complete. We hook into this check from a couple of other places (modules,
debug info) so it's not OK to elide the check if the type was already
complete.
llvm-svn: 203978
These tests are logically related, but they're spread about several
different CodeGen directories. Consolidate them in one place to make
them easier to manage.
llvm-svn: 203541
Previously, we would always emit them with internal linkage,
but with hidden visibility when the function was hidden, which
is an illegal combination, which could lead LLVM to actually
emit them as strong hidden symbols with hilarious results.
rdar://16265084
llvm-svn: 203503
These tests were added before we had settled on using a .profdata extension
for the profile data files. Renaming them now for consistency.
llvm-svn: 203166
If a guard variable will be created for an entity at global scope,
then we cannot rely on the scope depth to disambiguate names for us.
Instead, mangle the entire variable into the guard to ensure it's uniqueness.
llvm-svn: 203151
Initializers and finalizers for static data members have the variable's
access-specifier, storage-class, type and CV-qualifiers mangled in.
llvm-svn: 203145
Use a scheme inspired by the Itanium ABI to properly implement the
mangling of lambdas.
N.B. The incredibly astute observer will notice that we do not generate
external names that are identical, or even compatible with, MSVC.
This is fine because they don't generate names that they can use across
translation units. Technically, we can generate any name we'd like so
long as that name wouldn't conflict with any other and would be stable
across translation units.
This fixes PR15512.
llvm-svn: 202962
Summary:
The MSVC ABI appears to mangle the lexical scope into the names of
statics. Specifically, a counter is incremented whenever a scope is
entered where things can be declared in such a way that an ambiguity can
arise. For example, a class scope inside of a class scope doesn't do
anything interesting because the nested class cannot collide with
another nested class.
There are problems with this scheme:
- It is unreliable. The counter is only incremented when a previously
never encountered scope is entered. There are cases where this will
cause ambiguity amongst declarations that have the same name where one
was introduced in a deep scope while the other was introduced right
after in the previous lexical scope.
- It is wasteful. Statements like: {{{{{{{ static int foo = a; }}}}}}}
will make the mangling of "foo" larger than it need be because the
scope counter has been incremented many times.
Because of these problems, and practical implementation concerns. We
choose not to implement this scheme if the local static or local type
isn't visible. The mangling of these declarations will look very
similar but the numbering will make far more sense, this scheme is
lifted from the Itanium ABI implementation.
Reviewers: rsmith, doug.gregor, rnk, eli.friedman, cdavis5x
Reviewed By: rnk
CC: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2953
llvm-svn: 202951
We wouldn't recognize variable templates as being templates leading us
to leave the template arguments off of the mangled name. This would
allow two unrelated templates to map to the same mangled name.
N.B. While MSVC doesn't support variable templates as of this date,
this mangling is the most likely thing they will choose to use. Their
demangler can successfully demangle our manglings with the template
arguments shown.
llvm-svn: 202789
We should only have this optimization fire when the explicit
instantiation definition would cause at least one member function to be
emitted, thus ensuring that even a compiler not performing this
optimization would still emit the full type information elsewhere.
But we should also pessimize output still by always emitting the
definition when the explicit instantiation definition appears so that at
some point in the future we can depend on that information even when no
code had to be emitted in that TU. (this shouldn't happen very often,
since people mostly use explicit spec decl/defs to reduce code size -
but perhaps one day they could use it to explicitly reduce debug info
size too)
This was worth about 2% for Clang and LLVM - so not a huge win, but a
win. It looks really great for simple STL programs (include <string> and
just declare a string - 14k -> 1.4k of .dwo)
llvm-svn: 202769
Summary:
This merges VFPtrInfo and VBTableInfo into VPtrInfo, since they hold
almost the same information. With that change, the vbtable mangling
code can easily be applied to vftable data and we magically get the
correct, unambiguous vftable names.
Fixes PR17748.
Reviewers: timurrrr, majnemer
CC: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2893
llvm-svn: 202425
Erroring out until we fix the bug means we don't have to keep chasing down
this same miscompile in a bunch of different places.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2890
llvm-svn: 202331
Clang is using llvm::StructType::isOpaque() as a way of signaling if
we've finished record type conversion in
CodeGenTypes::isRecordLayoutComplete(). However, Clang was setting the
body of the type before it finished laying out the type as a base type.
Laying out the %class.C.base LLVM type attempts to convert more types,
eventually recursively attempting to layout 'C' again, at which point we
would say that layout was complete, even though we were still in the
middle of it.
By not setting the body, we correctly signal that layout is not
complete, and things work as expected.
