This makes LiveRange non-copyable, and LiveInterval is already
non-movable (due to the explicit dtor), so now it's non-copyable and
non-movable.
Fix the one case where we were relying on the (deprecated in C++11)
implicit copy ctor of LiveInterval (which happened to work because the
ctor created an object with a null segmentSet, so double-deleting the
null pointer was fine).
llvm-svn: 231168
Introduce -mllvm -sanitizer-coverage-8bit-counters=1
which adds imprecise thread-unfriendly 8-bit coverage counters.
The run-time library maps these 8-bit counters to 8-bit bitsets in the same way
AFL (http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/afl/technical_details.txt) does:
counter values are divided into 8 ranges and based on the counter
value one of the bits in the bitset is set.
The AFL ranges are used here: 1, 2, 3, 4-7, 8-15, 16-31, 32-127, 128+.
These counters provide a search heuristic for single-threaded
coverage-guided fuzzers, we do not expect them to be useful for other purposes.
Depending on the value of -fsanitize-coverage=[123] flag,
these counters will be added to the function entry blocks (=1),
every basic block (=2), or every edge (=3).
Use these counters as an optional search heuristic in the Fuzzer library.
Add a test where this heuristic is critical.
llvm-svn: 231166
Ultimately, we'll need to leave something behind to indicate which
alloca will hold the exception, but we can figure that out when it comes
time to emit the __CxxFrameHandler3 catch handler table.
llvm-svn: 231164
Selection conditions may be vectors or scalars. Make sure InstCombine
doesn't indiscriminately assume that a select which is value dependent
on another select have identical select condition types.
This fixes PR22773.
llvm-svn: 231156
From:
int M, total;
void foo() {
int i;
for (i = 0; i < M; i++) {
total = total + i / 2;
}
}
This is the kernel loop:
.LBB0_2: # %for.body
=>This Inner Loop Header: Depth=1
movl %edx, %esi
movl %ecx, %edx
shrl $31, %edx
addl %ecx, %edx
sarl %edx
addl %esi, %edx
incl %ecx
cmpl %eax, %ecx
jl .LBB0_2
--------------------------
The first mov insn "movl %edx, %esi" could be removed if we change "addl %esi, %edx" to "addl %edx, %esi".
The IR before TwoAddressInstructionPass is:
BB#2: derived from LLVM BB %for.body
Predecessors according to CFG: BB#1 BB#2
%vreg3<def> = COPY %vreg12<kill>; GR32:%vreg3,%vreg12
%vreg2<def> = COPY %vreg11<kill>; GR32:%vreg2,%vreg11
%vreg7<def,tied1> = SHR32ri %vreg3<tied0>, 31, %EFLAGS<imp-def,dead>; GR32:%vreg7,%vreg3
%vreg8<def,tied1> = ADD32rr %vreg3<tied0>, %vreg7<kill>, %EFLAGS<imp-def,dead>; GR32:%vreg8,%vreg3,%vreg7
%vreg9<def,tied1> = SAR32r1 %vreg8<kill,tied0>, %EFLAGS<imp-def,dead>; GR32:%vreg9,%vreg8
%vreg4<def,tied1> = ADD32rr %vreg9<kill,tied0>, %vreg2<kill>, %EFLAGS<imp-def,dead>; GR32:%vreg4,%vreg9,%vreg2
%vreg5<def,tied1> = INC64_32r %vreg3<kill,tied0>, %EFLAGS<imp-def,dead>; GR32:%vreg5,%vreg3
CMP32rr %vreg5, %vreg0, %EFLAGS<imp-def>; GR32:%vreg5,%vreg0
%vreg11<def> = COPY %vreg4; GR32:%vreg11,%vreg4
%vreg12<def> = COPY %vreg5<kill>; GR32:%vreg12,%vreg5
JL_4 <BB#2>, %EFLAGS<imp-use,kill>
Now TwoAddressInstructionPass will choose vreg9 to be tied with vreg4. However, it doesn't see that there is copy from vreg4 to vreg11 and another copy from vreg11 to vreg2 inside the loop body. To remove those copies, it is necessary to choose vreg2 to be tied with vreg4 instead of vreg9. This code pattern commonly appears when there is reduction operation in a loop.
So check for a reversed copy chain and if we encounter one then we can commute the add instruction so we can avoid a copy.
Patch by Wei Mi.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D7806
llvm-svn: 231148
Summary:
This does not conceptually belongs here. Instead provide a shortcut
getModule() that provides access to the DataLayout.
Reviewers: chandlerc, echristo
Reviewed By: echristo
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D8027
From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com>
llvm-svn: 231147
I removed the copy ctor, thinking that'd be the end of it - these
iterators should be perfectly assignable even from disjoint ranges (as
any iterator would be) - exkcept that the member was const.
