According to the documentation in StackMap section for the safepoint we should have:
"The first Location in each pair describes the base pointer for the object. The second is the derived pointer actually being relocated."
But before this change we emitted them in reverse order - derived pointer first, base pointer second.
llvm-svn: 237126
This changes the shape of the statepoint intrinsic from:
@llvm.experimental.gc.statepoint(anyptr target, i32 # call args, i32 unused, ...call args, i32 # deopt args, ...deopt args, ...gc args)
to:
@llvm.experimental.gc.statepoint(anyptr target, i32 # call args, i32 flags, ...call args, i32 # transition args, ...transition args, i32 # deopt args, ...deopt args, ...gc args)
This extension offers the backend the opportunity to insert (somewhat) arbitrary code to manage the transition from GC-aware code to code that is not GC-aware and back.
In order to support the injection of transition code, this extension wraps the STATEPOINT ISD node generated by the usual lowering lowering with two additional nodes: GC_TRANSITION_START and GC_TRANSITION_END. The transition arguments that were passed passed to the intrinsic (if any) are lowered and provided as operands to these nodes and may be used by the backend during code generation.
Eventually, the lowering of the GC_TRANSITION_{START,END} nodes should be informed by the GC strategy in use for the function containing the intrinsic call; for now, these nodes are instead replaced with no-ops.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9501
llvm-svn: 236888
For accessors in the `Statepoint` class, use symbolic constants for
offsets into the argument vector instead of literals. This makes the
code intent clearer and simpler to change.
llvm-svn: 236566
[DebugInfo] Add debug locations to constant SD nodes
This adds debug location to constant nodes of Selection DAG and updates
all places that create constants to pass debug locations
(see PR13269).
Can't guarantee that all locations are correct, but in a lot of cases choice
is obvious, so most of them should be. At least all tests pass.
Tests for these changes do not cover everything, instead just check it for
SDNodes, ARM and AArch64 where it's easy to get incorrect locations on
constants.
This is not complete fix as FastISel contains workaround for wrong debug
locations, which drops locations from instructions on processing constants,
but there isn't currently a way to use debug locations from constants there
as llvm::Constant doesn't cache it (yet). Although this is a bit different
issue, not directly related to these changes.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9084
llvm-svn: 235989
This adds debug location to constant nodes of Selection DAG and updates
all places that create constants to pass debug locations
(see PR13269).
Can't guarantee that all locations are correct, but in a lot of cases choice
is obvious, so most of them should be. At least all tests pass.
Tests for these changes do not cover everything, instead just check it for
SDNodes, ARM and AArch64 where it's easy to get incorrect locations on
constants.
This is not complete fix as FastISel contains workaround for wrong debug
locations, which drops locations from instructions on processing constants,
but there isn't currently a way to use debug locations from constants there
as llvm::Constant doesn't cache it (yet). Although this is a bit different
issue, not directly related to these changes.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9084
llvm-svn: 235977
This was discussed a while back and I left it optional for migration. Since it's been far more than the 'week or two' that was discussed, time to actually make this manditory.
llvm-svn: 233357
This patch adds support for explicitly provided spill slots in the GC arguments of a gc.statepoint. This is somewhat analogous to gcroot, but leverages the STATEPOINT MI node and StackMap infrastructure. The motivation for this is:
1) The stack spilling code for gc.statepoints hasn't advanced as fast as I'd like. One major option is to give up on doing spilling in the backend and do it at the IR level instead. We'd give up the ability to have gc values in registers, but that's a minor cost in practice. We are not neccessarily moving in that direction, but having the ability to prototype such a thing cheaply is interesting.
2) I want to port the gcroot lowering to use the statepoint infastructure. Given the metadata printers for gcroot expect a fixed set of stack roots, it's easiest to just reuse the explicit stack slots and pass them directly to the underlying statepoint.
I'm holding off on the documentation for the new feature until I'm reasonable sure this is going to stick around.
llvm-svn: 233356
Also it extracts getCopyFromRegs helper function in SelectionDAGBuilder as we need to be able to customize type of the register exported from basic block during lowering of the gc.result.
(Resubmitting this change after not being able to reproduce buildbot failure)
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7760
llvm-svn: 231800
Also it extracts getCopyFromRegs helper function in SelectionDAGBuilder as we need to be able to customize type of the register exported from basic block during lowering of the gc.result.
llvm-svn: 231366
This change reverts the interesting parts of 226311 (and 227046). This change introduced two problems, and I've been convinced that an alternate approach is preferrable anyways.
