Allow specifying 'nomerge' attribute for function pointers,
e.g. like in the following C code:
extern void (*foo)(void) __attribute__((nomerge));
void bar(long i) {
if (i)
foo();
else
foo();
}
With the goal to attach 'nomerge' to both calls done through 'foo':
@foo = external local_unnamed_addr global ptr, align 8
define dso_local void @bar(i64 noundef %i) local_unnamed_addr #0 {
; ...
%0 = load ptr, ptr @foo, align 8, !tbaa !5
; ...
if.then:
tail call void %0() #1
br label %if.end
if.else:
tail call void %0() #1
br label %if.end
if.end:
ret void
}
; ...
attributes #1 = { nomerge ... }
Report a warning in case if 'nomerge' is specified for a variable that
is not a function pointer, e.g.:
t.c:2:22: warning: 'nomerge' attribute is ignored because 'j' is not a function pointer [-Wignored-attributes]
2 | int j __attribute__((nomerge));
| ^
The intended use-case is for BPF backend.
BPF provides a sort of "standard library" functions that are called
helpers. BPF also verifies usage of these helpers before program
execution. Because of limitations of verification / runtime model it
is important to keep calls to some of such helpers from merging.
An example could be found by the link [1], there input C code:
if (data_end - data > 1024) {
bpf_for_each_map_elem(&map1, cb, &cb_data, 0);
} else {
bpf_for_each_map_elem(&map2, cb, &cb_data, 0);
}
Is converted to bytecode equivalent to:
if (data_end - data > 1024)
tmp = &map1;
else
tmp = &map2;
bpf_for_each_map_elem(tmp, cb, &cb_data, 0);
However, BPF verification/runtime requires to use the same map address
for each particular `bpf_for_each_map_elem()` call.
The 'nomerge' attribute is a perfect match for this situation, but
unfortunately BPF helpers are declared as pointers to functions:
static long (*bpf_for_each_map_elem)(void *map, ...) = (void *) 164;
Hence, this commit, allowing to use 'nomerge' for function pointers.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/03bdf90f-f374-1e67-69d6-76dd9c8318a4@meta.com/
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D152986
Before this commit, expression statements could not be annotated
with statement attributes. Whenever parser found attribute, it
unconditionally assumed that it was followed by a declaration.
This not only doesn't allow expression attributes to have attributes,
but also produces spurious error diagnostics.
In order to maintain all previously compiled code, we still assume
that GNU attributes are followed by declarations unless ALL of those
are statement attributes. And even in this case we are not forcing
the parser to think that it should parse a statement, but rather
let it proceed as if no attributes were found.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93630
