This pass is responsible for constructing the EH registration object
that gets linked into fs:00, which is all it does in this change. In the
future, it will also insert stores to update the EH state number.
I considered keeping this functionality in WinEHPrepare, but it's pretty
separable and X86 specific. It has conceptually very little to do with
the task of WinEHPrepare, which is currently outlining. WinEHPrepare is
also in theory useful on ARM, but this logic is pretty x86 specific.
Reviewers: andrew.w.kaylor, majnemer
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9422
llvm-svn: 236339
This helps reduce the frequency of stack realignment prologues in 32-bit
X86 Windows code. Before this change and the corresponding clang change,
we would take the max of the type preferred alignment and the explicit
alignment on the alloca.
If you don't override aggregate alignment in datalayout, you get a
default of 8. This dates back to 2007 / r34356, and changing it seems
prohibitively difficult at this point.
llvm-svn: 236270
Summary:
I don't know why every singled backend had to redeclare its own DataLayout.
There was a virtual getDataLayout() on the common base TargetMachine, the
default implementation returned nullptr. It was not clear from this that
we could assume at call site that a DataLayout will be available with
each Target.
Now getDataLayout() is no longer virtual and return a pointer to the
DataLayout member of the common base TargetMachine. I plan to turn it into
a reference in a future patch.
The only backend that didn't have a DataLayout previsouly was the CPPBackend.
It now initializes the default DataLayout. This commit is NFC for all the
other backends.
Test Plan: clang+llvm ninja check-all
Reviewers: echristo
Subscribers: jfb, jholewinski, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D8243
From: Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini@apple.com>
llvm-svn: 231987
Summary:
The generic ELF TargetObjectFile defaults to .ctors, but Linux's
defaults to .init_array by calling InitializeELF with the value of
UseInitArray from TargetMachine. Make NaCl's behavior match.
Reviewers: jvoung
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D8240
llvm-svn: 231934
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
Canonicalize access to function attributes to use the simpler API.
getAttributes().getAttribute(AttributeSet::FunctionIndex, Kind)
=> getFnAttribute(Kind)
getAttributes().hasAttribute(AttributeSet::FunctionIndex, Kind)
=> hasFnAttribute(Kind)
llvm-svn: 229214
LLVM's include tree and the use of using declarations to hide the
'legacy' namespace for the old pass manager.
This undoes the primary modules-hostile change I made to keep
out-of-tree targets building. I sent an email inquiring about whether
this would be reasonable to do at this phase and people seemed fine with
it, so making it a reality. This should allow us to start bootstrapping
with modules to a certain extent along with making it easier to mix and
match headers in general.
The updates to any code for users of LLVM are very mechanical. Switch
from including "llvm/PassManager.h" to "llvm/IR/LegacyPassManager.h".
Qualify the types which now produce compile errors with "legacy::". The
most common ones are "PassManager", "PassManagerBase", and
"FunctionPassManager".
llvm-svn: 229094
PassManager instance. In one case we can make the determination
from the Triple, in the other (execution dependency pass) the
pass will avoid running if we don't have any code that uses that
register class so go ahead and add it to the pipeline.
llvm-svn: 228334
This moves the transformation introduced in r223757 into a separate MI pass.
This allows it to cover many more cases (not only cases where there must be a
reserved call frame), and perform rudimentary call folding. It still doesn't
have a heuristic, so it is enabled only for optsize/minsize, with stack
alignment <= 8, where it ought to be a fairly clear win.
(Re-commit of r227728)
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6789
llvm-svn: 227752
TargetIRAnalysis access path directly rather than implementing getTTI.
This even removes getTTI from the interface. It's more efficient for
each target to just register a precise callback that creates their
specific TTI.
As part of this, all of the targets which are building their subtargets
individually per-function now build their TTI instance with the function
and thus look up the correct subtarget and cache it. NVPTX, R600, and
XCore currently don't leverage this functionality, but its trivial for
them to add it now.
llvm-svn: 227735
This moves the transformation introduced in r223757 into a separate MI pass.
