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
I discovered a case where the old algorithm would crash. Instead of
trying to patch the algorithm, rewrite it. The new algorithm operates
in three phases:
1. Find all paths to the subobject with the vptr.
2. Remove paths which are subsets of other paths.
3. Select the best path where 'best' is defined as introducing the most
covariant overriders. If two paths introduce different overriders,
raise a diagnostic.
llvm-svn: 236444
A class might contain multiple ways of getting to a vbase, some of which
are virtual and other non-virtual. It may be the case that a
non-virtual base contains an override of a method in a vbase. This
means that we must carefully pick between a set of nvbases to determine
which is the best.
As a consequence, the findPathForVPtr algorithm is considerably simpler.
llvm-svn: 236353
There can be multiple virtual bases which are on the path to a vfptr
when one vbase virtually inherits from another. We should prefer the
most derived virtual base which covariantly overrides a method in the
vfptr class; if we do not lengthen the path this way, we will end up
with too few vftable entries.
This fixes PR21073.
llvm-svn: 236239
This was a bug in r218285 that prevented us from seeing subsequent
virtual bases in the class hierarchy, leading to crashes later.
Also add some comments to this function, now that we better understand
what it's trying to do.
Fixes PR21062 and PR21064.
llvm-svn: 235899
We need to walk the class hierarchy twice: once in depth-first base
specifier order for mangling and again in depth-first layout order for
vftable layout.
Vftable layout seems to depend on the full path from the most derived
class to the base containing the vfptr.
Fixes PR21031.
llvm-svn: 218285
Deleted virtual functions get _purecall inserted into the vftable.
Earlier CTPs would simply stick nullptr in there.
N.B. MSVC can't handle deleted virtual functions which require return
adjusting thunks, they give an error that a deleted function couldn't be
called inside of a compiler generated function. We get this correct by
making the thunk have a __purecall entry as well.
llvm-svn: 217654
As suggested by Reid:
- class has GVA_Internal linkage -> internal
- thunk has return adjustment -> weak_odr, to handle evil corner case [1]
- all other normal methods -> linkonce_odr
1. Evil corner case:
struct Incomplete;
struct A { int a; virtual A *bar(); };
struct B { int b; virtual B *foo(Incomplete); };
struct C : A, B { int c; virtual C *foo(Incomplete); };
C c;
Here, the thunk for C::foo() will be emitted when C::foo() is defined, which
might be in a different translation unit, so it needs to be weak_odr.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D3992
llvm-svn: 210368
Summary:
This merges VFPtrInfo and VBTableInfo into VPtrInfo, since they hold
almost the same information. With that change, the vbtable mangling
code can easily be applied to vftable data and we magically get the
correct, unambiguous vftable names.
Fixes PR17748.
Reviewers: timurrrr, majnemer
CC: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2893
llvm-svn: 202425
This makes the C++ ABI depend entirely on the target: MS ABI for -win32 triples,
Itanium otherwise. It's no longer possible to do weird combinations.
To be able to run a test with a specific ABI without constraining it to a
specific triple, new substitutions are added to lit: %itanium_abi_triple and
%ms_abi_triple can be used to get the current target triple adjusted to the
desired ABI. For example, if the test suite is running with the i686-pc-win32
target, %itanium_abi_triple will expand to i686-pc-mingw32.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2545
llvm-svn: 199250
This makes it consistent with -fdump-record-layouts, which was moved to
outs() in r186219. My reasoning for going with stdout is that when one
of these options is present, the layouts are really a program output,
and shouldn't be interleaved with diagnostics, which are on stderr.
Reviewers: timurrrr
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2127
llvm-svn: 194279
Peter Collingbourne