
nodes. Instruction selection can and will liberally insert new machine basic
block predecessors. There is not a guaranteed one-to-one mapping from pred.
llvm basic blocks and machine basic blocks.
Therefore the current approach does not work as it assumes we can mark
predecessor machine basic block as needing a copy, and needs to know the set of
all predecessor machine basic blocks to decide when to insert phis.
Instead of computing the swifterror vregs as we select instructions, propagate
them at the end of instruction selection when the MBB CFG is complete.
When an instruction needs a swifterror vreg and we don't know the value yet,
generate a new vreg and remember this "upward exposed" use, and reconcile this
at the end of instruction selection.
This will only happen if the target supports promoting swifterror parameters to
registers and the swifterror attribute is used.
rdar://28300923
llvm-svn: 283617
At IR level, the swifterror argument is an input argument with type
ErrorObject**. For targets that support swifterror, we want to optimize it
to behave as an inout value with type ErrorObject*; it will be passed in a
fixed physical register.
The main idea is to track the virtual registers for each swifterror value. We
define swifterror values as AllocaInsts with swifterror attribute or a function
argument with swifterror attribute.
In SelectionDAGISel.cpp, we set up swifterror values (SwiftErrorVals) before
handling the basic blocks.
When iterating over all basic blocks in RPO, before actually visiting the basic
block, we call mergeIncomingSwiftErrors to merge incoming swifterror values when
there are multiple predecessors or to simply propagate them. There, we create a
virtual register for each swifterror value in the entry block. For predecessors
that are not yet visited, we create virtual registers to hold the swifterror
values at the end of the predecessor. The assignments are saved in
SwiftErrorWorklist and will be materialized at the end of visiting the basic
block.
When visiting a load from a swifterror value, we copy from the current virtual
register assignment. When visiting a store to a swifterror value, we create a
virtual register to hold the swifterror value and update SwiftErrorMap to
track the current virtual register assignment.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18108
llvm-svn: 265433
Given that StatepointLowering now uniques derived pointers before
putting them in the per-statepoint spill map, we may end up with missing
entries for derived pointers when we visit a gc.relocate on a pointer
that was de-duplicated away.
Fix this by keeping two maps, one mapping gc pointers to their
de-duplicated values, and one mapping a de-duplicated value to the slot
it is spilled in.
llvm-svn: 264320
Catch objects with a displacement of zero do not initialize a catch
object. The displacement is relative to %rsp at the end of the
function's prologue for x86_64 targets.
If we place an object at the top-of-stack, we will end up wit a
displacement of zero resulting in our catch object remaining
uninitialized.
Address this by creating our catch objects as fixed objects. We will
ensure that the UnwindHelp object is created after the catch objects so
that no catch object will have a displacement of zero.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17823
llvm-svn: 262546
The functionality that calculateCatchReturnSuccessorColors provides was
once non-trivial: it was a computation layered on top of funclet
coloring.
These days, LLVM IR directly encodes what
calculateCatchReturnSuccessorColors computed, obsoleting the need for
it.
No functionality change is intended.
llvm-svn: 256965
While we have successfully implemented a funclet-oriented EH scheme on
top of LLVM IR, our scheme has some notable deficiencies:
- catchendpad and cleanupendpad are necessary in the current design
but they are difficult to explain to others, even to seasoned LLVM
experts.
- catchendpad and cleanupendpad are optimization barriers. They cannot
be split and force all potentially throwing call-sites to be invokes.
This has a noticable effect on the quality of our code generation.
- catchpad, while similar in some aspects to invoke, is fairly awkward.
It is unsplittable, starts a funclet, and has control flow to other
funclets.
- The nesting relationship between funclets is currently a property of
control flow edges. Because of this, we are forced to carefully
analyze the flow graph to see if there might potentially exist illegal
nesting among funclets. While we have logic to clone funclets when
they are illegally nested, it would be nicer if we had a
representation which forbade them upfront.
Let's clean this up a bit by doing the following:
- Instead, make catchpad more like cleanuppad and landingpad: no control
flow, just a bunch of simple operands; catchpad would be splittable.
- Introduce catchswitch, a control flow instruction designed to model
the constraints of funclet oriented EH.