This allows it to cover many more cases (not only cases where there must be a
reserved call frame), and perform rudimentary call folding. It still doesn't
have a heuristic, so it is enabled only for optsize/minsize, with stack
alignment <= 8, where it ought to be a fairly clear win.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6789
llvm-svn: 227728
base which it adds a single analysis pass to, to instead return the type
erased TargetTransformInfo object constructed for that TargetMachine.
This removes all of the pass variants for TTI. There is now a single TTI
*pass* in the Analysis layer. All of the Analysis <-> Target
communication is through the TTI's type erased interface itself. While
the diff is large here, it is nothing more that code motion to make
types available in a header file for use in a different source file
within each target.
I've tried to keep all the doxygen comments and file boilerplate in line
with this move, but let me know if I missed anything.
With this in place, the next step to making TTI work with the new pass
manager is to introduce a really simple new-style analysis that produces
a TTI object via a callback into this routine on the target machine.
Once we have that, we'll have the building blocks necessary to accept
a function argument as well.
llvm-svn: 227685
type erased interface and a single analysis pass rather than an
extremely complex analysis group.
The end result is that the TTI analysis can contain a type erased
implementation that supports the polymorphic TTI interface. We can build
one from a target-specific implementation or from a dummy one in the IR.
I've also factored all of the code into "mix-in"-able base classes,
including CRTP base classes to facilitate calling back up to the most
specialized form when delegating horizontally across the surface. These
aren't as clean as I would like and I'm planning to work on cleaning
some of this up, but I wanted to start by putting into the right form.
There are a number of reasons for this change, and this particular
design. The first and foremost reason is that an analysis group is
complete overkill, and the chaining delegation strategy was so opaque,
confusing, and high overhead that TTI was suffering greatly for it.
Several of the TTI functions had failed to be implemented in all places
because of the chaining-based delegation making there be no checking of
this. A few other functions were implemented with incorrect delegation.
The message to me was very clear working on this -- the delegation and
analysis group structure was too confusing to be useful here.
The other reason of course is that this is *much* more natural fit for
the new pass manager. This will lay the ground work for a type-erased
per-function info object that can look up the correct subtarget and even
cache it.
Yet another benefit is that this will significantly simplify the
interaction of the pass managers and the TargetMachine. See the future
work below.
The downside of this change is that it is very, very verbose. I'm going
to work to improve that, but it is somewhat an implementation necessity
in C++ to do type erasure. =/ I discussed this design really extensively
with Eric and Hal prior to going down this path, and afterward showed
them the result. No one was really thrilled with it, but there doesn't
seem to be a substantially better alternative. Using a base class and
virtual method dispatch would make the code much shorter, but as
discussed in the update to the programmer's manual and elsewhere,
a polymorphic interface feels like the more principled approach even if
this is perhaps the least compelling example of it. ;]
Ultimately, there is still a lot more to be done here, but this was the
huge chunk that I couldn't really split things out of because this was
the interface change to TTI. I've tried to minimize all the other parts
of this. The follow up work should include at least:
1) Improving the TargetMachine interface by having it directly return
a TTI object. Because we have a non-pass object with value semantics
and an internal type erasure mechanism, we can narrow the interface
of the TargetMachine to *just* do what we need: build and return
a TTI object that we can then insert into the pass pipeline.
2) Make the TTI object be fully specialized for a particular function.
This will include splitting off a minimal form of it which is
sufficient for the inliner and the old pass manager.
3) Add a new pass manager analysis which produces TTI objects from the
target machine for each function. This may actually be done as part
of #2 in order to use the new analysis to implement #2.
4) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and the targets so that it is
easier to understand and less verbose to type erase.
5) Work on narrowing the API between TTI and its clients so that it is
easier to understand and less verbose to forward.
6) Try to improve the CRTP-based delegation. I feel like this code is
just a bit messy and exacerbating the complexity of implementing
the TTI in each target.
Many thanks to Eric and Hal for their help here. I ended up blocked on
this somewhat more abruptly than I expected, and so I appreciate getting
it sorted out very quickly.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7293
llvm-svn: 227669
derived classes.
Since global data alignment, layout, and mangling is often based on the
DataLayout, move it to the TargetMachine. This ensures that global
data is going to be layed out and mangled consistently if the subtarget
changes on a per function basis. Prior to this all targets(*) have
had subtarget dependent code moved out and onto the TargetMachine.
