Add a brief section linking to the experimental statepoint intrinsics analogous to the one we have linking to patchpoint.
While I'm here, cleanup some wording about what the gc "name" attribute actually means. It's not the name of a *collector* it's the name of the *strategy* which may be compatible with multiple collectors.
llvm-svn: 230576
In this change:
- Put the getting started section first
- Create a dedicated section to document the built in collector strategies
- Move discuss of ShadowStack into new section
- Add placeholders for erlang, ocaml, and statepoint-example collectors
There will be many more changes following. I plan on full integrating the documentation for gc.statepoint and gc.root. I want to make it much clearer on how to get started and what users should expect in terms of effort.
llvm-svn: 230359
This is a refactoring to restructure the single user of performCustomLowering as a specific lowering pass and remove the custom lowering hook entirely.
Before this change, the LowerIntrinsics pass (note to self: rename!) was essentially acting as a pass manager, but without being structured in terms of passes. Instead, it proxied calls to a set of GCStrategies internally. This adds a lot of conceptual complexity (i.e. GCStrategies are stateful!) for very little benefit. Since there's been interest in keeping the ShadowStackGC working, I extracting it's custom lowering pass into a dedicated pass and just added that to the pass order. It will only run for functions which opt-in to that gc.
I wasn't able to find an easy way to preserve the runtime registration of custom lowering functionality. Given that no user of this exists that I'm aware of, I made the choice to just remove that. If someone really cares, we can look at restoring it via dynamic pass registration in the future.
Note that despite the large diff, none of the lowering code actual changes. I added the framing needed to make it a pass and rename the class, but that's it.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7218
llvm-svn: 227351
As an example that was not actually being used, it suffered from a slow bitrot.
The two main issues with it were that it had no cmake support and
included a copy of the autoconf directory. The reality is that
autoconf is not easily composable. The lack of composabilty is why we
have clang options in llvm's configure. Suggesting that users include
a copy of autoconf/ in their projects seems a bad idea.
We are also in the process of switching to cmake, so pushing autoconf
to new project is probably not what we want.
llvm-svn: 203728
