Because of typo-correction, the AST can be transformed, and the transformed
AST is marginally useful for diagnostics purpose, the following
diagnostics usually do harm than good (easily cause confusions).
Given the following code:
```
void abcc();
void test() {
if (abc());
// diagnostic 1 (for the typo-correction): the typo is correct to `abcc()`, so the code is treate as `if (abcc())` in AST perspective;
// diagnostic 2 (for mismatch type): we perform an type-analysis on `if`, discover the type is not match
}
```
The secondary diagnostic "convertable to bool" is likely bogus to users.
The idea is to use RecoveryExpr (clang's dependent mechanism) to preserve the
recovery behavior but suppress all follow-up diagnostics.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D89946
Displaying large packed bitfields did not work if one was accessing them
through a pointer, and he used the "->" notation ("[0]." notation is
fine). The reason for that is that implicit dereference in -> is plumbed
all the way down to ValueObjectChild::UpdateValue, where the process of
fetching the child value was forked for this flag. The bitfield
"sliding" code was implemented only for the branch which did not require
dereferencing.
This patch restructures the function to avoid this mistake. Processing
now happens in two stages.
- first the parent is dereferenced (if needed)
- then the child value is computed (this step includes sliding and is
common for both branches)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D89236
Ensure that xs_xstate_bv is set correctly before calling
WriteRegisterSet(). The bit can be clear if the relevant registers
were at their initial state when they were read, and it needs to be set
in order to apply changes from the XState structure.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90105
Reset registers to their 'initial' state instead of a semi-random
pattern in write tests. While the latter might have been helpful
while debugging failures (i.e. to distinguish unmodified registers
from mistakenly written zeroes), the former makes it possible to test
whether xstate_bv field is written correctly when using XSAVE.
With this change, the four relevant tests start failing on NetBSD
without D90105.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90114
2 Bug fixes:
- Do not resolve procedure as intrinsic if they appeared in an
EXTERNAL attribute statement (one path was not considering this flag)
- Emit an error if a procedure resolved to be an intrinsic function
(resp. subroutine) is used as a subroutine (resp. function).
Lowering was attempted while the evaluate::Expression for the
call was missing without any errors.
1 behavior change:
- Do not implicitly resolve subroutines (resp. functions) as intrinsics
because their name is the name of an intrinsic function (resp.
subroutine). Add justification in documentation.
Reviewed By: klausler, tskeith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90049
This allows using annotation in a much more contexts than it currently has.
especially when annotation with template or constexpr.
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D88645
This patch adds a remarks that provides counts for each opcode per basic block.
An snippet of the generated information can be seen below.
The current implementation uses the target specific opcode for the counts. For example, on AArch64 this means we currently get 2 entries for `add` instructions if the block contains 32 and 64 bit adds. Similarly, immediate version are treated differently.
Unfortunately there seems to be no convenient way to get only the mnemonic part of the instruction as a string AFAIK. This could be improved in the future.
```
--- !Analysis
Pass: asm-printer
Name: InstructionMix
DebugLoc: { File: arm64-instruction-mix-remarks.ll, Line: 30, Column: 30 }
Function: foo
Args:
- String: 'BasicBlock: '
- BasicBlock: else
- String: "\n"
- String: INST_MADDWrrr
- String: ': '
- INST_MADDWrrr: '2'
- String: "\n"
- String: INST_MOVZWi
- String: ': '
- INST_MOVZWi: '1'
```
Reviewed By: anemet, thegameg, paquette
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D89892
If no pal metadata is given, default to the msgpack format instead of
the legacy metadata. This makes tests better readable.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90035
Support atomic load instruction and add a regression test.
VE uses release consitency, so need to insert fence around
atomic instructions. This patch enable AtomicExpandPass
and use emitLeadingFence and emitTrailingFence mechanism
for such purpose.
Reviewed By: simoll
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90135
This adds a MultiHazardRecognizer and starts to make use of it in the
ARM backend. The idea of the class is to allow multiple independent
hazard recognizers to be added to a single base MultiHazardRecognizer,
allowing them to all work in parallel without requiring them to be
chained into subclasses. They can then be added or not based on cpu or
subtarget features, which will become useful in the ARM backend once
more hazard recognizers are being used for various things.
