RPCS3/llvm-mirror
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/RPCS3/llvm-mirror.git synced 2024-11-25 04:02:41 +01:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity
02363cd9ec
llvm-mirror/test/CodeGen/ARM/invoke-donothing-assert.ll

74 lines
1.9 KiB
LLVM
Raw Normal View History

SelectionDAG: If llvm.donothing has a landingpad, we should clear CurrentCallSite to avoid an assertion failure: assert(MMI.getCurrentCallSite() == 0 && "Overlapping call sites!"); rdar://problem/13228754 llvm-svn: 176154
2013-02-27 03:11:57 +01:00
; RUN: llc < %s -mtriple=armv7-apple-ios | FileCheck %s
; This testcase makes sure we can handle invoke @llvm.donothing without
; assertion failure.
Revert r176154 in favor of a better approach. Code generation makes some basic assumptions about the IR it's been given. In particular, if there is only one 'invoke' in the function, then that invoke won't be going away. However, with the advent of the `llvm.donothing' intrinsic, those invokes may go away. If all of them go away, the landing pad no longer has any users. This confuses the back-end, which asserts. This happens with SjLj exceptions, because that's the model that modifies the IR based on there being invokes, etc. in the function. Remove any invokes of `llvm.donothing' during SjLj EH preparation. This will give us a CFG that the back-end won't be confused about. If all of the invokes in a function are removed, then the SjLj EH prepare pass won't insert the bogus code the relies upon the invokes being there. <rdar://problem/13228754&13316637> llvm-svn: 176677
2013-03-08 03:21:08 +01:00
; <rdar://problem/13228754> & <rdar://problem/13316637>
SelectionDAG: If llvm.donothing has a landingpad, we should clear CurrentCallSite to avoid an assertion failure: assert(MMI.getCurrentCallSite() == 0 && "Overlapping call sites!"); rdar://problem/13228754 llvm-svn: 176154
2013-02-27 03:11:57 +01:00
Revert r176154 in favor of a better approach. Code generation makes some basic assumptions about the IR it's been given. In particular, if there is only one 'invoke' in the function, then that invoke won't be going away. However, with the advent of the `llvm.donothing' intrinsic, those invokes may go away. If all of them go away, the landing pad no longer has any users. This confuses the back-end, which asserts. This happens with SjLj exceptions, because that's the model that modifies the IR based on there being invokes, etc. in the function. Remove any invokes of `llvm.donothing' during SjLj EH preparation. This will give us a CFG that the back-end won't be confused about. If all of the invokes in a function are removed, then the SjLj EH prepare pass won't insert the bogus code the relies upon the invokes being there. <rdar://problem/13228754&13316637> llvm-svn: 176677
2013-03-08 03:21:08 +01:00
; CHECK: .globl _foo
Move the personality function from LandingPadInst to Function The personality routine currently lives in the LandingPadInst. This isn't desirable because: - All LandingPadInsts in the same function must have the same personality routine. This means that each LandingPadInst beyond the first has an operand which produces no additional information. - There is ongoing work to introduce EH IR constructs other than LandingPadInst. Moving the personality routine off of any one particular Instruction and onto the parent function seems a lot better than have N different places a personality function can sneak onto an exceptional function. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D10429 llvm-svn: 239940
2015-06-17 22:52:32 +02:00
define void @foo() personality i8* bitcast (i32 (...)* @__gxx_personality_sj0 to i8*) {
SelectionDAG: If llvm.donothing has a landingpad, we should clear CurrentCallSite to avoid an assertion failure: assert(MMI.getCurrentCallSite() == 0 && "Overlapping call sites!"); rdar://problem/13228754 llvm-svn: 176154
2013-02-27 03:11:57 +01:00
invoke.cont:
invoke void @callA()
to label %invoke.cont25 unwind label %lpad2
invoke.cont25:
invoke void @llvm.donothing()
to label %invoke.cont27 unwind label %lpad15
invoke.cont27:
invoke void @callB()
to label %invoke.cont75 unwind label %lpad15
invoke.cont75:
ret void
lpad2:
Move the personality function from LandingPadInst to Function The personality routine currently lives in the LandingPadInst. This isn't desirable because: - All LandingPadInsts in the same function must have the same personality routine. This means that each LandingPadInst beyond the first has an operand which produces no additional information. - There is ongoing work to introduce EH IR constructs other than LandingPadInst. Moving the personality routine off of any one particular Instruction and onto the parent function seems a lot better than have N different places a personality function can sneak onto an exceptional function. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D10429 llvm-svn: 239940