The bugs were:
- Registery appears to require all users be within the same linkage unit. After this change, asking for "statepoint-example" in Transform/ would sometimes get you nullptr, whereas asking the same question in CodeGen would return the right GCStrategy. The correct long term fix is to get rid of the utter hack which is Registry, but I don't have time for that right now. 227046 appears to have been an attempt to fix this, but I don't believe it does so completely.
- GCMetadataPrinter::finishAssembly was being called more than once per GCStrategy. Each Strategy was being added to the GCModuleInfo multiple times.
Once I get time again, I'm going to split GCModuleInfo into the gc.root specific part and a GCStrategy owning Analysis pass. I'm probably also going to kill off the Registry. Once that's done, I'll move the new GCStrategyAnalysis and all built in GCStrategies into Analysis. (As original suggested by Chandler.) This will accomplish my original goal of being able to access GCStrategy from Transform/ without adding all of the builtin GCs to IR/.
llvm-svn: 227109
Note: This change ended up being slightly more controversial than expected. Chandler has tentatively okayed this for the moment, but I may be revisiting this in the near future after we settle some high level questions.
Rather than have the GCStrategy object owned by the GCModuleInfo - which is an immutable analysis pass used mainly by gc.root - have it be owned by the LLVMContext. This simplifies the ownership logic (i.e. can you have two instances of the same strategy at once?), but more importantly, allows us to access the GCStrategy in the middle end optimizer. To this end, I add an accessor through Function which becomes the canonical way to get at a GCStrategy instance.
In the near future, this will allows me to move some of the checks from http://reviews.llvm.org/D6808 into the Verifier itself, and to introduce optimization legality predicates for some of the recent additions to InstCombine. (These will follow as separate changes.)
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6811
llvm-svn: 226311
This change includes the most basic possible GCStrategy for a GC which is using the statepoint lowering code. At the moment, this GCStrategy doesn't really do much - aside from actually generate correct stackmaps that is - but I went ahead and added a few extra correctness checks as proof of concept. It's mostly here to provide documentation on how to do one, and to provide a point for various optimization legality hooks I'd like to add going forward. (For context, see the TODOs in InstCombine around gc.relocate.)
Most of the validation logic added here as proof of concept will soon move in to the Verifier. That move is dependent on http://reviews.llvm.org/D6811
There was discussion in the review thread about addrspace(1) being reserved for something. I'm going to follow up on a seperate llvmdev thread. If needed, I'll update all the code at once.
Note that I am deliberately not making a GCStrategy required to use gc.statepoints with this change. I want to give folks out of tree - including myself - a chance to migrate. In a week or two, I'll make having a GCStrategy be required for gc.statepoints. To this end, I added the gc tag to one of the test cases but not others.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6808
llvm-svn: 225365
This is the third patch in a small series. It contains the CodeGen support for lowering the gc.statepoint intrinsic sequences (223078) to the STATEPOINT pseudo machine instruction (223085). The change also includes the set of helper routines and classes for working with gc.statepoints, gc.relocates, and gc.results since the lowering code uses them.
With this change, gc.statepoints should be functionally complete. The documentation will follow in the fourth change, and there will likely be some cleanup changes, but interested parties can start experimenting now.
I'm not particularly happy with the amount of code or complexity involved with the lowering step, but at least it's fairly well isolated. The statepoint lowering code is split into it's own files and anyone not working on the statepoint support itself should be able to ignore it.
During the lowering process, we currently spill aggressively to stack. This is not entirely ideal (and we have plans to do better), but it's functional, relatively straight forward, and matches closely the implementations of the patchpoint intrinsics. Most of the complexity comes from trying to keep relocated copies of values in the same stack slots across statepoints. Doing so avoids the insertion of pointless load and store instructions to reshuffle the stack. The current implementation isn't as effective as I'd like, but it is functional and 'good enough' for many common use cases.
In the long term, I'd like to figure out how to integrate the statepoint lowering with the register allocator. In principal, we shouldn't need to eagerly spill at all. The register allocator should do any spilling required and the statepoint should simply record that fact. Depending on how challenging that turns out to be, we may invest in a smarter global stack slot assignment mechanism as a stop gap measure.
Reviewed by: atrick, ributzka
llvm-svn: 223137
Pat Gavlin