- Make funclet scoping explicit by having funclet instructions consume
the token produced by the funclet which contains them.
- Remove catchendpad and cleanupendpad. Their presence can be inferred
implicitly using coloring information.
N.B. The state numbering code for the CLR has been updated but the
veracity of it's output cannot be spoken for. An expert should take a
look to make sure the results are reasonable.
Reviewers: rnk, JosephTremoulet, andrew.w.kaylor
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15139
llvm-svn: 255422
This patch implements dynamic realignment of stack objects for targets
with a non-realigned stack pointer. Behaviour in FunctionLoweringInfo
is changed so that for a target that has StackRealignable set to
false, over-aligned static allocas are considered to be variable-sized
objects and are handled with DYNAMIC_STACKALLOC nodes.
It would be good to group aligned allocas into a single big alloca as
an optimization, but this is yet todo.
SystemZ benefits from this, due to its stack frame layout.
New tests SystemZ/alloca-03.ll for aligned allocas, and
SystemZ/alloca-04.ll for "no-realign-stack" attribute on functions.
Review and help from Ulrich Weigand and Hal Finkel.
llvm-svn: 254227
Summary:
Now that there is a one-to-one mapping from MachineFunction to
WinEHFuncInfo, we don't need to use a DenseMap to select the right
WinEHFuncInfo for the current funclet.
The main challenge here is that X86WinEHStatePass is an IR pass that
doesn't have access to the MachineFunction. I gave it its own
WinEHFuncInfo object that it uses to calculate state numbers, which it
then throws away. As long as nobody creates or removes EH pads between
this pass and SDAG construction, we will get the same state numbers.
The other thing X86WinEHStatePass does is to mark the EH registration
node. Instead of communicating which alloca was the registration through
WinEHFuncInfo, I added the llvm.x86.seh.ehregnode intrinsic. This
intrinsic generates no code and simply marks the alloca in use.
Reviewers: JCTremoulet
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D14668
llvm-svn: 253378
We already had a test for this for 32-bit SEH catchpads, but those don't
actually create funclets. We had a bug that only appeared in funclet
prologues, where we would establish EBP and ESI as our FP and BP, and
then downstream prologue code would overwrite them.
While I was at it, I fixed Win64+funclets+stackrealign. This issue
doesn't come up as often there due to the ABI requring 16 byte stack
alignment, but now we can rest easy that AVX and WinEH will work well
together =P.
llvm-svn: 252210
The new implementation works at least as well as the old implementation
did.
Also delete the associated preparation tests. They don't exercise
interesting corner cases of the new implementation. All the codegen
tests of the EH tables have already been ported.
llvm-svn: 249918
Our current emission strategy is to emit the funclet prologue in the
CatchPad's normal destination. This is problematic because
intra-funclet control flow to the normal destination is not erroneous
and results in us reevaluating the prologue if said control flow is
taken.
Instead, use the CatchPad's location for the funclet prologue. This
correctly models our desire to have unwind edges evaluate the prologue
but edges to the normal destination result in typical control flow.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13424
llvm-svn: 249483
Summary:
Assign one state number per handler/funclet, tracking parent state,
handler type, and catch type token.
State numbers are arranged such that ancestors have lower state numbers
than their descendants.
Reviewers: majnemer, andrew.w.kaylor, rnk
Subscribers: pgavlin, AndyAyers, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13450
llvm-svn: 249457
Summary:
- Add CoreCLR to if/else ladders and switches as appropriate.
- Rename isMSVCEHPersonality to isFuncletEHPersonality to better
reflect what it captures.
Reviewers: majnemer, andrew.w.kaylor, rnk
Subscribers: pgavlin, AndyAyers, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13449
llvm-svn: 249455
Catchret transfers control from a catch funclet to an earlier funclet.
However, it is not completely clear which funclet the catchret target is
part of. Make this clear by stapling the catchret target's funclet
membership onto the CATCHRET SDAG node.
llvm-svn: 249052
Clang now passes the adjectives as an argument to catchpad.
