Catch objects with a displacement of zero do not initialize a catch
object. The displacement is relative to %rsp at the end of the
function's prologue for x86_64 targets.
If we place an object at the top-of-stack, we will end up wit a
displacement of zero resulting in our catch object remaining
uninitialized.
Address this by creating our catch objects as fixed objects. We will
ensure that the UnwindHelp object is created after the catch objects so
that no catch object will have a displacement of zero.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17823
llvm-svn: 262546
If we know that all of our successors want to be in the exact same
state, it makes sense to hoist the state transition into their common
predecessor.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17391
llvm-svn: 261262
SimplifyCFG allows tail merging with code which terminates in
unreachable which, in turn, makes it possible for an invoke to end up in
a funclet which it was not originally part of.
Using operand bundles on invokes allows us to determine whether or not
an invoke was part of a funclet in the source program.
Furthermore, it allows us to unambiguously answer questions about the
legality of inlining into call sites which the personality may have
trouble with.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15517
llvm-svn: 255674
While we have successfully implemented a funclet-oriented EH scheme on
top of LLVM IR, our scheme has some notable deficiencies:
- catchendpad and cleanupendpad are necessary in the current design
but they are difficult to explain to others, even to seasoned LLVM
experts.
- catchendpad and cleanupendpad are optimization barriers. They cannot
be split and force all potentially throwing call-sites to be invokes.
This has a noticable effect on the quality of our code generation.
- catchpad, while similar in some aspects to invoke, is fairly awkward.
It is unsplittable, starts a funclet, and has control flow to other
funclets.
- The nesting relationship between funclets is currently a property of
control flow edges. Because of this, we are forced to carefully
analyze the flow graph to see if there might potentially exist illegal
nesting among funclets. While we have logic to clone funclets when
they are illegally nested, it would be nicer if we had a
representation which forbade them upfront.
Let's clean this up a bit by doing the following:
- Instead, make catchpad more like cleanuppad and landingpad: no control
flow, just a bunch of simple operands; catchpad would be splittable.
- Introduce catchswitch, a control flow instruction designed to model
the constraints of funclet oriented EH.
- Make funclet scoping explicit by having funclet instructions consume
the token produced by the funclet which contains them.
- Remove catchendpad and cleanupendpad. Their presence can be inferred
implicitly using coloring information.
N.B. The state numbering code for the CLR has been updated but the
veracity of it's output cannot be spoken for. An expert should take a
look to make sure the results are reasonable.
Reviewers: rnk, JosephTremoulet, andrew.w.kaylor
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15139
llvm-svn: 255422
The C++ EH personality automatically restores ESP from the C++ EH
registration node after a catchret. I mistakenly thought it was like
SEH, which does not restore ESP.
It makes sense for C++ EH to differ from SEH here because SEH does not
use funclets for catches, and does not allow catching inside of finally.
C++ EH may need to unwind through multiple catch funclets and eventually
catchret to some outer funclet. Therefore, the runtime has to keep track
of which ESP to use with catchret, rather than having the compiler
reload it manually.
llvm-svn: 253084
For some reason we'd never run MachineVerifier on WinEH code, and you
explicitly have to ask for it with llc. I added it to a few test cases
to get some coverage.
Fixes PR25461.
llvm-svn: 252512
Summary:
This ensures that BranchFolding (and similar) won't remove these blocks.
Also allow AsmPrinter::EmitBasicBlockStart to process MBBs which are
address-taken but do not have BBs that are address-taken, since otherwise
its call to getAddrLabelSymbolTableToEmit would fail an assertion on such
blocks. I audited the other callers of getAddrLabelSymbolTableToEmit
(and getAddrLabelSymbol); they all have BBs known to be address-taken
except for the call through getAddrLabelSymbol from
WinException::create32bitRef; that call is actually now unreachable, so
I've removed it and updated the signature of create32bitRef.
This fixes PR25168.
Reviewers: majnemer, andrew.w.kaylor, rnk
Subscribers: pgavlin, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13774
llvm-svn: 251113
When lowering invoke statement, all unwind destinations are directly added as successors of call site block, and the weight of those new edges are not assigned properly. Actually, default weight 16 are used for those edges. This patch calculates the proper edge weights for those edges when collecting all unwind destinations.
Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13354
llvm-svn: 250119
The __CxxFrameHandler3 tables for 32-bit are supposed to hold stack
offsets relative to EBP, not ESP. I blindly updated the win-catchpad.ll
test case, and immediately noticed that 32-bit catching stopped working.
While I'm at it, move the frame index to frame offset WinEH table logic
out of PEI. PEI shouldn't have to know about WinEHFuncInfo. I realized
we can calculate frame index offsets just fine from the table printer.
llvm-svn: 249618
There was an off-by-one bug in ip2state tables which manifested when one
call immediately preceded the try-range of the next. The return address
of the previous call would appear to be within the try range of the next
scope, resulting in extra destructors or catches running.
We also computed the wrong offset for catch parameter stack objects. The
offset should be from RSP, not from RBP.
llvm-svn: 249578
Our current emission strategy is to emit the funclet prologue in the
CatchPad's normal destination. This is problematic because
intra-funclet control flow to the normal destination is not erroneous
and results in us reevaluating the prologue if said control flow is
taken.
Instead, use the CatchPad's location for the funclet prologue. This
correctly models our desire to have unwind edges evaluate the prologue
but edges to the normal destination result in typical control flow.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13424
llvm-svn: 249483
The x64 ABI requires that epilogues do not contain code other than stack
adjustments and some limited control flow. However, we'd insert code to
initialize the return address after stack adjustments. Instead, insert
EAX/RAX with the current value before we create the stack adjustments in
the epilogue.
llvm-svn: 248839
Summary:
Funclets have been turned into functions by the time they hit the object
file. Make sure that they have decent names for the symbol table and
CFI directives explaining how to reason about their prologues.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D13261
llvm-svn: 248824
This makes catchret look more like a branch, and less like a weird use
of BlockAddress. It also lets us get away from
llvm.x86.seh.restoreframe, which relies on the old parentfpoffset label
arithmetic.
llvm-svn: 247936
Clang now passes the adjectives as an argument to catchpad.
Getting the CatchObj working is simply a matter of threading another
static alloca through codegen, first as an alloca, then as a frame
index, and finally as a frame offset.
llvm-svn: 247844
The Win32 EH runtime caller does not preserve EBP, even though it does
preserve the CSRs (EBX, ESI, EDI) for us. The result was that each
finally funclet call would leave the frame pointer off by 12 bytes.
llvm-svn: 247348
All of the complexity is in cleanupret, and it mostly follows the same
codepaths as catchret, except it doesn't take a return value in RAX.
This small example now compiles and executes successfully on win32:
extern "C" int printf(const char *, ...) noexcept;
struct Dtor {
~Dtor() { printf("~Dtor\n"); }
};
void has_cleanup() {
Dtor o;
throw 42;
}
int main() {
try {
has_cleanup();
} catch (int) {
printf("caught it\n");
}
}
Don't try to put the cleanup in the same function as the catch, or Bad
Things will happen.
llvm-svn: 247219
Typically these are catchpads, which hold data used to decide whether to
catch the exception or continue unwinding. We also shouldn't create MBBs
for catchendpads, cleanupendpads, or terminatepads, since no real code
can live in them.
This fixes a problem where MI passes (like the register allocator) would
try to put code into catchpad blocks, which are not executed by the
runtime. In the new world, blocks ending in invokes now have many
possible successors.
llvm-svn: 247102
Summary:
32-bit funclets have short prologues that allocate enough stack for the
largest call in the whole function. The runtime saves CSRs for the
funclet. It doesn't restore CSRs after we finally transfer control back
to the parent funciton via a CATCHRET, but that's a separate issue.
32-bit funclets also have to adjust the incoming EBP value, which is
what llvm.x86.seh.recoverframe does in the old model.
64-bit funclets need to spill CSRs as normal. For simplicity, this just
spills the same set of CSRs as the parent function, rather than trying
to compute different CSR sets for the parent function and each funclet.
64-bit funclets also allocate enough stack space for the largest
outgoing call frame, like 32-bit.
Reviewers: majnemer
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12546
llvm-svn: 247092
We can now run 32-bit programs with empty catch bodies. The next step
is to change PEI so that we get funclet prologues and epilogues.
llvm-svn: 246235
David Majnemer