Summary:
Teach MachineVerifier to check branches for MBB operands if they are not declared indirect.
Add `isBarrier`, `isIndirectBranch` to `G_BRINDIRECT` and `G_BRJT`.
Without these, `MachineInstr.isConditionalBranch()` was giving a
false-positive for those instructions.
Reviewers: aemerson, qcolombet, dsanders, arsenm
Reviewed By: dsanders
Subscribers: hiraditya, wdng, simoncook, s.egerton, arsenm, rovka, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81587
There's two properties we want to verify:
1. That the successors returned by analyzeBranch are in the CFG
successor list, and
2. That there are no extraneous successors are in the CFG successor
list.
The previous implementation mostly accomplished this, but in a very
convoluted manner.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79793
Confusingly, these were unrelated and had different semantics. The
G_PTR_MASK instruction predates the llvm.ptrmask intrinsic, but has a
different format. G_PTR_MASK only allows clearing the low bits of a
pointer, and only a constant number of bits. The ptrmask intrinsic
allows an arbitrary mask. Replace G_PTR_MASK to match the intrinsic.
Only selects the cases that look like the old instruction. More work
is needed to select the general case. Also new legalization code is
still needed to deal with the case where the incoming mask size does
not match the pointer size, which has a specified behavior in the
langref.
This reverts commit 80a34ae311 with fixes.
Previously, since bots turning on EXPENSIVE_CHECKS are essentially turning on
MachineVerifierPass by default on X86 and the fact that
inline-asm-avx-v-constraint-32bit.ll and inline-asm-avx512vl-v-constraint-32bit.ll
are not expected to generate functioning machine code, this would go
down to `report_fatal_error` in MachineVerifierPass. Here passing
`-verify-machineinstrs=0` to make the intent explicit.
This reverts commit 80a34ae311 with fixes.
On bots llvm-clang-x86_64-expensive-checks-ubuntu and
llvm-clang-x86_64-expensive-checks-debian only,
llc returns 0 for these two tests unexpectedly. I tweaked the RUN line a little
bit in the hope that LIT is the culprit since this change is not in the
codepath these tests are testing.
llvm\test\CodeGen\X86\inline-asm-avx-v-constraint-32bit.ll
llvm\test\CodeGen\X86\inline-asm-avx512vl-v-constraint-32bit.ll
This reverts commit rGcd5b308b828e, rGcd5b308b828e, rG8cedf0e2994c.
There are issues to be investigated for polly bots and bots turning on
EXPENSIVE_CHECKS.
Summary:
This patch could be treated as a rebase of D33960. It also fixes PR35547.
A fix for `llvm/test/Other/close-stderr.ll` is proposed in D68164. Seems
the consensus is that the test is passing by chance and I'm not
sure how important it is for us. So it is removed like in D33960 for now.
The rest of the test fixes are just adding `--crash` flag to `not` tool.
** The reason it fixes PR35547 is
`exit` does cleanup including calling class destructor whereas `abort`
does not do any cleanup. In multithreading environment such as ThinLTO or JIT,
threads may share states which mostly are ManagedStatic<>. If faulting thread
tearing down a class when another thread is using it, there are chances of
memory corruption. This is bad 1. It will stop error reporting like pretty
stack printer; 2. The memory corruption is distracting and nondeterministic in
terms of error message, and corruption type (depending one the timing, it
could be double free, heap free after use, etc.).
Reviewers: rnk, chandlerc, zturner, sepavloff, MaskRay, espindola
Reviewed By: rnk, MaskRay
Subscribers: wuzish, jholewinski, qcolombet, dschuff, jyknight, emaste, sdardis, nemanjai, jvesely, nhaehnle, sbc100, arichardson, jgravelle-google, aheejin, kbarton, fedor.sergeev, asb, rbar, johnrusso, simoncook, apazos, sabuasal, niosHD, jrtc27, zzheng, edward-jones, atanasyan, rogfer01, MartinMosbeck, brucehoult, the_o, PkmX, jocewei, jsji, lenary, s.egerton, pzheng, cfe-commits, MaskRay, filcab, davide, MatzeB, mehdi_amini, hiraditya, steven_wu, dexonsmith, rupprecht, seiya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm, #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67847
MachineVerifier::visitMachineFunctionAfter() is extended to check the
live-through case for live-in lists. This is only done for registers without
aliases and that are neither allocatable or reserved, such as the SystemZ::CC
register.