2015-06-17 22:52:32 +02:00
%0 = landingpad { i8*, i32 }
SelectionDAG: If llvm.donothing has a landingpad, we should clear CurrentCallSite to avoid an assertion failure: assert(MMI.getCurrentCallSite() == 0 && "Overlapping call sites!"); rdar://problem/13228754 llvm-svn: 176154
2013-02-27 03:11:57 +01:00
cleanup
br label %eh.resume
lpad15:
Move the personality function from LandingPadInst to Function The personality routine currently lives in the LandingPadInst. This isn't desirable because: - All LandingPadInsts in the same function must have the same personality routine. This means that each LandingPadInst beyond the first has an operand which produces no additional information. - There is ongoing work to introduce EH IR constructs other than LandingPadInst. Moving the personality routine off of any one particular Instruction and onto the parent function seems a lot better than have N different places a personality function can sneak onto an exceptional function. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D10429 llvm-svn: 239940
2015-06-17 22:52:32 +02:00
%1 = landingpad { i8*, i32 }
SelectionDAG: If llvm.donothing has a landingpad, we should clear CurrentCallSite to avoid an assertion failure: assert(MMI.getCurrentCallSite() == 0 && "Overlapping call sites!"); rdar://problem/13228754 llvm-svn: 176154
2013-02-27 03:11:57 +01:00
cleanup
br label %eh.resume
eh.resume:
resume { i8*, i32 } zeroinitializer
}
Revert r176154 in favor of a better approach. Code generation makes some basic assumptions about the IR it's been given. In particular, if there is only one 'invoke' in the function, then that invoke won't be going away. However, with the advent of the `llvm.donothing' intrinsic, those invokes may go away. If all of them go away, the landing pad no longer has any users. This confuses the back-end, which asserts. This happens with SjLj exceptions, because that's the model that modifies the IR based on there being invokes, etc. in the function. Remove any invokes of `llvm.donothing' during SjLj EH preparation. This will give us a CFG that the back-end won't be confused about. If all of the invokes in a function are removed, then the SjLj EH prepare pass won't insert the bogus code the relies upon the invokes being there. <rdar://problem/13228754&13316637> llvm-svn: 176677
2013-03-08 03:21:08 +01:00
; CHECK: .globl _bar
Move the personality function from LandingPadInst to Function The personality routine currently lives in the LandingPadInst. This isn't desirable because: - All LandingPadInsts in the same function must have the same personality routine. This means that each LandingPadInst beyond the first has an operand which produces no additional information. - There is ongoing work to introduce EH IR constructs other than LandingPadInst. Moving the personality routine off of any one particular Instruction and onto the parent function seems a lot better than have N different places a personality function can sneak onto an exceptional function. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D10429 llvm-svn: 239940
2015-06-17 22:52:32 +02:00
define linkonce_odr void @bar(i32* %a) personality i8* bitcast (i32 (...)* @__gxx_personality_sj0 to i8*) {
Revert r176154 in favor of a better approach. Code generation makes some basic assumptions about the IR it's been given. In particular, if there is only one 'invoke' in the function, then that invoke won't be going away. However, with the advent of the `llvm.donothing' intrinsic, those invokes may go away. If all of them go away, the landing pad no longer has any users. This confuses the back-end, which asserts. This happens with SjLj exceptions, because that's the model that modifies the IR based on there being invokes, etc. in the function. Remove any invokes of `llvm.donothing' during SjLj EH preparation. This will give us a CFG that the back-end won't be confused about. If all of the invokes in a function are removed, then the SjLj EH prepare pass won't insert the bogus code the relies upon the invokes being there. <rdar://problem/13228754&13316637> llvm-svn: 176677
2013-03-08 03:21:08 +01:00
if.end.i.i.i:
invoke void @llvm.donothing()
to label %call.i.i.i.noexc unwind label %eh.resume
call.i.i.i.noexc:
br i1 false, label %cleanup, label %new.notnull.i.i
new.notnull.i.i:
br label %cleanup
cleanup:
[opaque pointer type] Add textual IR support for explicit type parameter to load instruction Essentially the same as the GEP change in r230786. A similar migration script can be used to update test cases, though a few more test case improvements/changes were required this time around: (r229269-r229278) import fileinput import sys import re pat = re.compile(r"((?:=|:|^)\s*load (?:atomic )?(?:volatile )?(.*?))(| addrspace\(\d+\) *)\*($| *(?:%|@|null|undef|blockaddress|getelementptr|addrspacecast|bitcast|inttoptr|\[\[[a-zA-Z]|\{\{).*$)") for line in sys.stdin: sys.stdout.write(re.sub(pat, r"\1, \2\3*\4", line)) Reviewers: rafael, dexonsmith, grosser Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7649 llvm-svn: 230794
