If `-shared` is specified, pull in a PIC-version of the profile runtime,
which was added to compiler-rt in r208947. I'm hoping this will get the
bots on my side.
llvm-svn: 208948
Shared objects are fairly broken for InstrProf right now -- a follow-up
commit in compiler-rt will fix the rest of this.
The main problem here is that at link time, profile data symbols in the
shared object might get used instead of symbols from the main
executable, creating invalid profile data sections.
<rdar://problem/16918688>
llvm-svn: 208939
This allows us to perfectly forward non-trivial arguments that use
inalloca.
We still can't forward non-trivial arguments through thunks when we have
a covariant return type with a non-trivial adjustment. This would
require emitting an extra copy, which is non-conforming anyway.
llvm-svn: 208927
All callers were passing in "a.out" or garbage so a sensible default works fine
here as a cleanup.
This also brings about the possibility of adapting the value based on the
driver's compatibility mode in future.
The setting can still be changed via Driver::DefaultImageName as needed.
llvm-svn: 208926
When using the VFS, we want the virtual header location when searching
for a framework module, since that will be the one in the correct
directory structure for the module.
I'll add a regression test once I finish reducing the larger one I have.
llvm-svn: 208901
GetGVALinkageForFunction handles TSK_ExplicitInstantiationDeclaration
twice, remove the redundant code trying to handle it again.
While we are here, update the reference we make to the standard. It
seems like another paragraph was added causing this text to get
renumbered.
llvm-svn: 208850
This undoes half of r208786.
It had problems with lazily declared special members in cases like this:
struct A {
A();
A &operator=(A &&o);
void *p;
};
void foo(A);
void bar() {
foo({});
}
In this case, the copy and move constructors are implicitly deleted.
However, Clang doesn't eagerly declare the copy ctor in the AST, so we
pass the struct in registers. Furthermore, GCC passes this in registers
even though this class should be uncopyable.
Revert this for now until the dust settles.
llvm-svn: 208836
This affects both the Itanium and Microsoft C++ ABIs.
This is in anticipation of a change to the Itanium C++ ABI, and should
match GCC's current behavior. The new text will likely be:
"""
Pass an object of class type by value if every copy constructor and
move constructor is deleted or trivial and at least one of them is not
deleted, and the destructor is trivial.
"""
http://sourcerytools.com/pipermail/cxx-abi-dev/2014-May/002728.html
On x86 Windows, we can mostly use the same logic, where we use inalloca
instead of passing by address. However, on Win64, there are register
parameters, and we have to do what MSVC does. MSVC ignores the presence
of non-trivial move constructors and only considers the presence of
non-trivial or deleted copy constructors. If a non-trivial or deleted
copy ctor is present, it passes the argument indirectly.
This change fixes bugs and makes us more ABI compatible with both GCC
and MSVC.
Fixes PR19668.
Reviewers: rsmith
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D3660
llvm-svn: 208786
This looks like the right way for this check to work, but there is
another semi-obvious bug, I would think: why is CurLoc not zero'd out
between functions? The possibility for it to bleed between them seems
problematic. (& indeed I caused tests to fail when I fixed this a
different way, by setting CurLoc to SourceLocation() and the end of
EmitFunctionEnd... )
The changes to debug-info-blocks.m are due to a mismatch between the
source manager's file naming and CGDebugInfo's default handling when no
-main-file-name is specified. This actually reveals somewhat of a bug in
the debug info when using source files from standard in, too. See the
comment in CGDebugInfo::CreateCompileUnit for more details.
llvm-svn: 208742
Joey Gouly