This commit fixes a bug in stack protector pass where edge weights were not set
when new basic blocks were added to lists of successor basic blocks.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D5766
llvm-svn: 222987
This is to be consistent with StringSet and ultimately with the standard
library's associative container insert function.
This lead to updating SmallSet::insert to return pair<iterator, bool>,
and then to update SmallPtrSet::insert to return pair<iterator, bool>,
and then to update all the existing users of those functions...
llvm-svn: 222334
Windows defines NULL to 0, which when used as an argument to a variadic
function, is not a null pointer constant. As a result, Clang's
-Wsentinel fires on this code. Using '0' would be wrong on most 64-bit
platforms, but both MSVC and Clang make it work on Windows. Sidestep the
issue with nullptr.
llvm-svn: 221940
define below all header includes in the lib/CodeGen/... tree. While the
current modules implementation doesn't check for this kind of ODR
violation yet, it is likely to grow support for it in the future. It
also removes one layer of macro pollution across all the included
headers.
Other sub-trees will follow.
llvm-svn: 206837
Previously, SSPBufferSize was assigned the value of the "stack-protector-buffer-size"
attribute after all uses of SSPBufferSize. The effect was that the default
SSPBufferSize was always used during analysis. I moved the check for the
attribute before the analysis; now --param ssp-buffer-size= works correctly again.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D3349
llvm-svn: 206486
This requires a number of steps.
1) Move value_use_iterator into the Value class as an implementation
detail
2) Change it to actually be a *Use* iterator rather than a *User*
iterator.
3) Add an adaptor which is a User iterator that always looks through the
Use to the User.
4) Wrap these in Value::use_iterator and Value::user_iterator typedefs.
5) Add the range adaptors as Value::uses() and Value::users().
6) Update *all* of the callers to correctly distinguish between whether
they wanted a use_iterator (and to explicitly dig out the User when
needed), or a user_iterator which makes the Use itself totally
opaque.
Because #6 requires churning essentially everything that walked the
Use-Def chains, I went ahead and added all of the range adaptors and
switched them to range-based loops where appropriate. Also because the
renaming requires at least churning every line of code, it didn't make
any sense to split these up into multiple commits -- all of which would
touch all of the same lies of code.
The result is still not quite optimal. The Value::use_iterator is a nice
regular iterator, but Value::user_iterator is an iterator over User*s
rather than over the User objects themselves. As a consequence, it fits
a bit awkwardly into the range-based world and it has the weird
extra-dereferencing 'operator->' that so many of our iterators have.
I think this could be fixed by providing something which transforms
a range of T&s into a range of T*s, but that *can* be separated into
another patch, and it isn't yet 100% clear whether this is the right
move.
However, this change gets us most of the benefit and cleans up
a substantial amount of code around Use and User. =]
llvm-svn: 203364
StackProtector keeps a ValueMap of alloca instructions to layout kind tags for
use by PEI and other later passes. When stack coloring replaces one alloca with
a bitcast to another one, the key replacement in this map does not work.
Instead, provide an interface to manage this updating directly. This seems like
an improvement over the old behavior, where the layout map would not get
updated at all when the stack slots were merged. In practice, however, there is
likely no observable difference because PEI only did anything special with
'large array' kinds, and if one large array is merged with another, than the
replacement should already have been a large array.
This is an attempt to unbreak the clang-x86_64-darwin11-RA builder.
llvm-svn: 199684
can be used by both the new pass manager and the old.
This removes it from any of the virtual mess of the pass interfaces and
lets it derive cleanly from the DominatorTreeBase<> template. In turn,
tons of boilerplate interface can be nuked and it turns into a very
straightforward extension of the base DominatorTree interface.
The old analysis pass is now a simple wrapper. The names and style of
this split should match the split between CallGraph and
CallGraphWrapperPass. All of the users of DominatorTree have been
updated to match using many of the same tricks as with CallGraph. The
goal is that the common type remains the resulting DominatorTree rather
than the pass. This will make subsequent work toward the new pass
manager significantly easier.
Also in numerous places things became cleaner because I switched from
re-running the pass (!!! mid way through some other passes run!!!) to
directly recomputing the domtree.
llvm-svn: 199104
subsequent changes are easier to review. About to fix some layering
issues, and wanted to separate out the necessary churn.
Also comment and sink the include of "Windows.h" in three .inc files to
match the usage in Memory.inc.
llvm-svn: 198685
This changes the MachineFrameInfo API to use the new SSPLayoutKind information
produced by the StackProtector pass (instead of a boolean flag) and updates a
few pass dependencies (to preserve the SSP analysis).
The stack layout follows the same approach used prior to this change - i.e.,
only LargeArray stack objects will be placed near the canary and everything
else will be laid out normally. After this change, structures containing large
arrays will also be placed near the canary - a case previously missed by the
old implementation.
Out of tree targets will need to update their usage of
MachineFrameInfo::CreateStackObject to remove the MayNeedSP argument.
The next patch will implement the rules for sspstrong and sspreq. The end goal
is to support ssp-strong stack layout rules.
WIP.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2158
llvm-svn: 197653
This modifies the pass to classify every SSP-triggering AllocaInst according to
an SSPLayoutKind (LargeArray, SmallArray, AddrOf). This analysis is collected
by the pass and made available for use, but no other pass uses it yet.
The next patch will make use of this analysis in PEI and StackSlot
passes. The end goal is to support ssp-strong stack layout rules.
WIP.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1789
llvm-svn: 193653
No functionality change. Future patches will add analysis which will be used
in other passes (PEI, StackSlot). The end goal is to support ssp-strong stack
layout rules.
WIP.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1521
llvm-svn: 191570
This patch decouples the stack protector pass so that we can support stack
protector implementations that do not use the IR level generated stack protector
fail basic block.
No codesize increase is caused by this change since the MI level tail merge pass
properly merges together the fail condition blocks (see the updated test).
llvm-svn: 188105
Use the function attributes to pass along the stack protector buffer size.
Now that we have robust function attributes, don't use a command line option to
specify the stack protecto buffer size.
llvm-svn: 186863
OpenBSD's stack smashing protection differs slightly from other
platforms:
1. The smash handler function is "__stack_smash_handler(const char
*funcname)" instead of "__stack_chk_fail(void)".
2. There's a hidden "long __guard_local" object that gets linked
into each executable and DSO.
Patch by Matthew Dempsky.
llvm-svn: 183533
The requirements of the strong heuristic are:
* A Protector is required for functions which contain an array, regardless of
type or length.
* A Protector is required for functions which contain a structure/union which
contains an array, regardless of type or length. Note, there is no limit to
the depth of nesting.
* A protector is required when the address of a local variable (i.e., stack
based variable) is exposed. (E.g., such as through a local whose address is
taken as part of the RHS of an assignment or a local whose address is taken as
part of a function argument.)
llvm-svn: 173231
SSPStrong applies a heuristic to insert stack protectors in these situations:
* A Protector is required for functions which contain an array, regardless of
type or length.
* A Protector is required for functions which contain a structure/union which
contains an array, regardless of type or length. Note, there is no limit to
the depth of nesting.
* A protector is required when the address of a local variable (i.e., stack
based variable) is exposed. (E.g., such as through a local whose address is
taken as part of the RHS of an assignment or a local whose address is taken as
part of a function argument.)
This patch implements the SSPString attribute to be equivalent to
SSPRequired. This will change in a subsequent patch.
llvm-svn: 173230
This fixes some of the cycles between libCodeGen and libSelectionDAG. It's still
a complete mess but as long as the edges consist of virtual call it doesn't
cause breakage. BasicTTI did static calls and thus broke some build
configurations.
llvm-svn: 172246
into their new header subdirectory: include/llvm/IR. This matches the
directory structure of lib, and begins to correct a long standing point
of file layout clutter in LLVM.
There are still more header files to move here, but I wanted to handle
them in separate commits to make tracking what files make sense at each
layer easier.
The only really questionable files here are the target intrinsic
tablegen files. But that's a battle I'd rather not fight today.
I've updated both CMake and Makefile build systems (I think, and my
tests think, but I may have missed something).
I've also re-sorted the includes throughout the project. I'll be
committing updates to Clang, DragonEgg, and Polly momentarily.
llvm-svn: 171366
directly.
This is in preparation for removing the use of the 'Attribute' class as a
collection of attributes. That will shift to the AttributeSet class instead.
llvm-svn: 171253
Sooooo many of these had incorrect or strange main module includes.
I have manually inspected all of these, and fixed the main module
include to be the nearest plausible thing I could find. If you own or
care about any of these source files, I encourage you to take some time
and check that these edits were sensible. I can't have broken anything
(I strictly added headers, and reordered them, never removed), but they
may not be the headers you'd really like to identify as containing the
API being implemented.
Many forward declarations and missing includes were added to a header
files to allow them to parse cleanly when included first. The main
module rule does in fact have its merits. =]
llvm-svn: 169131
We use the enums to query whether an Attributes object has that attribute. The
opaque layer is responsible for knowing where that specific attribute is stored.
llvm-svn: 165488
