This is an alternative to D66980, which was reverted. Instead of
inserting a pseudo instruction that optionally expands to nothing, add a
pass that inserts int3 when appropriate after basic block layout.
Reviewers: hans
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67201
llvm-svn: 371466
This reverts r370525 (git commit 0bb1630685)
Also reverts r370543 (git commit 185ddc08ee)
The approach I took only works for functions marked `noreturn`. In
general, a call that is not known to be noreturn may be followed by
unreachable for other reasons. For example, there could be multiple call
sites to a function that throws sometimes, and at some call sites, it is
known to always throw, so it is followed by unreachable. We need to
insert an `int3` in these cases to pacify the Windows unwinder.
I think this probably deserves its own standalone, Win64-only fixup pass
that runs after block placement. Implementing that will take some time,
so let's revert to TrapUnreachable in the mean time.
llvm-svn: 370829
Users have complained llvm.trap produce two ud2 instructions on Win64,
one for the trap, and one for unreachable. This change fixes that.
TrapUnreachable was added and enabled for Win64 in r206684 (April 2014)
to avoid poorly understood issues with the Windows unwinder.
There seem to be two major things in play:
- the unwinder
- C++ EH, _CxxFrameHandler3 & co
The unwinder disassembles forward from the return address to scan for
epilogues. Inserting a ud2 had the effect of stopping the unwinder, and
ensuring that it ran the EH personality function for the current frame.
However, it's not clear what the unwinder does when the return address
happens to be the last address of one function and the first address of
the next function.
The Visual C++ EH personality, _CxxFrameHandler3, needs to figure out
what the current EH state number is. It does this by consulting the
ip2state table, which maps from PC to state number. This seems to go
wrong when the return address is the last PC of the function or catch
funclet.
I'm not sure precisely which system is involved here, but in order to
address these real or hypothetical problems, I believe it is enough to
insert int3 after a call site if it would otherwise be the last
instruction in a function or funclet. I was able to reproduce some
similar problems locally by arranging for a noreturn call to appear at
the end of a catch block immediately before an unrelated function, and I
confirmed that the problems go away when an extra trailing int3
instruction is added.
MSVC inserts int3 after every noreturn function call, but I believe it's
only necessary to do it if the call would be the last instruction. This
change inserts a pseudo instruction that expands to int3 if it is in the
last basic block of a function or funclet. I did what I could to run the
Microsoft compiler EH tests, and the ones I was able to run showed no
behavior difference before or after this change.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66980
llvm-svn: 370525
Now that we've moved to C++14, we no longer need the llvm::make_unique
implementation from STLExtras.h. This patch is a mechanical replacement
of (hopefully) all the llvm::make_unique instances across the monorepo.
llvm-svn: 369013
Summary:
- Remove redundant initializations from pass constructors that were
already being initialized by LLVMInitializeX86Target().
- Add initialization function for the FPS pass.
Reviewers: craig.topper
Reviewed By: craig.topper
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63218
llvm-svn: 363221
This reverts r362990 (git commit 374571301d)
This was causing linker warnings on Darwin:
ld: warning: direct access in function 'llvm::initializeEvexToVexInstPassPass(llvm::PassRegistry&)'
from file '../../lib/libLLVMX86CodeGen.a(X86EvexToVex.cpp.o)' to global weak symbol
'void std::__1::__call_once_proxy<std::__1::tuple<void* (&)(llvm::PassRegistry&),
std::__1::reference_wrapper<llvm::PassRegistry>&&> >(void*)' from file '../../lib/libLLVMCore.a(Verifier.cpp.o)'
means the weak symbol cannot be overridden at runtime. This was likely caused by different translation
units being compiled with different visibility settings.
llvm-svn: 363028
Summary:
For builds with LLVM_BUILD_LLVM_DYLIB=ON and BUILD_SHARED_LIBS=OFF
this change makes all symbols in the target specific libraries hidden
by default.
A new macro called LLVM_EXTERNAL_VISIBILITY has been added to mark symbols in these
libraries public, which is mainly needed for the definitions of the
LLVMInitialize* functions.
This patch reduces the number of public symbols in libLLVM.so by about
25%. This should improve load times for the dynamic library and also
make abi checker tools, like abidiff require less memory when analyzing
libLLVM.so
One side-effect of this change is that for builds with
LLVM_BUILD_LLVM_DYLIB=ON and LLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB=ON some unittests that
access symbols that are no longer public will need to be statically linked.