The MachineVerifier earlier only catched the case of a live-in use without an
entry in the live-in list (as "using an undefined physical register").
A comment in LivePhysRegs.h has been added stating a guarantee that
addLiveOuts() can be trusted for a full register both before and after
register allocation.
Review: Quentin Colombet
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68267
While working with a patch for instruction selection, the splitting of a
large immediate ended up begin treated incorrectly by the backend. Where a
register operand should have been created, it instead became an immediate. To
my surprise the machine verifier failed to report this, which at the time
would have been helpful.
This patch improves the verifier so that it will report this type of error.
This patch XFAILs CodeGen/SPARC/fp128.ll, which has been reported at
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44091
Review: thegameg, arsenm, fhahn
https://reviews.llvm.org/D63973
Summary:
G_GEP is rather poorly named. It's a simple pointer+scalar addition and
doesn't support any of the complexities of getelementptr. I therefore
propose that we rename it. There's a G_PTR_MASK so let's follow that
convention and go with G_PTR_ADD
Reviewers: volkan, aditya_nandakumar, bogner, rovka, arsenm
Subscribers: sdardis, jvesely, wdng, nhaehnle, hiraditya, jrtc27, atanasyan, arphaman, Petar.Avramovic, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69734
MachineVerifier::visitMachineFunctionAfter() is extended to check the
live-through case for live-in lists. This is only done for registers without
aliases and that are neither allocatable or reserved, such as the SystemZ::CC
register.
The MachineVerifier earlier only catched the case of a live-in use without
an entry in the live-in list (as "using an undefined physical register").
A comment in LivePhysRegs.h has been added stating a guarantee that
addLiveOuts() can be trusted for a full register both before and after
register allocation.
Review: Quentin Colombet
https://reviews.llvm.org/D68267
We need to propagate this information from the IR in order to be able to safely
do tail call optimizations on the intrinsics during legalization. Assuming
it's safe to do tail call opt without checking for the marker isn't safe because
the mem libcall may use allocas from the caller.
This adds an extra immediate operand to the end of the intrinsics and fixes the
legalizer to handle it.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68151
llvm-svn: 373140
This just adds the opcode and verifier, it will be used to replace existing
dynamic alloca handling in a subsequent patch.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66677
llvm-svn: 369833
Currently shufflemasks get emitted as any other constant, and you end
up with a bunch of virtual registers of G_CONSTANT with a
G_BUILD_VECTOR. The AArch64 selector then asserts on anything that
doesn't fit this pattern. This isn't an ideal representation, and
should avoid legalization and have fewer opportunities for a
representational error.
Rather than invent a new shuffle mask operand type, similar to what
ShuffleVectorSDNode does, just track the original IR Constant mask
operand. I don't completely like the idea of adding another link to
the IR, but MIR is already quite dependent on IR constants already,
and this will allow sharing the shuffle mask utility functions with
the IR.
llvm-svn: 368704
Summary:
Targets often have instructions that can sign-extend certain cases faster
than the equivalent shift-left/arithmetic-shift-right. Such cases can be
identified by matching a shift-left/shift-right pair but there are some
issues with this in the context of combines. For example, suppose you can
sign-extend 8-bit up to 32-bit with a target extend instruction.
%1:_(s32) = G_SHL %0:_(s32), i32 24 # (I've inlined the G_CONSTANT for brevity)
%2:_(s32) = G_ASHR %1:_(s32), i32 24
%3:_(s32) = G_ASHR %2:_(s32), i32 1
would reasonably combine to:
%1:_(s32) = G_SHL %0:_(s32), i32 24
%2:_(s32) = G_ASHR %1:_(s32), i32 25
which no longer matches the special case. If your shifts and extend are
equal cost, this would break even as a pair of shifts but if your shift is
more expensive than the extend then it's cheaper as:
%2:_(s32) = G_SEXT_INREG %0:_(s32), i32 8
%3:_(s32) = G_ASHR %2:_(s32), i32 1
It's possible to match the shift-pair in ISel and emit an extend and ashr.
