Commit Graph

3 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Alan Zhao 8a1b5f2680 [llvm-ml] Add support for extern proc
EXTERN PROC isn't really well documented in MSVC, so after poking around
it seems as if it's just a regular extern symbol.

Interestingly enough, under MSVC the following is allowed:

extern foo:proc

mov eax, foo

MSVC will output:

mov eax, 0

while llvm-ml will currently output:

mov eax, dword ptr [foo]

(since foo is an extern)

Arguably, llvm-ml's output makes more sense, even though it's
inconsistent with MSVC ml. However, since moving an extern proc symbol
to a register doesn't really make sense in the first place, we'll treat
it as undefined behavior for now.

Reviewed By: epastor

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D125582
2022-05-13 17:20:55 -04:00
Alan Zhao 82c5e302f9 [llvm-ml] Implement support for MASM's extern directive
The EXTERN keyword defines external symbols in MASM.

Credit goes to epastor@ for implementing most of the logic; I (ayzhao@)
added some bugfixes and tests.

[0]: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/assembler/masm/extern-masm?view=msvc-170

Reviewed By: epastor

Submitted By: epastor

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D125273
2022-05-10 14:36:06 -04:00
Alan Zhao 3333c28fc0 [llvm-ml] Improve indirect call parsing
In MASM, if a QWORD symbol is passed to a jmp or call instruction in
64-bit mode or a DWORD or WORD symbol is passed in 32-bit mode, then
MSVC's assembler recognizes that as an indirect call. Additionally, if
the operand is qualified as a ptr, then that should also be an indirect
call.

Furthermore, in 64-bit mode, such operands are implicitly rip-relative
(in fact, MSVC's assembler ml64.exe does not allow explicitly specifying
rip as a base register.)

To keep this patch managable, this patch does not include:
* error messages for wrong operand types (e.g. passing a QWORD in 32-bit
  mode)
* resolving indirect calls if the symbol is declared after it's first
  use (llvm-ml currently only runs a single pass).
* imlementing the extern keyword (required to resolve
  https://crbug.com/762167.)

This patch is likely missing a bunch of edge cases, so please do point
them out in the review.

Reviewed By: epastor, hans, MaskRay

Committed By: epastor (on behalf of ayzhao)

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D124413
2022-04-28 13:17:19 -04:00