Summary:
We can emit vtable definition having inline function
if they are all emitted.
Reviewers: rjmccall, rsmith
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33437
llvm-svn: 304394
Much to my surprise, '-disable-llvm-optzns' which I thought was the
magical flag I wanted to get at the raw LLVM IR coming out of Clang
deosn't do that. It still runs some passes over the IR. I don't want
that, I really want the *raw* IR coming out of Clang and I strongly
suspect everyone else using it is in the same camp.
There is actually a flag that does what I want that I didn't know about
called '-disable-llvm-passes'. I suspect many others don't know about it
either. It both does what I want and is much simpler.
This removes the confusing version and makes that spelling of the flag
an alias for '-disable-llvm-passes'. I've also moved everything in Clang
to use the 'passes' spelling as it seems both more accurate (*all* LLVM
passes are disabled, not just optimizations) and much easier to remember
and spell correctly.
This is part of simplifying how Clang drives LLVM to make it cleaner to
wire up to the new pass manager.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28047
llvm-svn: 290392
In C++11 we don't emit vtables as eagerly as we do for C++03, so
fiddle the tests to emit them when the test expects them.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D27994
llvm-svn: 290205
Generating available_externally vtables for optimizations purposes.
Unfortunatelly ItaniumABI doesn't guarantee that we will be able to
refer to virtual inline method by name.
But when we don't have any inline virtual methods, and key function is
not defined in this TU, we can generate that there will be vtable and
mark it as available_externally.
This is patch will help devirtualize better.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11441
llvm-svn: 243090
This produces comdats for vtables, typeinfo, typeinfo names, and vtts.
When combined with llvm not producing implicit comdats, not doing this would
cause code bloat on ELF and link errors on COFF.
llvm-svn: 226227
unique them and permits the implementation of dynamic_cast (and
anything else which knows it's working with a complete class
type) to compare their addresses directly.
rdar://16005328
llvm-svn: 201020
This fixes pr13124.
From the discussion at
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-dev/2012-June/022606.html
we know that we cannot make funcions in a weak_odr vtable also weak_odr. They
should remain linkonce_odr.
The side effect is that we cannot emit a available_externally vtable unless we
also emit a copy of the function. This also has an issue: If codegen is going
to output a function, sema has to mark it used. Given llvm.org/pr9114, it looks
like sema cannot be more aggressive at marking functions used because
of vtables.
This leaves us with a few unpleasant options:
* Marking functions in vtables used if possible. This sounds a bit sloppy, so
we should avoid it.
* Producing available_externally vtables only when all the functions in it are
already used or weak_odr. This would cover cases like
--------------------
struct foo {
virtual ~foo();
};
struct bar : public foo {
virtual void zed();
};
void f() {
foo *x(new bar);
delete x;
}
void g(bar *x) {
x->~bar(); // force the destructor to be used
}
--------------------------
and
----------------------------------
template<typename T>
struct bar {
virtual ~bar();
};
template<typename T>
bar<T>::~bar() {
}
// make the destructor weak_odr instead of linkonce_odr
extern template class bar<int>;
void f() {
bar<int> *x(new bar<int>);
delete x;
}
----------------------------
These look like corner cases, so it is unclear if it is worth it.
* And finally: Just nuke this optimization. That is what this patch implements.
llvm-svn: 189852
linkonce_odr. Emit construction vtables as internal in this case, since the ABI
does not guarantee that they will be availble externally.
llvm-svn: 175330
a -cc1 option. The Darwin linker complains about mixed visibility when linking
gcc-built objects with clang-built objects, and the optimization isn't really
that valuable. Platforms with less ornery linkers can feel free to enable this.
llvm-svn: 110979
do the right thing with mixed-visibility symbols, so disable the visibility
optimization where that's possible, i.e. with template classes (since it's
possible that an arbitrary template might be subject to an explicit
instantiation elsewhere). 447.dealII actually does this.
I've put the code under an option that's currently not hooked up to anything.
llvm-svn: 110374
Apply hidden visibility to most RTTI; libstdc++ does not rely on exact
pointer equality for the type info (just the type info names). Apply
the same optimization to RTTI that we do to vtables.
Fixes PR5962.
llvm-svn: 110192
- I think this can be cleaned up, since this means we may notify the consumer about the vtable twice, but I didn't see an easy fix for this without more substantial refactoring.
- Doug, please review!
llvm-svn: 104577
"used" (e.g., we will refer to the vtable in the generated code) and
when they are defined (i.e., because we've seen the key function
definition). Previously, we were effectively tracking "potential
definitions" rather than uses, so we were a bit too eager about emitting
vtables for classes without key functions.
The new scheme:
- For every use of a vtable, Sema calls MarkVTableUsed() to indicate
the use. For example, this occurs when calling a virtual member
function of the class, defining a constructor of that class type,
dynamic_cast'ing from that type to a derived class, casting
to/through a virtual base class, etc.
- For every definition of a vtable, Sema calls MarkVTableUsed() to
indicate the definition. This happens at the end of the translation
unit for classes whose key function has been defined (so we can
delay computation of the key function; see PR6564), and will also
occur with explicit template instantiation definitions.
- For every vtable defined/used, we mark all of the virtual member
functions of that vtable as defined/used, unless we know that the key
function is in another translation unit. This instantiates virtual
member functions when needed.
- At the end of the translation unit, Sema tells CodeGen (via the
ASTConsumer) which vtables must be defined (CodeGen will define
them) and which may be used (for which CodeGen will define the
vtables lazily).
From a language perspective, both the old and the new schemes are
permissible: we're allowed to instantiate virtual member functions
whenever we want per the standard. However, all other C++ compilers
were more lazy than we were, and our eagerness was both a performance
issue (we instantiated too much) and a portability problem (we broke
Boost test cases, which now pass).
Notes:
(1) There's a ton of churn in the tests, because the order in which
vtables get emitted to IR has changed. I've tried to isolate some of
the larger tests from these issues.
(2) Some diagnostics related to
implicitly-instantiated/implicitly-defined virtual member functions
have moved to the point of first use/definition. It's better this
way.
(3) I could use a review of the places where we MarkVTableUsed, to
see if I missed any place where the language effectively requires a
vtable.
Fixes PR7114 and PR6564.
llvm-svn: 103718
non-inline key function of a class template instantiation, when no key
function is present, the class template instantiation itself was
instantiated with an explicit instantiation declaration (aka extern
template). I'm fairly certain that the C++0x specification gives us
this lattitude, although GCC doesn't take advantage of it.
llvm-svn: 92779
- All classes can have a key function; templates don't change that.
non-template classes when computing the key function.
- We always mark all of the virtual member functions of class
template instantiations.
- The vtable for an instantiation of a class template has weak
linkage.
We could probably use available_externally linkage for vtables of
classes instantiated by explicit instantiation declarations (extern
templates), but GCC doesn't do this and I'm not 100% that the ABI
permits it.
llvm-svn: 92753
- This is designed to make it obvious that %clang_cc1 is a "test variable"
which is substituted. It is '%clang_cc1' instead of '%clang -cc1' because it
can be useful to redefine what gets run as 'clang -cc1' (for example, to set
a default target).
llvm-svn: 91446
Piotr Padlewski