Currently, opaque pointers are supported in two forms: The
-force-opaque-pointers mode, where all pointers are opaque and
typed pointers do not exist. And as a simple ptr type that can
coexist with typed pointers.
This patch removes support for the mixed mode. You either get
typed pointers, or you get opaque pointers, but not both. In the
(current) default mode, using ptr is forbidden. In -opaque-pointers
mode, all pointers are opaque.
The motivation here is that the mixed mode introduces additional
issues that don't exist in fully opaque mode. D105155 is an example
of a design problem. Looking at D109259, it would probably need
additional work to support mixed mode (e.g. to generate GEPs for
typed base but opaque result). Mixed mode will also end up
inserting many casts between i8* and ptr, which would require
significant additional work to consistently avoid.
I don't think the mixed mode is particularly valuable, as it
doesn't align with our end goal. The only thing I've found it to
be moderately useful for is adding some opaque pointer tests in
between typed pointer tests, but I think we can live without that.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109290
This implements the elementtype attribute specified in D105407. It
just adds the attribute and the specified verifier rules, but
doesn't yet make use of it anywhere.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106008
FullTy is only necessary when we need to figure out what type an
instruction works with given a pointer's pointee type. However, we just
end up using the value operand's type, so FullTy isn't necessary.
Reviewed By: dblaikie
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102788
FullTy is only necessary when we need to figure out what type an
instruction works with given a pointer's pointee type. However, we just
end up using the value operand's type, so FullTy isn't necessary.
Reviewed By: dblaikie
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102788
Don't check that types match when the pointer operand is an opaque
pointer.
I would separate the Assembler and Verifier changes, but
verify-uselistorder in the Assembler test ends up running the verifier.
Reviewed By: dblaikie
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102450
Nikita Popov