Before and after public symbol counts (using gcc 8.2.1, ld.bfd 2.31.1):
nm before/libLLVM-9svn.so | grep ' [A-Zuvw] ' | wc -l
36221
nm after/libLLVM-9svn.so | grep ' [A-Zuvw] ' | wc -l
26278
Reviewers: chandlerc, beanz, mgorny, rnk, hans
Reviewed By: rnk, hans
Subscribers: Jim, hiraditya, michaelplatings, chapuni, jholewinski, arsenm, dschuff, jyknight, dylanmckay, sdardis, nemanjai, jvesely, nhaehnle, javed.absar, sbc100, jgravelle-google, aheejin, kbarton, fedor.sergeev, asb, rbar, johnrusso, simoncook, apazos, sabuasal, niosHD, jrtc27, zzheng, edward-jones, mgrang, atanasyan, rogfer01, MartinMosbeck, brucehoult, the_o, PkmX, jocewei, kristina, jsji, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54439
llvm-svn: 362990
When the tiny code model is requested for a target machine that does not
support this, we get an error message (which is nice) but also this diagnostic
and request to submit a bug report:
fatal error: error in backend: Target does not support the tiny CodeModel
[Inferior 2 (process 31509) exited with code 0106]
clang-9: error: clang frontend command failed with exit code 70 (use -v to see invocation)
(gdb) clang version 9.0.0 (http://llvm.org/git/clang.git 29994b0c63a40f9c97c664170244a7bba5ecc15e) (http://llvm.org/git/llvm.git 95606fdf91c2d63a931e865f4b78b2e9828ddc74)
Target: arm-arm-none-eabi
Thread model: posix
clang-9: note: diagnostic msg: PLEASE submit a bug report to https://bugs.llvm.org/ and include the crash backtrace, preprocessed source, and associated run script.
clang-9: note: diagnostic msg:
********************
PLEASE ATTACH THE FOLLOWING FILES TO THE BUG REPORT:
Preprocessed source(s) and associated run script(s) are located at:
clang-9: note: diagnostic msg: /tmp/tiny-dfe1a2.c
clang-9: note: diagnostic msg: /tmp/tiny-dfe1a2.sh
clang-9: note: diagnostic msg:
But this is not a bug, this is a feature. :-) Not only is this not a bug, this
is also pretty confusing. This patch causes just to print the fatal error and
not the diagnostic:
fatal error: error in backend: Target does not support the tiny CodeModel
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62236
llvm-svn: 361370
Move the declarations of getThe<Name>Target() functions into a new header in
TargetInfo and make users of these functions include this new header.
This fixes a layering problem.
llvm-svn: 360736
This is necessary since SVN r330706, as tail merging can include
CFI instructions since then.
This fixes PR40322 and PR40012.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61252
llvm-svn: 359496
Because CodeGen can't depend on GlobalISel, we need a way to encapsulate the CSE
configs that can be passed between TargetPassConfig and the targets' custom
pass configs. This CSEConfigBase allows targets to create custom CSE configs
which is then used by the GISel passes for the CSEMIRBuilder.
This support will be used in a follow up commit to allow constant-only CSE for
-O0 compiles in D60580.
llvm-svn: 358368
The expansion of TCRETURNri(64) would not keep operand flags like
undef/renamable/etc. which can result in machine verifier issues.
Also add plumbing to be able to use `-run-pass=x86-pseudo`.
llvm-svn: 357808
Summary:
Given that X86 does not use this currently, this is an NFC. I'll
experiment with enabling and will report numbers.
Reviewers: andreadb, lebedev.ri
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60185
llvm-svn: 357568
Summary:
ShadowCallStack on x86_64 suffered from the same racy security issues as
Return Flow Guard and had performance overhead as high as 13% depending
on the benchmark. x86_64 ShadowCallStack was always an experimental
feature and never shipped a runtime required to support it, as such
there are no expected downstream users.
Reviewers: pcc
Reviewed By: pcc
Subscribers: mgorny, javed.absar, hiraditya, jdoerfert, cfe-commits, #sanitizers, llvm-commits
Tags: #clang, #sanitizers, #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59034
llvm-svn: 355624
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
To make X86CondBrFoldingPass can be run with --run-pass option, this can test one wrong assertion on analyzeCompare function for SUB32ri when its operand is not imm
Patch by Jianping Chen
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55412
llvm-svn: 348620
Adds fatal errors for any target that does not support the Tiny or Kernel
codemodels by rejigging the getEffectiveCodeModel calls.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50141
llvm-svn: 348585
It causes asserts building BoringSSL. See https://crbug.com/91009#c3 for
repro.
This also reverts the follow-ups:
Revert r347724 "Do not insert prefetches with unsupported memory operands."