Getting the CatchObj working is simply a matter of threading another
static alloca through codegen, first as an alloca, then as a frame
index, and finally as a frame offset.
llvm-svn: 247844
All of the complexity is in cleanupret, and it mostly follows the same
codepaths as catchret, except it doesn't take a return value in RAX.
This small example now compiles and executes successfully on win32:
extern "C" int printf(const char *, ...) noexcept;
struct Dtor {
~Dtor() { printf("~Dtor\n"); }
};
void has_cleanup() {
Dtor o;
throw 42;
}
int main() {
try {
has_cleanup();
} catch (int) {
printf("caught it\n");
}
}
Don't try to put the cleanup in the same function as the catch, or Bad
Things will happen.
llvm-svn: 247219
The 32-bit tables don't actually contain PC range data, so emitting them
is incredibly simple.
The 64-bit tables, on the other hand, use the same table for state
numbering as well as label ranges. This makes things more difficult, so
it will be implemented later.
llvm-svn: 247192
Typically these are catchpads, which hold data used to decide whether to
catch the exception or continue unwinding. We also shouldn't create MBBs
for catchendpads, cleanupendpads, or terminatepads, since no real code
can live in them.
This fixes a problem where MI passes (like the register allocator) would
try to put code into catchpad blocks, which are not executed by the
runtime. In the new world, blocks ending in invokes now have many
possible successors.
llvm-svn: 247102
Summary:
32-bit funclets have short prologues that allocate enough stack for the
largest call in the whole function. The runtime saves CSRs for the
funclet. It doesn't restore CSRs after we finally transfer control back
to the parent funciton via a CATCHRET, but that's a separate issue.
32-bit funclets also have to adjust the incoming EBP value, which is
what llvm.x86.seh.recoverframe does in the old model.
64-bit funclets need to spill CSRs as normal. For simplicity, this just
spills the same set of CSRs as the parent function, rather than trying
to compute different CSR sets for the parent function and each funclet.
64-bit funclets also allocate enough stack space for the largest
outgoing call frame, like 32-bit.
Reviewers: majnemer
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12546
llvm-svn: 247092
Also delete and simplify a lot of MachineModuleInfo code that used to be
needed to handle personalities on landingpads. Now that the personality
is on the LLVM Function, we no longer need to track it this way on MMI.
Certainly it should not live on LandingPadInfo.
llvm-svn: 246478
We can now run 32-bit programs with empty catch bodies. The next step
is to change PEI so that we get funclet prologues and epilogues.
llvm-svn: 246235
State numbers are calculated by performing a walk from the innermost
funclet to the outermost funclet. Rudimentary support for the new EH
constructs has been added to the assembly printer, just enough to test
the new machinery.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12098
llvm-svn: 245331
Summary:
Avoid using the TargetMachine owned DataLayout and use the Module owned
one instead. This requires passing the DataLayout up the stack to
ComputeValueVTs().
This change is part of a series of commits dedicated to have a single
DataLayout during compilation by using always the one owned by the
module.
Reviewers: echristo
Subscribers: jholewinski, yaron.keren, rafael, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11019
From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com>
llvm-svn: 241773
The incoming EBP value points to the end of a local stack allocation, so
we can use that to restore ESI, the base pointer. Once we do that, we
can use local stack allocations. If we know we need stack realignment,
spill the original frame pointer in the prologue and reload it after
restoring ESI.
llvm-svn: 241648
Summary:
SelectionDAG itself is not invoking directly the DataLayout in the
TargetMachine, but the "TargetLowering" class is still using it. I'll
address it in a following commit.
This change is part of a series of commits dedicated to have a single
DataLayout during compilation by using always the one owned by the
module.
Reviewers: echristo
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11000
From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com>
llvm-svn: 241618
The personality routine currently lives in the LandingPadInst.
This isn't desirable because:
- All LandingPadInsts in the same function must have the same
personality routine. This means that each LandingPadInst beyond the
first has an operand which produces no additional information.
- There is ongoing work to introduce EH IR constructs other than
LandingPadInst. Moving the personality routine off of any one
particular Instruction and onto the parent function seems a lot better
than have N different places a personality function can sneak onto an
exceptional function.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D10429
llvm-svn: 239940
David Blaikie