This change introduces a new intrinsic, `llvm.is.fpclass`, which checks
if the provided floating-point number belongs to any of the the specified
value classes. The intrinsic implements the checks made by C standard
library functions `isnan`, `isinf`, `isfinite`, `isnormal`, `issubnormal`,
`issignaling` and corresponding IEEE-754 operations.
The primary motivation for this intrinsic is the support of strict FP
mode. In this mode using compare instructions or other FP operations is
not possible, because if the value is a signaling NaN, floating-point
exception `Invalid` is raised, but the aforementioned functions must
never raise exceptions.
Currently there are two solutions for this problem, both are
implemented partially. One of them is using integer operations to
implement the check. It was implemented in https://reviews.llvm.org/D95948
for `isnan`. It solves the problem of exceptions, but offers one
solution for all targets, although some can do the check in more
efficient way.
The other, implemented in https://reviews.llvm.org/D96568, introduced a
hook 'clang::TargetCodeGenInfo::testFPKind', which injects a target
specific code into IR to implement `isnan` and some other functions. It is
convenient for targets that have dedicated instruction to determine FP data
class. However using target-specific intrinsic complicates analysis and can
prevent some optimizations.
A special intrinsic for value class checks allows representing data class
tests with enough flexibility. During IR transformations it represents the
check in target-independent way and saves it from undesired transformations.
In the instruction selector it allows efficient lowering depending on the
used target and mode.
This implementation is an extended variant of `llvm.isnan` introduced
in https://reviews.llvm.org/D104854. It is limited to minimal intrinsic
support. Target-specific treatment will be implemented in separate
patches.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112025
When deciding where to split a block to insert stack guard checks, we should
move past any debug instructions we see that might (e.g.) be separating a tail
call from its frame wrangling.
This time, also don't run off the front of a basic block.
When deciding where to split a block to insert stack guard checks, we should
move past any debug instructions we see that might (e.g.) be separating a tail
call from its frame wrangling.
This is a port of the feature that allows the StackProtector pass to omit
checking code for stack canary checks, and rely on SelectionDAG to do it at a
later stage. The reasoning behind this seems to be to prevent the IR checking
instructions from hindering tail-call optimizations during codegen.
Here we allow GlobalISel to also use that scheme. Doing so requires that we
do some analysis using some factored-out code to determine where to generate
code for the epilogs.
Not every case is handled in this patch since we don't have support for all
targets that exercise different stack protector schemes.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D98200
Serge Pavlov