*One target hasn't been migrated as part of this change: R600. The
R600 port has, as a subtarget feature, the size of pointers and
this affects global data layout. I've currently hacked in a FIXME
to enable progress, but the port needs to be updated to either pass
the 64-bitness to the TargetMachine, or fix the DataLayout to
avoid subtarget dependent features.
llvm-svn: 227113
Previously print+verify passes were added in a very unsystematic way, which is
annoying when debugging as you miss intermediate steps and allows bugs to stay
unnotice when no verification is performed.
To make this change practical I added the possibility to explicitely disable
verification. I used this option on all places where no verification was
performed previously (because alot of places actually don't pass the
MachineVerifier).
In the long term these problems should be fixed properly and verification
enabled after each pass. I'll enable some more verification in subsequent
commits.
This is the 2nd attempt at this after realizing that PassManager::add() may
actually delete the pass.
llvm-svn: 224059
Previously print+verify passes were added in a very unsystematic way, which is
annoying when debugging as you miss intermediate steps and allows bugs to stay
unnotice when no verification is performed.
To make this change practical I added the possibility to explicitely disable
verification. I used this option on all places where no verification was
performed previously (because alot of places actually don't pass the
MachineVerifier).
In the long term these problems should be fixed properly and verification
enabled after each pass. I'll enable some more verification in subsequent
commits.
llvm-svn: 224042
These recently all grew a unique_ptr<TargetLoweringObjectFile> member in
r221878. When anyone calls a virtual method of a class, clang-cl
requires all virtual methods to be semantically valid. This includes the
implicit virtual destructor, which triggers instantiation of the
unique_ptr destructor, which fails because the type being deleted is
incomplete.
This is just part of the ongoing saga of PR20337, which is affecting
Blink as well. Because the MSVC ABI doesn't have key functions, we end
up referencing the vtable and implicit destructor on any virtual call
through a class. We don't actually end up emitting the dtor, so it'd be
good if we could avoid this unneeded type completion work.
llvm-svn: 222480
These will make it easier to test further changes to the
code generation and optimization pipelines as those are
moved to subtargets initialized with target feature and
target cpu.
llvm-svn: 219106
This required a new hook called hasLoadLinkedStoreConditional to know whether
to expand atomics to LL/SC (ARM, AArch64, in a future patch Power) or to
CmpXchg (X86).
Apart from that, the new code in AtomicExpandPass is mostly moved from
X86AtomicExpandPass. The main result of this patch is to get rid of that
pass, which had lots of code duplicated with AtomicExpandPass.
llvm-svn: 217928
be deleted. This will be reapplied as soon as possible and before
the 3.6 branch date at any rate.
Approved by Jim Grosbach, Lang Hames, Rafael Espindola.
This reverts commits r215111, 215115, 215116, 215117, 215136.
llvm-svn: 215154
I am sure we will be finding bits and pieces of dead code for years to
come, but this is a good start.
Thanks to Lang Hames for making MCJIT a good replacement!
llvm-svn: 215111
The logic for expanding atomics that aren't natively supported in
terms of cmpxchg loops is much simpler to express at the IR level. It
also allows the normal optimisations and CodeGen improvements to help
out with atomics, instead of using a limited set of possible
instructions..
rdar://problem/13496295
llvm-svn: 212119
X86Subtarget::isTargetCygMing || X86Subtarget::isTargetKnownWindowsMSVC is
equivalent to all Windows environments. Simplify the check to isOSWindows.
NFC.
llvm-svn: 210431
According to Intel Software Optimization Manual on Silvermont in some cases LEA
is better to be replaced with ADD instructions:
"The rule of thumb for ADDs and LEAs is that it is justified to use LEA
with a valid index and/or displacement for non-destructive destination purposes
(especially useful for stack offset cases), or to use a SCALE.
Otherwise, ADD(s) are preferable."
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D3826
llvm-svn: 209198
Win64 stack unwinder gets confused when execution flow "falls through" after
a call to 'noreturn' function. This fixes the "missing epilogue" problem by
emitting a trap instruction for IR 'unreachable' on x86_x64-pc-windows.
A secondary use for it would be for anyone wanting to make double-sure that
'noreturn' functions, indeed, do not return.
llvm-svn: 206684
