This generalizes code and also fixes the broken behavior shown in
one of our test cases for some targets, like x86-64.
The issue occurs when the forward declarations are used in the script.
One of the samples is:
SECTIONS {
foo = ADDR(.text) - ABSOLUTE(ADDR(.text));
};
In that case, we have a broken output when output target does
not use thunks. That happens because thunks creating code
(called from maybeAddThunks)
calls Script->assignAddresses() at least one more time,
what fixups the values. As a result final symbols values can
be different on AArch64 and x86, for example.
In this patch, I generalize and rename maybeAddThunks to
finalizeAddressDependentContent and now it is used and called
by all targets.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55550
llvm-svn: 358646
Summary:
We access Live and OutputOff (which may share the same memory location)
concurrently in 2 parallelForEachN loops. Separating them avoids subtle
data races like D41884/PR35788. This patch places Live and Hash
together.
2 reasons this is appealing:
1) Hash is immutable. Live is almost read-only - only written once in MarkLive.cpp where
Hash is not accessed
2) we already discard low bits of Hash to decide ShardID. It doesn't
matter much if we make 32-bit Hash to 31-bit.
For a huge internal clang -O3 executable (1.6GiB),
`Strings` in StringTableBuilder::finalizeStringTable contains at most 310253 elements.
The expected number of pair-wise collisions 2^(-31) * C(310253,2) ~= 22.41 is too small to have a negative impact on performance.
Actually, my benchmark shows there is actually a minor performance improvement.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60765
llvm-svn: 358645
Summary:
This issue from the bugzilla: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41177
When the two operands for BUILD_VECTOR are same, we will get assert error.
llvm::SDValue combineBVOfConsecutiveLoads(llvm::SDNode*, llvm::SelectionDAG&):
Assertion `!(InputsAreConsecutiveLoads && InputsAreReverseConsecutive) &&
"The loads cannot be both consecutive and reverse consecutive."' failed.
This error caused by the wrong ElemSIze when calling isConsecutiveLS(). We
should use `getScalarType().getStoreSize();` to get the ElemSize instread of
`getScalarSizeInBits() / 8`.
Reviewed By: jsji
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60811
llvm-svn: 358644
fneg combining attempts to turn it into fadd(fneg(A), fneg(0)), but
creating the new fadd folds to just fneg(A). When A has multiple uses,
this confuses it and you get an assert. Fixed.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60633
Change-Id: I0ddc9b7286abe78edc0cd8d734fdeb05ff09821c
llvm-svn: 358640
Patch by Gabriel Smith.
The address for a section would be evaluated before the region was
switched to. Because of this, the position within the region would not
be updated. After the region is swapped to the dot would be set to the
out of date position within the region, undoing the section address
evaluation.
To fix this, the region is swapped to before the section's address is
evaluated. As part of the fallout of this, expandMemoryRegions needed
to be gated in setDot on the condition that the evaluated address is
less than the dot. This is for the case where sections are not listed
from lowest address to highest address.
Finally, a test for the case where sections are listed "out of order"
was added.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60744
llvm-svn: 358638
Reverse the checking of the domiance order so that when a self compare happens,
it returns false. This makes compare function have strict weak ordering.
llvm-svn: 358636
global module fragment.
We know that the declaration in question should have been introduced by
a '#include', so try to figure out which one and suggest it. Don't
suggest importing the global module fragment itself!
llvm-svn: 358631
retaining block and all of the enclosing blocks are non-escaping.
If the block implicitly retaining self doesn't escape, there is no risk
of creating retain cycles, so clang shouldn't diagnose it and force
users to add self-> to silence the diagnostic.
Also, fix a bug where clang was failing to diagnose an implicitly
retained self inside a c++ lambda nested inside a block.
rdar://problem/25059955
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60736
llvm-svn: 358624
The test file has pairs of tests that are logically equivalent:
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/2zQ
%t4 = and i8 %t1, 8
%t5 = zext i8 %t4 to i16
%sh = shl i16 %t5, 2
%t6 = add i16 %sh, %t0
=>
%t4 = and i8 %t1, 8
%sh2 = shl i8 %t4, 2
%z5 = zext i8 %sh2 to i16
%t6 = add i16 %z5, %t0
...so if we can fold the shift op into LEA in the 1st pattern, then we
should be able to do the same in the 2nd pattern (unnecessary 'movzbl'
is a separate bug I think).
