Commit Graph

3 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Joseph Tremoulet 52f729a613 [WinEH] Update CoreCLR EH state numbering
Summary:
Fix the CLR state numbering to generate correct tables, and update the lit
test to verify them.

The CLR numbering assigns one state number to each catchpad and
cleanuppad.

It also computes two tree-like relations over states:
 1) Each state has a "HandlerParentState", which is the state of the next
    outer handler enclosing this state's handler (same as nearest ancestor
    per the ParentPad linkage on EH pads, but skipping over catchswitches).
 2) Each state has a "TryParentState", which:
    a) for a catchpad that's not the last handler on its catchswitch, is
       the state of the next catchpad on that catchswitch.
    b) for all other pads, is the state of the pad whose try region is the
       next outer try region enclosing this state's try region.  The "try
       regions are not present as such in the IR, but will be inferred
       based on the placement of invokes and pads which reach each other
       by exceptional exits.

Catchswitches do not get their own states, but each gets mapped to the
state of its first catchpad.

Table generation requires each state's "unwind dest" state to have a lower
state number than the given state.

Since HandlerParentState can be computed as a function of a pad's
ParentPad, and TryParentState can be computed as a function of its unwind
dest and the TryParentStates of its children, the CLR state numbering
algorithm first computes HandlerParentState in a top-down pass, then
computes TryParentState in a bottom-up pass.

Also reword some comments/names in the CLR EH table generation to make the
distinction between the different kinds of "parent" clear.


Reviewers: rnk, andrew.w.kaylor, majnemer

Subscribers: AndyAyers, llvm-commits

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15325

llvm-svn: 256760
2016-01-04 16:16:01 +00:00
David Majnemer 3bb88c0210 [WinEH] Use operand bundles to describe call sites
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
2015-12-15 21:27:27 +00:00
David Majnemer 8a1c45d6e8 [IR] Reformulate LLVM's EH funclet IR
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
2015-12-12 05:38:55 +00:00