At some point, it might be worth refactoring this to avoid looking at
the LLVM IR types under construction.
llvm-svn: 202320
Previously the X86 backend would look for the sret attribute and handle
this for us. inalloca takes that all away, so we have to do the return
ourselves now.
llvm-svn: 202097
Most 64-bit targets define int64_t as long int, and AArch64 should
make same definition to follow LP64 model. In GNU tool chain, int64_t
is defined as long int for 64-bit target. So to get consistent with GNU,
it's better Changing int64_t from 'long long int' to 'long int',
otherwise clang will get different name mangling suffix compared with g++.
llvm-svn: 202004
CGRecordLayoutBuilder was aging, complex, multi-pass, and shows signs of
existing before ASTRecordLayoutBuilder. It redundantly performed many
layout operations that are now performed by ASTRecordLayoutBuilder and
asserted that the results were the same. With the addition of support
for the MS-ABI, such as placement of vbptrs, vtordisps, different
bitfield layout and a variety of other features, CGRecordLayoutBuilder
was growing unwieldy in its redundancy.
This patch re-architects CGRecordLayoutBuilder to not perform any
redundant layout but rather, as directly as possible, lower an
ASTRecordLayout to an llvm::type. The new architecture is significantly
smaller and simpler than the CGRecordLayoutBuilder and contains fewer
ABI-specific code paths. It's also one pass.
The architecture of the new system is described in the comments. For the
most part, the new system simply takes all of the fields and bases from
an ASTRecordLayout, sorts them, inserts padding and dumps a record.
Bitfields, unions and primary virtual bases make this process a bit more
complicated. See the inline comments.
In addition, this patch updates a few lit tests due to the fact that the
new system computes more accurate llvm types than CGRecordLayoutBuilder.
Each change is commented individually in the review.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2795
llvm-svn: 201907
Virtual methods expect 'this' to point to the vfptr containing the
virtual method, and this extends to virtual member pointer thunks. The
relevant vfptr is always at offset zero on entry to the thunk, and no
this adjustment is needed.
Previously we would not include the vfptr adjustment in the member
pointer, and we'd look at the vfptr offset when loading from the vftable
in the thunk.
Fixes PR18917.
llvm-svn: 201835
The MS ABI requires that we determine the vbptr offset if have a
virtual inheritance model. Instead, raise an error pointing to the
diagnostic when this happens.
This fixes PR18583.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2842
llvm-svn: 201824
In the Microsoft ABI, the vftable is laid out as if all methods in every
overload set were declared in reverse order of declaration at the point
of declaration of the first overload in the set.
Previously we only considered virtual methods in an overload set, but
MSVC includes non-virtual methods for ordering purposes.
Fixes PR18902.
llvm-svn: 201722
Summary:
Generally the vector deleting dtor, which we model as a vtable thunk,
takes care of non-virtual adjustment and delegates to the other
destructor variants. The other non-complete destructor variants assume
that 'this' on entry points to the virtual base subobject that first
declared the virtual destructor.
We need to change the adjustment in both the prologue and the vdtor call
setup.
Reviewers: timurrrr
CC: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2821
llvm-svn: 201612
Extended qualifiers can appear in many places, refactor the code so it's
more reusable. Add tests in areas where we've increased compatibility.
llvm-svn: 201574
Pointer types in the MSVC ABI are a bit awkward, the width of the
pointer is considered a kind of CVR qualifier.
Restrict is handled similarly to const and volatile but is mangled after
the pointer width qualifier.
This fixes PR18880.
llvm-svn: 201569
Previously, we made one traversal of the AST prior to codegen to assign
counters to the ASTs and then propagated the count values during codegen. This
patch now adds a separate AST traversal prior to codegen for the
-fprofile-instr-use option to propagate the count values. The counts are then
saved in a map from which they can be retrieved during codegen.
This new approach has several advantages:
1. It gets rid of a lot of extra PGO-related code that had previously been
added to codegen.
2. It fixes a serious bug. My original implementation (which was mailed to the
list but never committed) used 3 counters for every loop. Justin improved it to
move 2 of those counters into the less-frequently executed breaks and continues,
but that turned out to produce wrong count values in some cases. The solution
requires visiting a loop body before the condition so that the count for the
condition properly includes the break and continue counts. Changing codegen to
visit a loop body first would be a fairly invasive change, but with a separate
AST traversal, it is easy to control the order of traversal. I've added a
testcase (provided by Justin) to make sure this works correctly.
3. It improves the instrumentation overhead, reducing the number of counters for
a loop from 3 to 1. We no longer need dedicated counters for breaks and
continues, since we can just use the propagated count values when visiting
breaks and continues.
To make this work, I needed to make a change to the way we count case
statements, going back to my original approach of not including the fall-through
in the counter values. This was necessary because there isn't always an AST node
that can be used to record the fall-through count. Now case statements are
handled the same as default statements, with the fall-through paths branching
over the counter increments. While I was at it, I also went back to using this
approach for do-loops -- omitting the fall-through count into the loop body
simplifies some of the calculations and make them behave the same as other
loops. Whenever we start using this instrumentation for coverage, we'll need
to add the fall-through counts into the counter values.
llvm-svn: 201528