However, this is far from the only way to break this shift pair and make
it hard to match the extends. Another example is that with the right
known-zeros, this:
%1:_(s32) = G_SHL %0:_(s32), i32 24
%2:_(s32) = G_ASHR %1:_(s32), i32 24
%3:_(s32) = G_MUL %2:_(s32), i32 2
can become:
%1:_(s32) = G_SHL %0:_(s32), i32 24
%2:_(s32) = G_ASHR %1:_(s32), i32 23
All upstream targets have been configured to lower it to the current
G_SHL,G_ASHR pair but will likely want to make it legal in some cases to
handle their faster cases.
To follow-up: Provide a way to legalize based on the constant. At the
moment, I'm thinking that the best way to achieve this is to provide the
MI in LegalityQuery but that opens the door to breaking core principles
of the legalizer (legality is not context sensitive). That said, it's
worth noting that looking at other instructions and acting on that
information doesn't violate this principle in itself. It's only a
violation if, at the end of legalization, a pass that checks legality
without being able to see the context would say an instruction might not be
legal. That's a fairly subtle distinction so to give a concrete example,
saying %2 in:
%1 = G_CONSTANT 16
%2 = G_SEXT_INREG %0, %1
is legal is in violation of that principle if the legality of %2 depends
on %1 being constant and/or being 16. However, legalizing to either:
%2 = G_SEXT_INREG %0, 16
or:
%1 = G_CONSTANT 16
%2:_(s32) = G_SHL %0, %1
%3:_(s32) = G_ASHR %2, %1
depending on whether %1 is constant and 16 does not violate that principle
since both outputs are genuinely legal.
Reviewers: bogner, aditya_nandakumar, volkan, aemerson, paquette, arsenm
Subscribers: sdardis, jvesely, wdng, nhaehnle, rovka, kristof.beyls, javed.absar, hiraditya, jrtc27, atanasyan, Petar.Avramovic, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61289
llvm-svn: 368487
I keep using the wrong instruction when manually writing tests. This
really needs to check the number of operands, but I don't see an easy
way to do that right now.
llvm-svn: 363579
This is a branch opcode that takes a jump table pointer, jump table index and an
index into the table to do an indirect branch.
We pass both the table pointer and JTI to allow targets like ARM64 to more
easily use the existing jump table compression optimization without having to
walk up the block to find a paired G_JUMP_TABLE.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63159
llvm-svn: 363434
This opcode generates a pointer to the address of the jump table
specified by the source operand, which is a jump table index.
It will be used in conjunction with an upcoming G_BRJT opcode to support
jump table codegen with GlobalISel.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63111
llvm-svn: 363096
Summary:
This avoids needing an isel pattern for each condition code. And it removes translation switches for converting between Jcc instructions and condition codes.
Now the printer, encoder and disassembler take care of converting the immediate. We use InstAliases to handle the assembly matching. But we print using the asm string in the instruction definition. The instruction itself is marked IsCodeGenOnly=1 to hide it from the assembly parser.
Reviewers: spatel, lebedev.ri, courbet, gchatelet, RKSimon
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Subscribers: MatzeB, qcolombet, eraman, hiraditya, arphaman, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60228
llvm-svn: 357802
Testing based on the total size of the elements failed to catch a few
invalid scenarios, so explicitly check the number of elements/operands
and types.
This failed to catch situations like
<4 x s16> = G_BUILD_VECTOR s32, s32 since the total size added
up. This also would fail to catch an implicit conversion between
pointers and scalars.
llvm-svn: 354139
The Verifier is separate from the MachineVerifier, so move it to a
different directory. Some other verifier tests were scattered in
target codegen tests as well (although I'm sure I missed some). Work
towards using a more consistent naming scheme to make it clearer where
the gaps still are for generic instructions.
llvm-svn: 354138
Dominik Montada