This reverts commit r262370.
It turns out there is code out there that does sequences of allocas
greater than 4K: http://crbug.com/591404
The goal of this change was to improve the code size of inalloca call
sequences, but we got tangled up in the mess of dynamic allocas.
Instead, we should come back later with a separate MI pass that uses
dominance to optimize the full sequence. This should also be able to
remove the often unneeded stacksave/stackrestore pairs around the call.
llvm-svn: 262505
The _chkstk function is called by the compiler to probe the stack in an
order consistent with Windows' expectations. However, it is possible to
elide the call to _chkstk and manually adjust the stack pointer if we
can prove that the allocation is fixed size and smaller than the probe
size.
This shrinks chrome.dll, chrome_child.dll and chrome.exe by a
cummulative ~133 KB.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17679
llvm-svn: 262370
The CatchObjOffset is relative to the end of the EH registration node
for 32-bit x86 WinEH targets. A special sentinel value, 0, is used to
indicate that no catch object should be initialized.
This means that a catch object allocated immediately before the
registration node would be assigned a CatchObjOffset of 0, leading the
runtime to believe that a catch object should not be initialized.
To handle this, allocate the registration node prior to any other frame
object. This will ensure that catch objects will not be allocated
before the registration node.
This fixes PR26757.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17689
llvm-svn: 262294
32-bit x86 Windows targets use a linked-list of nodes allocated on the
stack, referenced to via thread-local storage. The personality routine
interprets one of the fields in the node as a 'state number' which
indicates where the personality routine should transfer control.
State transitions are possible only before call-sites which may throw
exceptions. Our previous scheme had us update the state number before
all call-sites which may throw.
Instead, we can try to minimize the number of times we need to store by
reasoning about the nearest store which dominates the current call-site.
If the last store agrees with the current call-site, then we know that
the state-update is redundant and can be elided.
This is largely straightforward: an RPO walk of the blocks allows us to
correctly forward propagate the information when the function is a DAG.
Currently, loops are not handled optimally and may trigger superfluous
state stores.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16763
llvm-svn: 261122
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
In particular, passing non-trivially copyable objects by value on win32
uses a dynamic alloca (inalloca). We would clobber ESP in the epilogue
and end up returning to outer space.
llvm-svn: 249637
Reid Kleckner