We don't want to do this any sooner though because that would conflict
with generic transforms that try to narrow the width of the shift.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60789
llvm-svn: 358622
Before the patch calling clang-tidy with -header-filter=.* -system-headers would
result in a few hundred useless warnings:
warning: macro '_GNU_SOURCE' used to declare a constant; consider using a 'constexpr' constant [cppcoreguidelines-macro-usage]
warning: macro '_LP64' used to declare a constant; consider using a 'constexpr' constant [cppcoreguidelines-macro-usage]
warning: macro '__ATOMIC_ACQUIRE' used to declare a constant; consider using a 'constexpr' constant [cppcoreguidelines-macro-usage]
warning: macro '__ATOMIC_ACQ_REL' used to declare a constant; consider using a 'constexpr' constant [cppcoreguidelines-macro-usage]
warning: macro '__ATOMIC_CONSUME' used to declare a constant; consider using a 'constexpr' constant [cppcoreguidelines-macro-usage]
warning: macro '__ATOMIC_RELAXED' used to declare a constant; consider using a 'constexpr' constant [cppcoreguidelines-macro-usage]
warning: macro '__ATOMIC_RELEASE' used to declare a constant; consider using a 'constexpr' constant [cppcoreguidelines-macro-usage]
warning: macro '__ATOMIC_SEQ_CST' used to declare a constant; consider using a 'constexpr' constant [cppcoreguidelines-macro-usage]
warning: macro '__BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT__' used to declare a constant; consider using a 'constexpr' constant [cppcoreguidelines-macro-usage]
... and so on
llvm-svn: 358621
Summary:
This check aims to address a relatively common benign error where
Objective-C subclass initializers call -self on their superclass instead
of invoking a superclass initializer, typically -init. The error is
typically benign because libobjc recognizes that improper initializer
chaining is common¹.
One theory for the frequency of this error might be that -init and -self
have the same return type which could potentially cause inappropriate
autocompletion to -self instead of -init. The equal selector lengths and
triviality of common initializer code probably contribute to errors like
this slipping through code review undetected.
This check aims to flag errors of this form in the interests of
correctness and reduce incidence of initialization failing to chain to
-[NSObject init].
[1] "In practice, it will be hard to rely on this function.
Many classes do not properly chain -init calls."
From _objc_rootInit in https://opensource.apple.com/source/objc4/objc4-750.1/runtime/NSObject.mm.auto.html.
Test Notes:
Verified via `make check-clang-tools`.
Subscribers: mgorny, xazax.hun, jdoerfert, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59806
llvm-svn: 358620
Summary:
X86 is quite complicated; so I intend to leave it as is. ARM+Aarch64 do
basically the same thing (Aarch64 did not correctly handle immediates,
ARM has a test llvm/test/CodeGen/ARM/2009-04-06-AsmModifier.ll that uses
%a with an immediate) for a flag that should be target independent
anyways.
Reviewers: echristo, peter.smith
Reviewed By: echristo
Subscribers: javed.absar, eraman, kristof.beyls, hiraditya, llvm-commits, srhines
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60841
llvm-svn: 358618
It turns out that whether the new handlers should be provided is orthogonal
to whether new/delete are provided in libc++ or libc++abi. The reason why
I initially added this conditional is because of an incorrect understanding
of the path we're taking when building on Apple platforms. In fact, we
always build libc++ on top of libc++abi on Apple platforms, so we take
the branch for `LIBCXX_BUILDING_LIBCXXABI` there.
llvm-svn: 358616
Some linker libraries are only needed for shared libc++, some only
for static libc++, combining these together in LIBCXX_LIBRARIES and
LIBCXX_INTERFACE_LIBRARIES can introduce unnecessary dependencies.
This changes splits those up into LIBCXX_SHARED_LIBRARIES and
LIBCXX_STATIC_LIBRARIES matching what libc++abi already does.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57872
llvm-svn: 358614
Legalize things like i24 load/store by splitting them into smaller power of 2 operations.
This matches how SelectionDAG handles these operations.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59971
llvm-svn: 358613
Summary:
- for warnings, use the flag the warning is controlled by (-Wfoo)
- for errors, keep using the internal name (there's nothing better) but
drop the err_ prefix
This comes at the cost of uniformity, it's no longer totally obvious
exactly what the code field contains. But the -Wname flags are so much
more useful to end-users than the internal warn_foo that this seems worth it.
Reviewers: kadircet
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, ioeric, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60822
llvm-svn: 358611
In r358591, I added a test that uses the debug database from multiple
threads and that helped us uncover the problem that was fixed in r355367.
