llvm-mirror/test/CodeGen/X86/dynamic-alloca-in-entry.ll

; RUN: llc < %s -mtriple=i686-pc-win32 | FileCheck %s

; Allocas with unknown size in the entry block are dynamic.
define void @foo(i32 %n) {
  %m = alloca i32, i32 %n
  ret void
}
; CHECK-LABEL: _foo:
; CHECK: calll __chkstk
; CHECK: retl

; Use of inalloca implies that that the alloca is not static.
define void @bar() {
  %m = alloca inalloca i32
  ret void
}
; CHECK-LABEL: _bar:
; CHECK: calll __chkstk
; CHECK: retl
Don't put non-static allocas in the static alloca map Allocas marked inalloca are never static, but we were trying to put them into the static alloca map if they were in the entry block. Also add an assertion in x86 fastisel. llvm-svn: 200593 2014-02-01 00:45:12 +01:00			`; RUN: llc < %s -mtriple=i686-pc-win32 \| FileCheck %s`

			`; Allocas with unknown size in the entry block are dynamic.`
			`define void @foo(i32 %n) {`
			`%m = alloca i32, i32 %n`
			`ret void`
			`}`
			`; CHECK-LABEL: _foo:`
			`; CHECK: calll __chkstk`
			`; CHECK: retl`

			`; Use of inalloca implies that that the alloca is not static.`
			`define void @bar() {`
IR: Change inalloca's grammar a bit The grammar for LLVM IR is not well specified in any document but seems to obey the following rules: - Attributes which have parenthesized arguments are never preceded by commas. This form of attribute is the only one which ever has optional arguments. However, not all of these attributes support optional arguments: 'thread_local' supports an optional argument but 'addrspace' does not. Interestingly, 'addrspace' is documented as being a "qualifier". What constitutes a qualifier? I cannot find a definition. - Some attributes use a space between the keyword and the value. Examples of this form are 'align' and 'section'. These are always preceded by a comma. - Otherwise, the attribute has no argument. These attributes do not have a preceding comma. Sometimes an attribute goes before the instruction, between the instruction and it's type, or after it's type. 'atomicrmw' has 'volatile' between the instruction and the type while 'call' has 'tail' preceding the instruction. With all this in mind, it seems most consistent for 'inalloca' on an 'inalloca' instruction to occur before between the instruction and the type. Unlike the current formulation, there would be no preceding comma. The combination 'alloca inalloca' doesn't look particularly appetizing, perhaps a better spelling of 'inalloca' is down the road. llvm-svn: 203376 2014-03-09 07:41:58 +01:00			`%m = alloca inalloca i32`
Don't put non-static allocas in the static alloca map Allocas marked inalloca are never static, but we were trying to put them into the static alloca map if they were in the entry block. Also add an assertion in x86 fastisel. llvm-svn: 200593 2014-02-01 00:45:12 +01:00			`ret void`
			`}`
			`; CHECK-LABEL: _bar:`
			`; CHECK: calll __chkstk`
			`; CHECK: retl`