Commit Graph

14 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Philip Reames 1a196f7daf Revert 258157
According the build bots, clang is using the Registry class somewhere as well. Will reapply with appropriate clang changes at a later point.

llvm-svn: 258159
2016-01-19 18:41:10 +00:00
Philip Reames 0f6650e8e8 [GC] Registry initialization and linkage interactions
The Registry class constructs a linked list of nodes whose storage is inside static variables and nodes are added via static initializers. The trick is that those static initializers are in both the LLVM code base, and some random plugin that might get loaded in at runtime. The existing code tries to use C++ templates and their ODR rules to get a single definition of the registry for each type, but, experimentally, this doesn't quite work as designed. (Well, the entire structure doesn't. It might not actually be an ODR problem.)

Previously, when I tried moving the GCStrategy class (along with it's registry) from CodeGen to IR, I ran into a problem where asking the GCStrategyRegistry a question would return inconsistent results depending on whether you asked from CodeGen (where the static initializers still were) or Transforms. My best guess is that this is a result of either a) an order of initialization error, or b) we ended up with two copies of the registry being created. I remember at the time having convinced myself it was probably (b), but I don't have any of my notes around from that investigation any more.

See http://reviews.llvm.org/rL226311 for the original patch in question.

This patch tries to remove the possibility of (b) above. (a) was already fixed in change 258109.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16170

llvm-svn: 258157
2016-01-19 18:34:27 +00:00
Philip Reames 36319538d0 clang-format all the GC related files (NFC)
Nothing interesting here...

llvm-svn: 226342
2015-01-16 23:16:12 +00:00
Philip Reames 1e30897497 GCStrategy should not own GCFunctionInfo
This change moves the ownership and access of GCFunctionInfo (the object which describes the safepoints associated with a safepoint under GCRoot) to GCModuleInfo. Previously, this was owned by GCStrategy which was in turned owned by GCModuleInfo. This made GCStrategy module specific which is 'surprising' given it's name and other purposes.

There's a few more changes needed, but we're getting towards the point we can reuse GCStrategy for gc.statepoint as well.

p.s. The style of this code ends up being a mess. I was trying to move code around without otherwise changing much. Once I get the ownership structure rearranged, I will go through and fixup spacing, naming, comments etc.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6587

llvm-svn: 223994
2014-12-11 01:47:23 +00:00
Philip Reames de226055ca Remove the Module pointer from GCStrategy and GCMetadataPrinter
In the current implementation, GCStrategy is a part of the ownership structure for the gc metadata which describes a Module. It also contains a reference to the module in question. As a result, GCStrategy instances are essentially Module specific.

I plan to transition away from this design. Instead, a GCStrategy will be owned by the LLVMContext. It will be a lightweight policy object which contains no information about the Modules or Functions involved, but can be easily reached given a Function.

The first step in this transition is to remove the direct Module reference from GCStrategy. This also requires removing the single user of this reference, the GCMetadataPrinter hierarchy. In theory, this will allow the lifetime of the printers to be scoped to the LLVMContext as well, but in practice, I'm not actually changing that. (Yet?)

An alternate design would have been to move the direct Module reference into the GCMetadataPrinter and change the keying of the owning maps to explicitly key off both GCStrategy and Module. I'm open to doing it that way instead, but didn't see much value in preserving the per Module association for GCMetadataPrinters.

The next change in this sequence will be to start unwinding the intertwined ownership between GCStrategy, GCModuleInfo, and GCFunctionInfo.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6566

llvm-svn: 223859
2014-12-09 23:57:54 +00:00
Chris Lattner ef8240bbac mcize the gc metadata printing stuff.
llvm-svn: 100324
2010-04-04 07:39:04 +00:00
Benjamin Kramer cabfdb1e67 Remove pointless forward declaration, MSVC got confused by this.
llvm-svn: 98519
2010-03-14 22:00:28 +00:00
Chris Lattner 1065f49ad9 switch GC_LABEL to use an MCSymbol operand instead of a label ID operand.
llvm-svn: 98474
2010-03-14 07:27:07 +00:00
Chris Lattner e9a75a6654 rename TAI -> MAI, being careful not to make MAILJMP instructions :)
llvm-svn: 79777
2009-08-22 21:43:10 +00:00
Chris Lattner 7b26fce23e Rename TargetAsmInfo (and its subclasses) to MCAsmInfo.
llvm-svn: 79763
2009-08-22 20:48:53 +00:00
Owen Anderson 9371964f47 Use raw_ostream throughout the AsmPrinter.
llvm-svn: 55092
2008-08-21 00:14:44 +00:00
Gordon Henriksen aa8ab4501a Don't require Registry specializations to define random static variables.
llvm-svn: 54902
2008-08-17 19:08:34 +00:00
Gordon Henriksen d930f913e6 Rename some GC classes so that their roll will hopefully be clearer.
In particular, Collector was confusing to implementors. Several
thought that this compile-time class was the place to implement
their runtime GC heap. Of course, it doesn't even exist at runtime.
Specifically, the renames are:

  Collector               -> GCStrategy
  CollectorMetadata       -> GCFunctionInfo
  CollectorModuleMetadata -> GCModuleInfo
  CollectorRegistry       -> GCRegistry
  Function::getCollector  -> getGC (setGC, hasGC, clearGC)

Several accessors and nested types have also been renamed to be
consistent. These changes should be obvious.

llvm-svn: 54899
2008-08-17 18:44:35 +00:00
Gordon Henriksen bcef14d2e4 Factor GC metadata table assembly generation out of Collector in preparation for splitting AsmPrinter into its own library.
llvm-svn: 54881
2008-08-17 12:56:54 +00:00