However, the test broke the tsan CI bots, and I think the problem is the
test allocator that was used in the test (which is not thread safe).
I'm committing again without using the test allocator, and in a separate
test file.
llvm-svn: 358610
For the following code snippet:
void builtin_function_call_crash_fixes(char *c) {
__builtin_strncpy(c, "", 6);
__builtin_memset(c, '\0', (0));
__builtin_memcpy(c, c, 0);
}
security.insecureAPI.DeprecatedOrUnsafeBufferHandling caused a regression, as it
didn't recognize functions starting with __builtin_. Fixed exactly that.
I wanted to modify an existing test file, but the two I found didn't seem like
perfect candidates. While I was there, I prettified their RUN: lines.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59812
llvm-svn: 358609
This patch adds a basic loop fusion pass. It will fuse loops that conform to the
following 4 conditions:
1. Adjacent (no code between them)
2. Control flow equivalent (if one loop executes, the other loop executes)
3. Identical bounds (both loops iterate the same number of iterations)
4. No negative distance dependencies between the loop bodies.
The pass does not make any changes to the IR to create opportunities for fusion.
Instead, it checks if the necessary conditions are met and if so it fuses two
loops together.
The pass has not been added to the pass pipeline yet, and thus is not enabled by
default. It can be run stand alone using the -loop-fusion option.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55851
llvm-svn: 358607
Summary:
Typically used with umbrella headers, e.g. GTK:
#if !defined (__GTK_H_INSIDE__) && !defined (GTK_COMPILATION)
#error "Only <gtk/gtk.h> can be included directly."
#endif
Heuristic is fairly conservative, a quick code search over github showed
a fair number of hits and few/no false positives. (Not all were umbrella
headers, but I'd be happy avoiding include insertion for all of them).
We may want to relax the heuristic later to catch more cases.
Reviewers: ioeric
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, kadircet, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60815
llvm-svn: 358605
We were using the LLDB-Info.plist as the canonical holder of the
version number, but there is really no good reason to do this. If
anything the plist should be generated using the information provided
to CMake.
For now just remove the logic extracting the version from the plist
and rely on LLDB_VERSION_STRING.
llvm-svn: 358604
Summary:
None of these derived classes do anything that the base class cannot.
If we remove these case statements, then the base class can handle them
just fine.
Reviewers: peter.smith, echristo
Reviewed By: echristo
Subscribers: nemanjai, javed.absar, eraman, kristof.beyls, hiraditya, kbarton, jsji, llvm-commits, srhines
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60803
llvm-svn: 358603
Summary:
Otherwise, we can run into problems when the program has static variables
that need to use the debug database during their deinitialization, if
the debug DB has already been deinitialized.
Reviewers: EricWF
Subscribers: christof, jkorous, dexonsmith, libcxx-commits
Tags: #libc
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60830
llvm-svn: 358602
Summary:
Reapply r357931 with fixes to ThinLTO testcases and llvm-lto tool.
ThinLTOCodeGenerator currently does not preserve llvm.used symbols and
it can internalize them. In order to pass the necessary information to the
legacy ThinLTOCodeGenerator, the input to the code generator is
rewritten to be based on lto::InputFile.
Now ThinLTO using the legacy LTO API will requires data layout in
Module.
"internalize" thinlto action in llvm-lto is updated to run both
"promote" and "internalize" with the same configuration as
ThinLTOCodeGenerator. The old "promote" + "internalize" option does not
produce the same output as ThinLTOCodeGenerator.
This fixes: PR41236
rdar://problem/49293439
Reviewers: tejohnson, pcc, kromanova, dexonsmith
Reviewed By: tejohnson
Subscribers: ormris, bd1976llvm, mehdi_amini, inglorion, eraman, hiraditya, jkorous, dexonsmith, arphaman, dang, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60421
llvm-svn: 358601
In InstCombine, we use an idiom of "store i1 true, i1 undef" to indicate we've found a path which we've proven unreachable. We can't actually insert the unreachable instruction since that would require changing the CFG. We leave that to simplifycfg later.
This just factors out that idiom creation so we don't duplicate the same mostly undocument idiom creation in multiple places.
llvm-svn: 358600
If a branch is conditional on extractvalue(op.with.overflow(%x, C), 1)
then we can constrain the value of %x inside the branch based on
makeGuaranteedNoWrapRegion(). We do this by extending the edge-value
handling in LVI. This allows CVP to then fold comparisons against %x,
as illustrated in the tests.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60650
llvm-svn: 358597
Cullen Rhodes