Not sure how to test this cause I think the worst that happens is that we don't revisit the node a second time to look for additional combines. We used UpdateNodeOperands so the updating the DAG work was already done.
llvm-svn: 321148
This patch fixes a bug in the redundant compare elimination reported in https://reviews.llvm.org/rL320786 and re-enables the optimization.
The redundant compare elimination assumes that we can replace signed comparison with unsigned comparison for the equality check. But due to the difference in the sign extension behavior we cannot change the opcode if the comparison is against an immediate and the most significant bit of the immediate is one.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41385
llvm-svn: 321147
This teaches memcpyopt to make a non-local memdep query when a local query
indicates that the dependency is non-local. This notably allows it to
eliminate many more llvm.memcpy calls in common Rust code, often by 20-30%.
This is r319482 and r319483, along with fixes for PR35519: fix the
optimization that merges stores into memsets to preserve cached memdep
info, and fix memdep's non-local caching strategy to not assume that larger
queries are always more conservative than smaller ones.
Fixes PR28958 and PR35519.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40802
llvm-svn: 321138
The bugreporter::trackNullOrUndefValue() mechanism contains a system of bug
reporter visitors that recursively call each other in order to track where a
null or undefined value came from, where each visitor represents a particular
tracking mechanism (track how the value was stored, track how the value was
returned from a function, track how the value was constrained to null, etc.).
Each visitor is only added once per value it needs to track. Almost. One
exception from this rule would be FindLastStoreBRVisitor that has two operation
modes: it contains a flag that indicates whether null stored values should be
suppressed. Two instances of FindLastStoreBRVisitor with different values of
this flag are considered to be different visitors, so they can be added twice
and produce the same diagnostic twice. This was indeed the case in the affected
test.
With the current logic of this whole machinery, such duplication seems
unavoidable. We should be able to safely add visitors with different flag
values without constructing duplicate diagnostic pieces. Hence the effort
in this commit to de-duplicate diagnostics regardless of what visitors
have produced them.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41258
llvm-svn: 321135
In this case we are calling a function pointer which
a type that doesn't otherwise exist in the code.
Clearly this code can't would trap if it was ever
called (because there is not such function that
the pointer can resolve to).
But it should valid and compile and link and validation
time.
llvm-svn: 321134
When trying to figure out where a null or undefined value came from,
parentheses and cast expressions are either completely irrelevant, or,
in the case of lvalue-to-rvale cast, straightforwardly lead us in the right
direction when we remove them.
There is a regression that causes a certain diagnostic to appear twice in the
path-notes.cpp test (changed to FIXME). It would be addressed in the next
commit.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41254
llvm-svn: 321133
These optimizations depend on the ExplicitLocals pass to lower TEE
instructions, which is disabled in the ELF ABI, so disable them too.
llvm-svn: 321131
When reporting certain kinds of analyzer warnings, we use the
bugreporter::trackNullOrUndefValue mechanism, which is part of public checker
API, to understand where a zero, null-pointer, or garbage value came from,
which would highlight important events with respect to that value in the
diagnostic path notes, and help us suppress various false positives that result
from values appearing from particular sources.
Previously, we've lost track of the value when it was written into a memory
region that is not a plain variable. Now try to resume tracking in this
situation by finding where the last write to this region has occured.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41253
llvm-svn: 321130
Since C++17, classes that have base classes can potentially be initialized as
aggregates. Trying to construct such objects through brace initialization was
causing the analyzer to crash when the base class has a non-trivial constructor,
while figuring target region for the base class constructor, because the parent
stack frame didn't contain the constructor of the subclass, because there is
no constructor for subclass, merely aggregate initialization.
This patch avoids the crash, but doesn't provide the actually correct region
for the constructor, which still remains to be fixed. Instead, construction
goes into a fake temporary region which would be immediately discarded. Similar
extremely conservative approach is used for other cases in which the logic for
finding the target region is not yet implemented, including aggregate
initialization with fields instead of base-regions (which is not C++17-specific
but also never worked, just didn't crash).
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40841
rdar://problem/35441058
llvm-svn: 321128
As a result of this change, the basic_stringbuf constructor that
takes a mode ends up leaving __hm_ set to 0, causing the comparison
"__hm_ - __str_.data() < __noff" in seekoff() to succeed, which caused
the function to incorrectly return -1. The fix is to account for the
possibility of __hm_ being 0 when computing the distance from __hm_
to the start of the string.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41319
llvm-svn: 321124
It appears the code uses nullptr to represent a void type in debug metadata,
which led to an assertion failure when building DeltaAlgorithm.cpp with a
self-hosted clang on Windows.
I'm not sure why/if the problem was Windows-specific.
Fixes bug https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35543
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41264
llvm-svn: 321122
Work towards the unification of MIR and debug output by refactoring the
interfaces.
Also add support for printing with a null TargetIntrinsicInfo and no
MachineFunction.
llvm-svn: 321111
Summary:
We use Diagnostic as a key to find the corresponding FixIt when we do
the "apply-fix", but the "severity" field could be omitted, in some cases,
the codeAction request sent from LSP clients (e.g. VScode) doesn't include the
`severity` field, which makes clangd fail to find the FixIt.
Test the following code in VScode, before the fix, no FixIt shown.
```
void main() {}
^~~~
```
Reviewers: sammccall
Reviewed By: sammccall
Subscribers: klimek, ilya-biryukov, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41280
llvm-svn: 321106
Store data relocations with their respective segment.
This allows relocations to be applied as each segment
is written (and therefore in parallel).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41410
llvm-svn: 321105
Another followup to my refactoring in r321036: Turns out we can end up
with an x86 darwin target that is not macos (simulator triples can look
like i386-apple-ios) so we need the x86/32bit check in all cases.
llvm-svn: 321104
OS instead of inferring it from SDK / environment
The OS version is specified in -target should be used instead of the one in an
environment variable / SDK name.
rdar://35813850
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40998
llvm-svn: 321099
Martin Storsjo