Unconstify it.
llvm-svn: 231146
The assertion was just checking a class invariant that's pretty easy to
verify by inspection (no mutating operations, and the two non-copy ctors
already ensure the state is maintained) so remove the explicit copy ctor
in favor of the default, thus allowing the use of the default copy
assignment operator without hitting the C++11 deprecation here.
llvm-svn: 231143
There's no reason to disallow assigning an iterator from one range to an
iterator that previously iterated over a disjoint range. This then
follows the Rule of Zero, allowing implicit copy construction to be used
without hitting the case that's deprecated in C++11.
llvm-svn: 231142
There doesn't seem to be any need to assert that iterator assignment is
between iterators over the same node - if you want to reuse an iterator
variable to iterate another node, that's perfectly acceptable. Just
don't mix comparisons between iterators into disjoint sequences, as
usual.
llvm-svn: 231138
Accidentally committed a few more of these cleanup changes than
intended. Still breaking these out & tidying them up.
This reverts commit r231135.
llvm-svn: 231136
There doesn't seem to be any need to assert that iterator assignment is
between iterators over the same node - if you want to reuse an iterator
variable to iterate another node, that's perfectly acceptable. Just
don't mix comparisons between iterators into disjoint sequences, as
usual.
llvm-svn: 231135
There doesn't seem to be any need to assert that iterator assignment is
between iterators over the same node - if you want to reuse an iterator
variable to iterate another node, that's perfectly acceptable. Just
don't mix comparisons between iterators into disjoint sequences, as
usual.
llvm-svn: 231134
This type could be made copyable (= default a protected copy ctor in the
base class, and preferably make the derived class final to avoid risks
of providing a slicing copy operation to further derived classes) but it
seemed easier to avoid that complexity for a dump function that I assume
(by symmetry with ResourcePriorityQueue's dump, which was actively
buggy) not often used.
llvm-svn: 231133
Previously we had only Linux using DTPOFF for these; all X86 ELF
targets should. Fixes a side issue mentioned in PR21077.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D8011
llvm-svn: 231130
This patch was landed in r231035 and reverted because it was buggy.
This is fixed version of the same change.
Summary:
This patch is an attempt at making `DenseMapIterator`s "fail-fast".
Fail-fast iterators that have been invalidated due to insertion into
the host `DenseMap` deterministically trip an assert (in debug mode)
on access, instead of non-deterministically hitting memory corruption
issues.
Reviewers: dexonsmith, dberlin, ruiu, chandlerc
Reviewed By: chandlerc
Subscribers: yaron.keren, chandlerc, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7931
llvm-svn: 231125
frame register before checking if there is a DWARF register number for it.
Thanks to H.J. Lu for diagnosing this and providing the testcase!
llvm-svn: 231121
Without this, use of this copy ctor is deprecated in C++11 due to the
presence of a user-declared dtor.
Marking the class final is just a little extra security that there are
no further derived classes that may then end up using the intermediate
base class's copy assignment operator and cause slicing to occur.
I didn't bother marking the other (non-test) base class final, since it
has reference members so it won't have any implicit assignment operators
anyway. Open to ideas on that, though.
We probably want a warning about use of a slicing assignment operator,
then I wouldn't worry so much about marking the class as final.
llvm-svn: 231114
The cause of the issue is the interaction of two factors:
1) When generating a DW_TAG_imported_declaration DIE which imports another
imported declaration, the code in AsmPrinter/DwarfCompileUnit.cpp
asserts that the second imported declaration must already have a DIE.
2) There is a non-determinism in the order in which imported declarations
within the same scope are processed.
Because of the non-determinism (2), it is possible that an imported
declaration is processed before another one it depends on, breaking the
assumption in (1).
The source of the non-determinism is that the imported declaration
DIDescriptors are sorted by scope in DwarfDebug::beginModule(); however that
sort is not a stable_sort, therefore the order of the declarations within
the same scope is not preserved. The attached patch changes the std::sort to
a std::stable_sort and it fixes the problem.
Test omitted due to it being non-deterministic and depending on the
implementation of std::sort.
llvm-svn: 231100
I tried making these private & friended to the BitVector, but that
didn't work - there's one use of BitVector::reference in Clang that
actually copies it into a local variable & uses it from there, rather
than just using the result of op[] in a temporary expression.
Whether or not this is desired is debatable (we could just fix that one
use in Clang) & it's not clear which way the C++ standard falls on this
for std::bitset's reference type (it has the same bug at least in
libstdc++, but Clang's -Wdeprecated doesn't flag it, because it's in a
standard header)
While it was only BitVector::reference's copy ctor that was referenced
by user code, I made SmallBitVector::reference's copy ctor public too,
for consistency.
llvm-svn: 231099
