This patch contains all of the clang changes from D72959.
- Generalize the relative vtables ABI such that it can be used by other targets.
- Add an enum VTableComponentLayout which controls whether components in the
vtable should be pointers to other structs or relative offsets to those structs.
Other ABIs can change this enum to restructure how components in the vtable
are laid out/accessed.
- Add methods to ConstantInitBuilder for inserting relative offsets to a
specified position in the aggregate being constructed.
- Fix failing tests under new PM and ASan and MSan issues.
See D72959 for background info.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77592
This reverts commit 2e009dbcb3.
Reverting since there were some test failures on buildbots that used the
new pass manager. ASan and MSan are also finding some bugs in this that
I'll need to address.
This patch contains all of the clang changes from D72959.
- Generalize the relative vtables ABI such that it can be used by other targets.
- Add an enum VTableComponentLayout which controls whether components in the
vtable should be pointers to other structs or relative offsets to those structs.
Other ABIs can change this enum to restructure how components in the vtable
are laid out/accessed.
- Add methods to ConstantInitBuilder for inserting relative offsets to a
specified position in the aggregate being constructed.
See D72959 for background info.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77592
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
Summary:
The following class hierarchy requires that we be able to emit a
this-adjusting thunk for B::foo in C's vftable:
struct Incomplete;
struct A {
virtual A* foo(Incomplete p) = 0;
};
struct B : virtual A {
void foo(Incomplete p) override;
};
struct C : B { int c; };
This TU is valid, but lacks a definition of 'Incomplete', which makes it
hard to build a thunk for the final overrider, B::foo.
Before this change, Clang gives up attempting to emit the thunk, because
it assumes that if the parameter types are incomplete, it must be
emitting the thunk for optimization purposes. This is untrue for the MS
ABI, where the implementation of B::foo has no idea what thunks C's
vftable may require. Clang needs to emit the thunk without necessarily
having access to the complete prototype of foo.
This change makes Clang emit a musttail variadic call when it needs such
a thunk. I call these "unprototyped" thunks, because they only prototype
the "this" parameter, which must always come first in the MS C++ ABI.
These thunks work, but they create ugly LLVM IR. If the call to the
thunk is devirtualized, it will be a call to a bitcast of a function
pointer. Today, LLVM cannot inline through such a call, but I want to
address that soon, because we also use this pattern for virtual member
pointer thunks.
This change also implements an old FIXME in the code about reusing the
thunk's computed CGFunctionInfo as much as possible. Now we don't end up
computing the thunk's mangled name and arranging it's prototype up to
around three times.
Fixes PR25641
Reviewers: rjmccall, rsmith, hans
Subscribers: Prazek, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45112
llvm-svn: 329009
In a future change, this representation will allow us to use the new inrange
annotation on getelementptr to allow the optimizer to split vtable groups.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D22296
llvm-svn: 289584
- Simplify signature of CreateVTableInitializer function.
- Move vtable component builder to a separate function.
- Remove unnecessary accessors from VTableLayout class.
This is in preparation for a future change that will alter the type of the
vtable initializer.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D22642
llvm-svn: 280897
The pointer for a class's RTTI data comes right before the VFTable but
has no name. To be properly compatible with this, we do the following:
* Create a single GlobalVariable which holds the contents of the VFTable
_and_ the pointer to the RTTI data.
* Create a GlobalAlias, with appropriate linkage/visibility, that points
just after the RTTI data pointer. This ensures that the VFTable
symbol will always refer to VFTable data.
* Create a Comdat with a "Largest" SelectionKind and stick the private
GlobalVariable in it. By transitivity, the GlobalAlias will be a
member of the Comdat group. Using "Largest" ensures that foreign
definitions without an RTTI data pointer will _not_ be chosen in the
final linked image.
Whether or not we emit RTTI data depends on several things:
* The -fno-rtti flag implies that we should never not emit a pointer to
RTTI data before the VFTable.
* __declspec(dllimport) brings in the VFTable from a remote DLL. Use an
available_externally GlobalVariable to provide a local definition of
the VFTable. This means that we won't have any available_externally
definitions of things like complete object locators. This is
acceptable because they are never directly referenced.
To my knowledge, this completes the implementation of MSVC RTTI code
generation.
Further semantic work should be done to properly support /GR-.
llvm-svn: 212125
Member pointers are mangled as they would be represented at runtime.
They can be a single integer literal, single decl, or a tuple with some
more numbers tossed in. With Clang today, most of those numbers will be
zero because we reject pointers to members of virtual bases.
This change required moving VTableContextBase ownership from
CodeGenVTables to ASTContext, because mangling now depends on vtable
layout.
I also hoisted the inheritance model helpers up to be inline static
methods of MSInheritanceAttr. This makes the AST code that deals with
member pointers much more readable.
MSVC doesn't appear to have stable manglings of null member pointers:
- Null data memptrs in function templates have a mangling collision with
the first field of a non-polymorphic single inheritance class.
- The mangling of null data memptrs changes if you add casts.
- Large null function memptrs in class templates crash MSVC.
Clang uses the class template mangling for null data memptrs and the
function template mangling for null function memptrs to deal with this.
Reviewers: majnemer
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2695
llvm-svn: 200857
Now CodeGenVTables has only one VTableContext object, which is either
Itanium or Microsoft.
Fixes a FIXME with no functionality change intended.
Ideally we could avoid the downcasts by pushing the things that
reference the Itanium vtable context into ItaniumCXXABI.cpp, but we're
not there yet.
llvm-svn: 197845
This function only makes sense there. Eventually it should no longer
be part of the CGCXXABI interface, as it is an Itanium-specific detail.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D821
llvm-svn: 185213
never key functions. We did not implement that rule for the
iOS ABI, which was driven by what was implemented in gcc-4.2.
However, implement it now for other ARM-based platforms.
llvm-svn: 173515
uncovered.
This required manually correcting all of the incorrect main-module
headers I could find, and running the new llvm/utils/sort_includes.py
script over the files.
I also manually added quite a few missing headers that were uncovered by
shuffling the order or moving headers up to be main-module-headers.
llvm-svn: 169237
Emit them instead with the linkage of the VTT.
I'm actually really ambivalent about this; it's what GCC does, but outside
of improving code size (if the linkage is coalescing), I'm not sure it's
at all relevant. Construction vtables are naturally referenced only by the
VTT, which is itself only referenced by complete-object constructors and
destructors; giving the construction vtables possibly-external linkage is
important if you have an optimization that drills through the VTT to a
reference to a particular construction vtable which it cannot just emit
itself.
llvm-svn: 128374
Leonard Chan