2015-02-27 22:17:42 +01:00
%0 = load i32, i32* %a, align 4
Revert r176154 in favor of a better approach. Code generation makes some basic assumptions about the IR it's been given. In particular, if there is only one 'invoke' in the function, then that invoke won't be going away. However, with the advent of the `llvm.donothing' intrinsic, those invokes may go away. If all of them go away, the landing pad no longer has any users. This confuses the back-end, which asserts. This happens with SjLj exceptions, because that's the model that modifies the IR based on there being invokes, etc. in the function. Remove any invokes of `llvm.donothing' during SjLj EH preparation. This will give us a CFG that the back-end won't be confused about. If all of the invokes in a function are removed, then the SjLj EH prepare pass won't insert the bogus code the relies upon the invokes being there. <rdar://problem/13228754&13316637> llvm-svn: 176677
2013-03-08 03:21:08 +01:00
%inc294 = add nsw i32 %0, 4
store i32 %inc294, i32* %a, align 4
br i1 false, label %_ZN3lol5ArrayIivvvvvvvED1Ev.exit, label %delete.notnull.i.i.i1409
delete.notnull.i.i.i1409:
br label %_ZN3lol5ArrayIivvvvvvvED1Ev.exit
_ZN3lol5ArrayIivvvvvvvED1Ev.exit:
ret void
eh.resume:
Move the personality function from LandingPadInst to Function The personality routine currently lives in the LandingPadInst. This isn't desirable because: - All LandingPadInsts in the same function must have the same personality routine. This means that each LandingPadInst beyond the first has an operand which produces no additional information. - There is ongoing work to introduce EH IR constructs other than LandingPadInst. Moving the personality routine off of any one particular Instruction and onto the parent function seems a lot better than have N different places a personality function can sneak onto an exceptional function. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D10429 llvm-svn: 239940
2015-06-17 22:52:32 +02:00
%1 = landingpad { i8*, i32 }
Revert r176154 in favor of a better approach. Code generation makes some basic assumptions about the IR it's been given. In particular, if there is only one 'invoke' in the function, then that invoke won't be going away. However, with the advent of the `llvm.donothing' intrinsic, those invokes may go away. If all of them go away, the landing pad no longer has any users. This confuses the back-end, which asserts. This happens with SjLj exceptions, because that's the model that modifies the IR based on there being invokes, etc. in the function. Remove any invokes of `llvm.donothing' during SjLj EH preparation. This will give us a CFG that the back-end won't be confused about. If all of the invokes in a function are removed, then the SjLj EH prepare pass won't insert the bogus code the relies upon the invokes being there. <rdar://problem/13228754&13316637> llvm-svn: 176677
2013-03-08 03:21:08 +01:00
cleanup
%2 = extractvalue { i8*, i32 } %1, 0
%3 = extractvalue { i8*, i32 } %1, 1
%lpad.val = insertvalue { i8*, i32 } undef, i8* %2, 0
%lpad.val395 = insertvalue { i8*, i32 } %lpad.val, i32 %3, 1
resume { i8*, i32 } %lpad.val395
}
declare void @callA()
SelectionDAG: If llvm.donothing has a landingpad, we should clear CurrentCallSite to avoid an assertion failure: assert(MMI.getCurrentCallSite() == 0 && "Overlapping call sites!"); rdar://problem/13228754 llvm-svn: 176154
2013-02-27 03:11:57 +01:00
declare void @callB()
declare void @llvm.donothing() nounwind readnone
Revert r176154 in favor of a better approach. Code generation makes some basic assumptions about the IR it's been given. In particular, if there is only one 'invoke' in the function, then that invoke won't be going away. However, with the advent of the `llvm.donothing' intrinsic, those invokes may go away. If all of them go away, the landing pad no longer has any users. This confuses the back-end, which asserts. This happens with SjLj exceptions, because that's the model that modifies the IR based on there being invokes, etc. in the function. Remove any invokes of `llvm.donothing' during SjLj EH preparation. This will give us a CFG that the back-end won't be confused about. If all of the invokes in a function are removed, then the SjLj EH prepare pass won't insert the bogus code the relies upon the invokes being there. <rdar://problem/13228754&13316637> llvm-svn: 176677
2013-03-08 03:21:08 +01:00
declare i32 @__gxx_personality_sj0(...)
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink