The motivation is that the update script has at least two deviations
(`<...>@GOT`/`<...>@PLT`/ and not hiding pointer arithmetics) from
what pretty much all the checklines were generated with,
and most of the tests are still not updated, so each time one of the
non-up-to-date tests is updated to see the effect of the code change,
there is a lot of noise. Instead of having to deal with that each
time, let's just deal with everything at once.
This has been done via:
```
cd llvm-project/llvm/test/CodeGen/X86
grep -rl "; NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_llc_test_checks.py" | xargs -L1 <...>/llvm-project/llvm/utils/update_llc_test_checks.py --llc-binary <...>/llvm-project/build/bin/llc
```
Not all tests were regenerated, however.
I don't like landing this change, but it's an acknowledgement of a practical reality. Despite not having well specified semantics for inttoptr and ptrtoint involving non-integral pointer types, they are used in practice. Here's a quick summary of the current pragmatic reality:
* I happen to know that the main external user of non-integral pointers has effectively disabled the verifier rules.
* RS4GC (the lowering pass for abstract GC machine model which is the key motivation for non-integral pointers), even supports them. We just have all the tests using an integral pointer space to let the verifier run.
* Certain idioms (such as alignment checks for alignment N, where any relocation is guaranteed to be N byte aligned) are fine in practice.
* As implemented, inttoptr/ptrtoint are CSEd and are not control dependent. This means that any code which is intending to check a particular bit pattern at site of use must be wrapped in an intrinsic or external function call.
This change allows them in the Verifier, and updates the LangRef to specific them as implementation dependent. This allows us to acknowledge current reality while still leaving ourselves room to punt on figuring out "good" semantics until the future.
This is a similarity visualization tool that accepts a Module and
passes it to the IRSimilarityIdentifier. The resulting SimilarityGroups
are output in a JSON file.
Tests are found in test/tools/llvm-sim and check for the file not found,
a bad module, and that the JSON is created correctly.
Reviewers: paquette, jroelofs, MaskRay
Recommit of: 15645d044bcfe2a0f63156048b302f997a717688 to fix linking
errors.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D86974
Also:
- add driver test (fsanitize-use-after-return.c)
- add basic IR test (asan-use-after-return.cpp)
- (NFC) cleaned up logic for generating table of __asan_stack_malloc
depending on flag.
for issue: https://github.com/google/sanitizers/issues/1394
Reviewed By: vitalybuka
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104076
It was found by chance revealing discrepancy between comment (few lines above),
the condition and how re-ordering of instruction is done inside the if statement
it guards. The condition was always evaluated to true.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104064
Register allocation may spill virtual registers to the stack, which can
increase alignment requirements of the stack frame. If the the function
did not require stack realignment before register allocation, the
registers required to do so may not be reserved/available. This results
in a stack frame that requires realignment but can not be realigned.
Instead, only increase the alignment of the stack if we are still able
to realign.
The register SpillAlignment will be ignored if we can't realign, and the
backend will be responsible for emitting the correct unaligned loads and
stores. This seems to be the assumed behaviour already, e.g.
ARMBaseInstrInfo::storeRegToStackSlot and X86InstrInfo::storeRegToStackSlot
are both `canRealignStack` aware.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103602
Adds the basic instrumentation needed for stack tagging.
Currently does not support stack short granules or TLS stack histories,
since a different code path is followed for the callback instrumentation
we use.
We may simply wait to support these two features until we switch to
a custom calling convention.
Patch By: xiangzhangllvm, morehouse
Reviewed By: vitalybuka
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102901
The problematic code pattern in the test is based on:
https://llvm.org/PR50638
If the IfCond is itself the phi that we are trying to remove,
then the loop around line 2835 can end up with something like:
%cmp = select i1 %cmp, i1 false, i1 true
That can then lead to a use-after-free and assert (although
I'm still not seeing that locally in my release + asserts build).
I think this can only happen with unreachable code.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104063
<string> is currently the highest impact header in a clang+llvm build:
https://commondatastorage.googleapis.com/chromium-browser-clang/llvm-include-analysis.html
One of the most common places this is being included is the APInt.h header, which needs it for an old toString() implementation that returns std::string - an inefficient method compared to the SmallString versions that it actually wraps.
This patch replaces these APInt/APSInt methods with a pair of llvm::toString() helpers inside StringExtras.h, adjusts users accordingly and removes the <string> from APInt.h - I was hoping that more of these users could be converted to use the SmallString methods, but it appears that most end up creating a std::string anyhow. I avoided trying to use the raw_ostream << operators as well as I didn't want to lose having the integer radix explicit in the code.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103888
GCC documentation for the `wa` constraint states that:
```
wa
A VSX register (VSR), vs0…vs63. This is either an FPR (vs0…vs31 are f0…f31)
or a VR (vs32…vs63 are v0…v31).
