Currently, the UnifiedLTO pipeline seems to have trouble with several
LTO features, like SplitLTO units, which means we cannot use important
optimizations like Whole Program Devirtualization or security hardening
instrumentation like CFI.
This patch reverts FatLTO to using distinct pipelines for Full LTO and
ThinLTO. It still avoids module cloning, since that was error prone.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/70703 pointed out that
cloning LLVM modules could lead to miscompiles when using FatLTO.
This is due to an existing issue when cloning modules with labels (see
#55991 and #47769). Since this can lead to miscompilation, we can avoid
cloning the LLVM modules, which was desirable anyway.
This patch modifies the EmbedBitcodePass to no longer clone the module
or run an input pipeline over it. Further, it make FatLTO always perform
UnifiedLTO, so we can still defer the Thin/Full LTO decision to
link-time. Lastly, it removes dead/obsolete code related to now defunct
options that do not work with the EmbedBitcodePass implementation any
longer.
Fat LTO objects contain both LTO compatible IR, as well as generated
object code. This allows users to defer the choice of whether to use LTO
or not to link-time. This is a feature available in GCC for some time,
and makes the existing -ffat-lto-objects flag functional in the same
way as GCC's.
Within LLVM, we add a new EmbedBitcodePass that serializes the module to
the object file, and expose a new pass pipeline for compiling fat
objects. The new pipeline initially clones the module and runs the
selected (Thin)LTOPrelink pipeline, after which it will serialize the
module into a `.llvm.lto` section of an ELF file. When compiling for
(Thin)LTO, this normally the point at which the compiler would emit a
object file containing the bitcode and metadata.
After that point we compile the original module using the
PerModuleDefaultPipeline used for non-LTO compilation. We generate
standard object files at the end of this pipeline, which contain machine
code and the new `.llvm.lto` section containing bitcode.
Since the two pipelines operate on different copies of the module, we
can be sure that the bitcode in the `.llvm.lto` section and object code
in `.text` are congruent with the existing output produced by the
default and LTO pipelines.
Original RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-ffat-lto-objects-support/63977
Earlier versions of this patch were missing REQUIRES lines for llc
related tests in Transforms/EmbedBitcode. Those tests are now under
CodeGen/X86, which should avoid running the check on unsupported
platforms.
The EmbedbBitcodePass also returned PreservedAnalyses::all when adding a
metadata section, which failed expensive checks, since it modified the
module. This is now corrected.
Reviewed By: tejohnson, MaskRay, nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D146776
Fat LTO objects contain both LTO compatible IR, as well as generated
object code. This allows users to defer the choice of whether to use LTO
or not to link-time. This is a feature available in GCC for some time,
and makes the existing -ffat-lto-objects flag functional in the same
way as GCC's.
Within LLVM, we add a new EmbedBitcodePass that serializes the module to
the object file, and expose a new pass pipeline for compiling fat
objects. The new pipeline initially clones the module and runs the
selected (Thin)LTOPrelink pipeline, after which it will serialize the
module into a `.llvm.lto` section of an ELF file. When compiling for
(Thin)LTO, this normally the point at which the compiler would emit a
object file containing the bitcode and metadata.
After that point we compile the original module using the
PerModuleDefaultPipeline used for non-LTO compilation. We generate
standard object files at the end of this pipeline, which contain machine
code and the new `.llvm.lto` section containing bitcode.
Since the two pipelines operate on different copies of the module, we
can be sure that the bitcode in the `.llvm.lto` section and object code
in `.text` are congruent with the existing output produced by the
default and LTO pipelines.
Original RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-ffat-lto-objects-support/63977
Earlier versions of this patch were missing REQUIRES lines for llc
related tests in Transforms/EmbedBitcode. Those tests are now under
CodeGen/X86, which should avoid running the check on unsupported
platforms.
Reviewed By: tejohnson, MaskRay, nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D146776
There seems to be a problem on arm buildbots. Reverting until I can
investigate. https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot#builders/245/builds/10184
This reverts commit a67208e1c697649ce432e6497f56a93675273dd8
and dependent commit e54a3112cee5ae0a9117359ecbea878e1388f51e.
Fat LTO objects contain both LTO compatible IR, as well as generated
object code. This allows users to defer the choice of whether to use LTO
or not to link-time. This is a feature available in GCC for some time,
and makes the existing -ffat-lto-objects flag functional in the same
way as GCC's.
Within LLVM, we add a new EmbedBitcodePass that serializes the module to
the object file, and expose a new pass pipeline for compiling fat
objects. The new pipeline initially clones the module and runs the
selected (Thin)LTOPrelink pipeline, after which it will serialize the
module into a `.llvm.lto` section of an ELF file. When compiling for
(Thin)LTO, this normally the point at which the compiler would emit a
object file containing the bitcode and metadata.
After that point we compile the original module using the
PerModuleDefaultPipeline used for non-LTO compilation. We generate
standard object files at the end of this pipeline, which contain machine
code and the new `.llvm.lto` section containing bitcode.
Since the two pipelines operate on different copies of the module, we
can be sure that the bitcode in the `.llvm.lto` section and object code
in `.text` are congruent with the existing output produced by the
default and LTO pipelines.
Original RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-ffat-lto-objects-support/63977
Reviewed By: tejohnson, MaskRay, nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D146776
