These checks already exist as asserts when creating the corresponding
instruction. Anybody creating these instructions already need to take
care to not break these checks.
Move the checks for success/failure ordering in cmpxchg from the
verifier to the LLParser and BitcodeReader plus an assert.
Add some tests for cmpxchg ordering. The .bc files are created from the
.ll files with an llvm-as with these checks disabled.
Reviewed By: dblaikie
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102803
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
This recommits r365750 (git commit 8b222ecf27)
Original message:
Currently invalid bitcode files can cause a crash, when OpNum exceeds
the number of elements in Record, like in the attached bitcode file.
The test case was generated by clusterfuzz: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=15698
Reviewers: t.p.northover, thegameg, jfb
Reviewed By: jfb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64507
llvm-svn: 365750jkkkk
llvm-svn: 366018
Currently invalid bitcode files can cause a crash, when OpNum exceeds
the number of elements in Record, like in the attached bitcode file.
The test case was generated by clusterfuzz: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=15698
Reviewers: t.p.northover, thegameg, jfb
Reviewed By: jfb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64507
llvm-svn: 365750
There is existing bitcode that we need to support where the structured nature
of pointer types is used to derive the result type of some operation. For
example a GEP's operation and result will be based on its input Type.
When pointers become opaque, the BitcodeReader will still have access to this
information because it's explicitly told how to construct the more complex
types used, but this information will not be attached to any Value that gets
looked up. This changes BitcodeReader so that in all places which use type
information in this manner, it's derived from a side-table rather than from the
Value in question.
llvm-svn: 364550
The bitstream reader handles errors poorly. This has two effects:
* Bugs in file handling (especially modules) manifest as an "unexpected end of
file" crash
* Users of clang as a library end up aborting because the code unconditionally
calls `report_fatal_error`
The bitstream reader should be more resilient and return Expected / Error as
soon as an error is encountered, not way late like it does now. This patch
starts doing so and adopting the error handling where I think it makes sense.
There's plenty more to do: this patch propagates errors to be minimally useful,
and follow-ups will propagate them further and improve diagnostics.
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42311
<rdar://problem/33159405>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63518
llvm-svn: 364464
The implementation is fairly obvious. This is preparation for using
some blobs in bitcode.
For clarity (and perhaps future-proofing?), I moved the call to
JumpToBit in BitstreamCursor::readRecord ahead of calling
MemoryObject::getPointer, since JumpToBit can theoretically (a) read
bytes, which (b) invalidates the blob pointer.
This isn't strictly necessary the two memory objects we have:
- The return of RawMemoryObject::getPointer is valid until the memory
object is destroyed.
- StreamingMemoryObject::getPointer is valid until the next chunk is
read from the stream. Since the JumpToBit call is only going ahead
to a word boundary, we'll never load another chunk.
However, reordering makes it clear by inspection that the blob returned
by BitstreamCursor::readRecord will be valid.
I added some tests for StreamingMemoryObject::getPointer and
BitstreamCursor::readRecord.
llvm-svn: 264549
Optimize output of MDStrings in bitcode. This emits them in big blocks
(currently 1024) in a pair of records:
- BULK_STRING_SIZES: the sizes of the strings in the block, and
- BULK_STRING_DATA: a single blob, which is the concatenation of all
the strings.
Inspired by Mehdi's similar patch, http://reviews.llvm.org/D18342, this
should (a) slightly reduce bitcode size, since there is less record
overhead, and (b) greatly improve reading speed, since blobs are super
cheap to deserialize.
I needed to add support for blobs to streaming input to get the test
suite passing.
- StreamingMemoryObject::getPointer reads ahead and returns the
address of the blob.
- To avoid a possible reallocation of StreamingMemoryObject::Bytes,
BitstreamCursor::readRecord needs to move the call to JumpToEnd
forward so that getPointer is the last bitstream operation.
llvm-svn: 264409
Summary:
Also tagged a FIXME comment, and added information about why it breaks.
Bug found using AFL fuzz.
Reviewers: rafael, craig.topper
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9729
llvm-svn: 237709
Summary:
Added isLoadableOrStorableType to PointerType.
We were doing some checks in some places, occasionally assert()ing instead
of telling the caller. With this patch, I'm putting all type checking in
the same place for load/store type instructions, and verifying the same
thing every time.
I also added a check for load/store of a function type.
Applied extracted check to Load, Store, and Cmpxcg.
I don't have exhaustive tests for all of these, but all Error() calls in
TypeCheckLoadStoreInst are being tested (in invalid.test).
Reviewers: dblaikie, rafael
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9785
llvm-svn: 237619
Summary:
We don't seem to need to assert here, since this function's callers expect
to get a nullptr on error. This way we don't assert on user input.
Bug found with AFL fuzz.
Reviewers: rafael
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9308
llvm-svn: 236027
Arthur Eubanks