```
This technically means that we could accept floating point parameters. In fact,
gcc itself does. The following testcase compiles and runs on all PPC platforms with GCC,
whereas clang/llc will assert:
```
#include <stdio.h>
double foo ( vector double a ) {
double b, c;
asm("xvabsdp %x0, %x2 \n"
"xxsldwi %x1, %x0, %x0, 2 \n"
: "+wa" (b),
"=wa" (c)
: "wa" (a)
);
return b+c;
}
int main(void) {
vector double a = {-3., -4.};
double t = foo( a );
printf("%g\n", t);
}
```
This patch allows clang/llc to build and run this testcase.
Reviewed By: nemanjai, #powerpc
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103409
Re-applying this patch after bots failures. Should be fine now.
The function __multi3() is undefined on 32-bit ARM, so a call to it should
never be emitted. Instead, plain instructions need to be generated to
perform 128-bit multiplications.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103906
Added a case for CTPOP to AArch64TTIImpl::getIntrinsicInstrCost so that
the cost estimate matches the codegen in
test/CodeGen/AArch64/arm64-vpopcnt.ll
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103952
This has been reported several times by the PVS Studio team as well as coming up in some static analysis.
getRandom() % 1 always returns 0 so we never actually test this codepath, (git blame suggests this has always been like this) - given that we have plenty of other "getRandom() & 1" the typo is pretty obvious, and matches the intention in the comment above - with this change we generate a nice mixture of scalar/vector condition selects of vectors.
I don't know llvm-stress that well - but I don't think we guarantee that the same seed value will always generate the same IR for later versions of the program - just that the same binary would.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104022
We were passing the RecurrenceDescriptor by value to most of the reduction analysis methods, despite it being rather bulky with TrackingVH members (that can be costly to copy). In all these cases we're only using the RecurrenceDescriptor for rather basic purposes (access to types/kinds etc.).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104029
This adds a function specialization pass to LLVM. Constant parameters
like function pointers and constant globals are propagated to the callee by
specializing the function.
This is a first version with a number of limitations:
- The pass is off by default, so needs to be enabled on the command line,
- It does not handle specialization of recursive functions,
- It does not yet handle constants and constant ranges,
- Only 1 argument per function is specialised,
- The cost-model could be further looked into, and perhaps related,
- We are not yet caching analysis results.
This is based on earlier work by Matthew Simpson (D36432) and Vinay Madhusudan.
More recently this was also discussed on the list, see:
https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2021-March/149380.html.
The motivation for this work is that function specialisation often comes up as
a reason for performance differences of generated code between LLVM and GCC,
which has this enabled by default from optimisation level -O3 and up. And while
this certainly helps a few cpu benchmark cases, this also triggers in real
world codes and is thus a generally useful transformation to have in LLVM.
Function specialisation has great potential to increase compile-times and
code-size. The summary from some investigations with this patch is:
- Compile-time increases for short compile jobs is high relatively, but the
increase in absolute numbers still low.
- For longer compile-jobs, the extra compile time is around 1%, and very much
in line with GCC.
- It is difficult to blame one thing for compile-time increases: it looks like
everywhere a little bit more time is spent processing more functions and
instructions.
- But the function specialisation pass itself is not very expensive; it doesn't
show up very high in the profile of the optimisation passes.
The goal of this work is to reach parity with GCC which means that eventually
we would like to get this enabled by default. But first we would like to address
some of the limitations before that.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93838
Relaxing superclass constraint for VSX register classes helps reducing
32-byte spills and copies when register pressure is high.
In test case affected, some of them introduces more copies due to new
allocation order. However, this patch should not be the root cause, and
we may be able to fix it in other places of register allocation.
Reviewed By: nemanjai
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104006
When using FP to access stack objects, the scalable stack objects will
be put at the lower end of the frame. It looks like
```
|-------------------| <-- FP
| callee-saved regs |
|-------------------|
| scalar local vars |
|-------------------|
| RVV local vars |
|-------------------| <-- SP
```
If there are scalar arguments that need to pass through memory and there
are vector objects on the stack using FP to access. The outgoing scalar
arguments will overwrite the vector objects. It looks like
```
|-------------------| <-- FP
| callee-saved regs |
|-------------------|
| scalar local vars |
|-------------------| |-------------------|
| RVV local vars | | outgoing args | <- outgoing arguments
|-------------------| <-- SP |-------------------| overwrite from here.
```
In this patch, we reserve the stack for the outgoing arguments before
function calls if using FP to access and there are scalable vector frame
objects. It looks like
```
|-------------------| <-- FP
| callee-saved regs |
|-------------------|
| scalar local vars |
|-------------------|
| RVV local vars |
|-------------------|
| outgoing args |
|-------------------| <-- SP
```
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103622
This fixes the concern in single element store scalarization that the
alignment of new store may be larger than it should be. It calculates
the largest alignment if index is constant, and a safe one if not.
Reviewed By: lebedev.ri, spatel
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103419
