The many many benefits include:
1 - Input/Output/Error streams are now handled as real streams not a push style input
2 - auto completion in python embedded interpreter
3 - multi-line input for "script" and "expression" commands now allow you to edit previous/next lines using up and down arrow keys and this makes multi-line input actually a viable thing to use
4 - it is now possible to use curses to drive LLDB (please try the "gui" command)
We will need to deal with and fix any buildbot failures and tests and arise now that input/output and error are correctly hooked up in all cases.
llvm-svn: 200263
uint32.
When folding branches to common destination, the updated branch weights
can exceed uint32 by more than factor of 2. We should keep halving the
weights until they can fit into uint32.
llvm-svn: 200262
PR18322. This test will be reenabled when the SDK gets fixed. In the meantime,
it is pretty disruptive to have this test keep failing.
llvm-svn: 200256
This brings MC into line with GNU 'as' on ARM, and it brings the ARM
target into line with most other LLVM targets, which declare the
initial CFI state with addInitialFrameState().
Without this, functions generated with .cfi_startproc/endproc on ARM
will tend to cause GDB to abort with:
gdb/dwarf2-frame.c:1132: internal-error: Unknown CFA rule.
I've also tested this by comparing the output of "readelf -w" on the
object files produced by llvm-mc and gas when given the .s file added
here.
This change is part of addressing PR18636.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2597
llvm-svn: 200255
if the remote stub provided enough information to identify it in the
qProcessInfo packet response. (e.g. for an Apple device where we know
it is Mach-O, the cpu type & cpu sub type).
<rdar://problem/15847901>
llvm-svn: 200253
Also update the comment, since it actually produces a
select (setcc) instead of select_cc.
It was checking and using the setcc result type for the
type of the sext, instead of the type of the compared items.
In my problem case, the sext was to i32 and was used as the setcc type,
but the expected type was i64.
No test since I haven't been able to hit the problem with
this on any in-tree targets.
llvm-svn: 200249
Summary:
This commit gives an address mode to the PLD instruction. We
were getting an assertion failure in the frame lowering code
because we had code that was doing a pld of a stack allocated
address. The frame lowering was checking the address mode and
then asserting because pld had none defined.
This commit fixes pld for arm mode. There was a previous fix for
thumb mode in a separate commit. The commit for thumb mode
added a test in a separate file because it would otherwise fail
for arm. This commit moves the thumb test back into the prefetch.ll
file and adds the corresponding arm test.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2622
llvm-svn: 200248
ValueObjectPrinter could enter an infinite loop while trying to display an aptly formed ValueObject: a reference, with a child of some pointer type, such that the pointees chain ended up pointing back to some part of itself - a pointer to itself being the simplest such case
Fixed here by only setting a pointer depth when needed, and ensuring that we won't overflow and wrap the pointer depth when it's zero.
llvm-svn: 200247
This change modifies the 'A' command handler's launch code to launch
with LaunchProcess (). The net effect is that the default process
monitoring that LaunchProcess () adds will kick in, allowing the
GDBRemoteCommunicationServer to be able to reap processes started with
this facility correctly. Later, in the case of lldb-gdbserver, we'll
also have the proper process monitoring going on to really debug the
inferior process.
llvm-svn: 200246
This failed the ms-intrin.cpp test.
This reverts commit r200237.
This also comments out the _setjmpex declaration for now so that
intrin.h will work on x64 targets.
llvm-svn: 200243
This reverts commit r200233.
The test required a registered ARM target, it was testing LLVM's
generated assembly, and it should have been an IRGen test.
llvm-svn: 200242
parimary class and in mrr mode, assume property's default
memory attribute (assign) and to prevent a bogus warning.
// rdar://15859862
llvm-svn: 200238
This patch teaches the DAGCombiner how to fold a sext/aext/zext dag node when
the operand in input is a build vector of constants (or UNDEFs).
The inability to fold a sext/zext of a constant build_vector was the root
cause of some pcg bugs affecting vselect expansion on x86-64 with AVX support.
Before this change, the DAGCombiner only knew how to fold a sext/zext/aext of a
ConstantSDNode.
llvm-svn: 200234
(comment without a decl).
I think this can not happen during normal compilation with -Wdocumentation,
only while using Clang APIs to parse comments outside of a source file.
Based on a patch by Olivier Goffart.
llvm-svn: 200230
This commit allows LLVM MC to process .cfi_startproc directives when
they are followed by an additional `simple' identifier. This signals to
elide the emission of target specific CFI instructions that would
normally occur initially.
This fixes PR16587.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2624
llvm-svn: 200227
This patch addresses a bug where in a multi-threaded program a new
signal from the inferior may be received before all group-stop
messages from an earlier signal have been handled.
Patch by Andrew MacPherson
llvm-svn: 200226
cold loops as-if they were being optimized for size.
Nothing fancy here. Simply test case included. The nice thing is that we
can now incrementally build on top of this to drive other heuristics.
All of the infrastructure work is done to get the profile information
into this layer.
The remaining work necessary to make this a fully general purpose loop
unroller for very hot loops is to make it a fully general purpose loop
unroller. Things I know of but am not going to have time to benchmark
and fix in the immediate future:
1) Don't disable the entire pass when the target is lacking vector
registers. This really doesn't make any sense any more.
2) Teach the unroller at least and the vectorizer potentially to handle
non-if-converted loops. This is trivial for the unroller but hard for
the vectorizer.
3) Compute the relative hotness of the loop and thread that down to the
various places that make cost tradeoffs (very likely only the
unroller makes sense here, and then only when dealing with loops that
are small enough for unrolling to not completely blow out the LSD).
I'm still dubious how useful hotness information will be. So far, my
experiments show that if we can get the correct logic for determining
when unrolling actually helps performance, the code size impact is
completely unimportant and we can unroll in all cases. But at least
we'll no longer burn code size on cold code.
One somewhat unrelated idea that I've had forever but not had time to
implement: mark all functions which are only reachable via the global
constructors rigging in the module as optsize. This would also decrease
the impact of any more aggressive heuristics here on code size.
llvm-svn: 200219
object and fewer pointless variables.
Also, add a clarifying comment and a FIXME because the code which
disables *all* vectorization if we can't use implicit floating point
instructions just makes no sense at all.
llvm-svn: 200214
powers of two. This is essentially always the correct thing given the
impact on alignment, scaling factors that can be used in addressing
modes, etc. Also, fix the management of the unroll vs. small loop cost
to more accurately model things with this world.
Enhance a test case to actually exercise more of the unroll machinery if
using synthetic constants rather than a specific target model. Before
this change, with the added flags this test will unroll 3 times instead
of either 2 or 4 (the two sensible answers).
While I don't expect this to make a huge difference, if there are lots
of loops sitting right on the edge of hitting the 'small unroll' factor,
they might change behavior. However, I've benchmarked moving the small
loop cost up and down in many various ways and by a huge factor (2x)
without seeing more than 0.2% code size growth. Small adjustments such
as the series that led up here have led to about 1% improvement on some
benchmarks, but it is very close to the noise floor so I mostly checked
that nothing regressed. Let me know if you see bad behavior on other
targets but I don't expect this to be a sufficiently dramatic change to
trigger anything.
llvm-svn: 200213
Richard Smith