diff options
author | David Majnemer <david.majnemer@gmail.com> | 2015-12-12 05:38:55 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | David Majnemer <david.majnemer@gmail.com> | 2015-12-12 05:38:55 +0000 |
commit | 8a1c45d6e86d54c40835fa8638d1fd900071783c (patch) | |
tree | e485010342db16bc7c4de112e89d5b5e23b29bba /llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86WinEHState.cpp | |
parent | a38312a9a4eeb8ab8976adf5712fadd68dd763cf (diff) | |
download | bcm5719-llvm-8a1c45d6e86d54c40835fa8638d1fd900071783c.tar.gz bcm5719-llvm-8a1c45d6e86d54c40835fa8638d1fd900071783c.zip |
[IR] Reformulate LLVM's EH funclet IR
While we have successfully implemented a funclet-oriented EH scheme on
top of LLVM IR, our scheme has some notable deficiencies:
- catchendpad and cleanupendpad are necessary in the current design
but they are difficult to explain to others, even to seasoned LLVM
experts.
- catchendpad and cleanupendpad are optimization barriers. They cannot
be split and force all potentially throwing call-sites to be invokes.
This has a noticable effect on the quality of our code generation.
- catchpad, while similar in some aspects to invoke, is fairly awkward.
It is unsplittable, starts a funclet, and has control flow to other
funclets.
- The nesting relationship between funclets is currently a property of
control flow edges. Because of this, we are forced to carefully
analyze the flow graph to see if there might potentially exist illegal
nesting among funclets. While we have logic to clone funclets when
they are illegally nested, it would be nicer if we had a
representation which forbade them upfront.
Let's clean this up a bit by doing the following:
- Instead, make catchpad more like cleanuppad and landingpad: no control
flow, just a bunch of simple operands; catchpad would be splittable.
- Introduce catchswitch, a control flow instruction designed to model
the constraints of funclet oriented EH.
- Make funclet scoping explicit by having funclet instructions consume
the token produced by the funclet which contains them.
- Remove catchendpad and cleanupendpad. Their presence can be inferred
implicitly using coloring information.
N.B. The state numbering code for the CLR has been updated but the
veracity of it's output cannot be spoken for. An expert should take a
look to make sure the results are reasonable.
Reviewers: rnk, JosephTremoulet, andrew.w.kaylor
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15139
llvm-svn: 255422
Diffstat (limited to 'llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86WinEHState.cpp')
-rw-r--r-- | llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86WinEHState.cpp | 24 |
1 files changed, 19 insertions, 5 deletions
diff --git a/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86WinEHState.cpp b/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86WinEHState.cpp index 0276f3969b4..7ceb41662ad 100644 --- a/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86WinEHState.cpp +++ b/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86WinEHState.cpp @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===// #include "X86.h" +#include "llvm/Analysis/CFG.h" #include "llvm/Analysis/EHPersonalities.h" #include "llvm/CodeGen/MachineModuleInfo.h" #include "llvm/CodeGen/Passes.h" @@ -416,20 +417,33 @@ void WinEHStatePass::addStateStores(Function &F, WinEHFuncInfo &FuncInfo) { calculateWinCXXEHStateNumbers(&F, FuncInfo); // Iterate all the instructions and emit state number stores. + DenseMap<BasicBlock *, ColorVector> BlockColors = colorEHFunclets(F); for (BasicBlock &BB : F) { + // Figure out what state we should assign calls in this block. + int BaseState = -1; + auto &BBColors = BlockColors[&BB]; + + assert(BBColors.size() == 1 && + "multi-color BB not removed by preparation"); + BasicBlock *FuncletEntryBB = BBColors.front(); + if (auto *FuncletPad = + dyn_cast<FuncletPadInst>(FuncletEntryBB->getFirstNonPHI())) { + auto BaseStateI = FuncInfo.FuncletBaseStateMap.find(FuncletPad); + if (BaseStateI != FuncInfo.FuncletBaseStateMap.end()) + BaseState = BaseStateI->second; + } + for (Instruction &I : BB) { if (auto *CI = dyn_cast<CallInst>(&I)) { // Possibly throwing call instructions have no actions to take after // an unwind. Ensure they are in the -1 state. if (CI->doesNotThrow()) continue; - insertStateNumberStore(RegNode, CI, -1); + insertStateNumberStore(RegNode, CI, BaseState); } else if (auto *II = dyn_cast<InvokeInst>(&I)) { // Look up the state number of the landingpad this unwinds to. - Instruction *PadInst = II->getUnwindDest()->getFirstNonPHI(); - // FIXME: Why does this assertion fail? - //assert(FuncInfo.EHPadStateMap.count(PadInst) && "EH Pad has no state!"); - int State = FuncInfo.EHPadStateMap[PadInst]; + assert(FuncInfo.InvokeStateMap.count(II) && "invoke has no state!"); + int State = FuncInfo.InvokeStateMap[II]; insertStateNumberStore(RegNode, II, State); } } |