Vitaly Buka 166c8cccde [msan][CodeGen] Set noundef for C return value
Msan needs noundef consistency between interface and implementation. If
we call C++ from C we can have noundef on C++ side, and no noundef on
caller C side, noundef implementation will not set TLS for return value,
no noundef caller will expect it. Then we have false reports in msan.

The workaround could be set TLS to zero even for noundef return values.
However if we do that always it will increase binary size by about 10%.
If we do that selectively we need to handle "address is taken"
functions, any non local functions, and probably all function which have
musttail callers. Which is still a lot.

The existing implementation of HasStrictReturn refers to C standard as
the reason not enforcing noundef. I believe it applies only to the case
when return statement is omitted. Testing on Google codebase I never see
such cases, however I've see tens of cases where C code returns actual
uninitialized variables, but we ignore that it because of "omitted
return" case.

So this patch will:
1. fix false-positives with TLS missmatch.
2. detect bugs returning uninitialized variables for C as well.
3. report "omitted return" cases stricter than C, which is already a
   warning and very likely a bug in a code anyway.

Reviewed By: kda

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D139296
2022-12-05 22:58:29 -08:00
..
2022-11-08 07:21:23 -05:00
2022-11-08 07:21:23 -05:00

IRgen optimization opportunities.

//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//

The common pattern of
--
short x; // or char, etc
(x == 10)
--
generates an zext/sext of x which can easily be avoided.

//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//

Bitfields accesses can be shifted to simplify masking and sign
extension. For example, if the bitfield width is 8 and it is
appropriately aligned then is is a lot shorter to just load the char
directly.

//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//

It may be worth avoiding creation of alloca's for formal arguments
for the common situation where the argument is never written to or has
its address taken. The idea would be to begin generating code by using
the argument directly and if its address is taken or it is stored to
then generate the alloca and patch up the existing code.

In theory, the same optimization could be a win for block local
variables as long as the declaration dominates all statements in the
block.

NOTE: The main case we care about this for is for -O0 -g compile time
performance, and in that scenario we will need to emit the alloca
anyway currently to emit proper debug info. So this is blocked by
being able to emit debug information which refers to an LLVM
temporary, not an alloca.

//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//

We should try and avoid generating basic blocks which only contain
jumps. At -O0, this penalizes us all the way from IRgen (malloc &
instruction overhead), all the way down through code generation and
assembly time.

On 176.gcc:expr.ll, it looks like over 12% of basic blocks are just
direct branches!

//===---------------------------------------------------------------------===//