This also renames ARMHazardRecognizer to ARMHazardRecognizerFPMLx in the
process, to more clearly explain what that recognizer is designed for.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D72939
Support atomic fence instruction and add a regression test.
Add MEMBARRIER pseudo insturction also to use it as a barrier
against to the compiler optimizations.
Reviewed By: simoll
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90112
We use an absolute address for stack objects and
it would be necessary to have a constant 0 for soffset field.
Fixes: SWDEV-228562
Reviewed By: arsenm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D89234
The 0xf3 prefix has been defined as wbnoinvd on Icelake Server. So
the prefix isn't ignored by the CPU. AMD documentation suggests that
wbnoinvd is treated as wbinvd on older processors. Intel documentation
is not clear. Perhaps 0xf2 and 0x66 are treated the same, but its
not documented.
This patch changes TB to PS in the td file so 0xf2 and 0x66 will
be treated as errors. This matches versions of objdump after
wbnoinvd was added.
For now, we lost the encoding information if we using inline assembly.
The encoding for the inline assembly will keep default even if we add
the vex/evex prefix.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90009
This is a modified 2nd try of 22d10b8ab4
(reverted by 1c8371692d because it managed
to expose an existing crashing bug that should be fixed by
74ffc823 ).
Original commit message:
This is similar in spirit to 01ea93d85d (memcpy) except that
here the underlying caller assumptions were created for vectorizer
use (throughput) rather than other passes.
That meant targets could have an enormous throughput cost with no
corresponding size, latency, or blended cost increase.
The ARM costs show a small difference between throughput and
size because there's an underlying difference in cmp/sel
costs that is also predicated on cost-kind.
Paraphrasing from the previous commits:
This may not make sense for some callers, but at least now the
costs will be consistently wrong instead of mysteriously wrong.
Targets should provide better overrides if the current modeling
is not accurate.
I'm not sure if/how this ever worked, but it must not be tested
currently because the basic tests added here were crashing as
noted in the post-review comments for 1c83716 (which reverted
another cost-model fix in 22d10b8ab4).
Same change as 0dda633317, but for
mul expressions. We want to first fold any constant operans and
then strengthen the nowrap flags, as we can compute more precise
flags at that point.
The constructor of Project asserts that the contained ValueDecl is not
null, use that in the ThreadSafetyAnalyzer. In the case of LiteralPtr
it's the other way around.
Also dyn_cast<> is sufficient if we know something isn't null.
Instead of just mutex members we also consider mutex globals.
Unsurprisingly they are always in scope. Now the paper [1] says that
> The scope of a class member is assumed to be its enclosing class,
> while the scope of a global variable is the translation unit in
> which it is defined.
But I don't think we should limit this to TUs where a definition is
available - a declaration is enough to acquire the mutex, and if a mutex
is really limited in scope to a translation unit, it should probably be
only declared there.
The previous attempt in 9dcc82f34e was causing false positives because
I wrongly assumed that LiteralPtrs were always globals, which they are
not. This should be fixed now.
[1] https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.com/en/us/pubs/archive/42958.pdf
Fixes PR46354.
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D84604
Establish parity with the handling of add expressions, by always
constant folding mul expression operands before checking the depth
limit (this is a non-recursive simplification). The code was already
unconditionally constant folding the case where all operands were
constants, but was not folding multiple constant operands together
if there were also non-constant operands.
This requires picking out a different demonstration for depth-based
folding differences in the limit-depth.ll test.
Separate out the code handling constant folding into a separate
block, that is independent of other folds that need a constant
first operand. Also make some minor adjustments to make the
constant folding look nearly identical to the same code in
getAddExpr().
The only reason this change is not strictly NFC is that the
C1*(C2+V) fold is moved below the constant folding, which means
that it now also applies to C1*C2*(C3+V), as it should.
We should first try to constant fold the add expression and only
strengthen nowrap flags afterwards. This allows us to determine
stronger flags if e.g. only two operands are left after constant
folding (and thus "guaranteed no wrap region" code applies) or the
resulting operands are non-negative and thus nsw->nuw strengthening
applies.
This extends D78430 to solve cases like:
https://llvm.org/PR47858
There are still missed opportunities shown in the tests,
and as noted in the earlier patches, we have related
functionality in InstCombine, so we may want to extend
other folds in a similar way.
A semi-random sampling of test diff proofs in this patch:
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/sS4C
Haojian Wu