Revert r347606 "[X86] Add dependency from X86 to ProfileData after rL347596"
Revert r347607 "Add new passes to X86 pipeline tests"
llvm-svn: 347864
Summary:
Support for profile-driven cache prefetching (X86)
This change is part of a larger system, consisting of a cache prefetches recommender, create_llvm_prof (https://github.com/google/autofdo), and LLVM.
A proof of concept recommender is DynamoRIO's cache miss analyzer. It processes memory access traces obtained from a running binary and identifies patterns in cache misses. Based on them, it produces a csv file with recommendations. The expectation is that, by leveraging such recommendations, we can reduce the amount of clock cycles spent waiting for data from memory. A microbenchmark based on the DynamoRIO analyzer is available as a proof of concept: https://goo.gl/6TM2Xp.
The recommender makes prefetch recommendations in terms of:
* the binary offset of an instruction with a memory operand;
* a delta;
* and a type (nta, t0, t1, t2)
meaning: a prefetch of that type should be inserted right before the instrution at that binary offset, and the prefetch should be for an address delta away from the memory address the instruction will access.
For example:
0x400ab2,64,nta
and assuming the instruction at 0x400ab2 is:
movzbl (%rbx,%rdx,1),%edx
means that the recommender determined it would be beneficial for a prefetchnta instruction to be inserted right before this instruction, as such:
prefetchnta 0x40(%rbx,%rdx,1)
movzbl (%rbx, %rdx, 1), %edx
The workflow for prefetch cache instrumentation is as follows (the proof of concept script details these steps as well):
1. build binary, making sure -gmlt -fdebug-info-for-profiling is passed. The latter option will enable the X86DiscriminateMemOps pass, which ensures instructions with memory operands are uniquely identifiable (this causes ~2% size increase in total binary size due to the additional debug information).
2. collect memory traces, run analysis to obtain recommendations (see above-referenced DynamoRIO demo as a proof of concept).
3. use create_llvm_prof to convert recommendations to reference insertion locations in terms of debug info locations.
4. rebuild binary, using the exact same set of arguments used initially, to which -mllvm -prefetch-hints-file=<file> needs to be added, using the afdo file obtained at step 3.
Note that if sample profiling feedback-driven optimization is also desired, that happens before step 1 above. In this case, the sample profile afdo file that was used to produce the binary at step 1 must also be included in step 4.
The data needed by the compiler in order to identify prefetch insertion points is very similar to what is needed for sample profiles. For this reason, and given that the overall approach (memory tracing-based cache recommendation mechanisms) is under active development, we use the afdo format as a syntax for capturing this information. We avoid confusing semantics with sample profile afdo data by feeding the two types of information to the compiler through separate files and compiler flags. Should the approach prove successful, we can investigate improvements to this encoding mechanism.
Reviewers: davidxl, wmi, craig.topper
Reviewed By: davidxl, wmi, craig.topper
Subscribers: davide, danielcdh, mgorny, aprantl, eraman, JDevlieghere, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54052
llvm-svn: 347596
The required-vector-width attribute was only used for backend testing and has never been generated by clang.
I believe clang is now generating min-legal-vector-width for vector uses in user code.
With this I believe passing -mprefer-vector-width=256 to clang should prevent use of zmm registers in the generated assembly unless the user used a 512-bit intrinsic in their source code.
llvm-svn: 345317
This patch implements a pass that optimizes condition branches on x86 by
taking advantage of the three-way conditional code generated by compare
instructions.
Currently, it tries to hoisting EQ and NE conditional branch to a dominant
conditional branch condition where the same EQ/NE conditional code is
computed. An example:
bb_0:
cmp %0, 19
jg bb_1
jmp bb_2
bb_1:
cmp %0, 40
jg bb_3
jmp bb_4
bb_4:
cmp %0, 20
je bb_5
jmp bb_6
Here we could combine the two compares in bb_0 and bb_4 and have the
following code:
bb_0:
cmp %0, 20
jg bb_1
jl bb_2
jmp bb_5
bb_1:
cmp %0, 40
jg bb_3
jmp bb_6
For the case of %0 == 20 (bb_5), we eliminate two jumps, and the control height
for bb_6 is also reduced. bb_4 is gone after the optimization.
This optimization is motivated by the branch pattern generated by the switch
lowering: we always have pivot-1 compare for the inner nodes and we do a pivot
compare again the leaf (like above pattern).
This pass currently is enabled on Intel's Sandybridge and later arches. Some
reviewers pointed out that on some arches (like AMD Jaguar), this pass may
increase branch density to the point where it hurts the performance of the
branch predictor.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46662
llvm-svn: 343993
Load Hardening.
Wires up the existing pass to work with a proper IR attribute rather
than just a hidden/internal flag. The internal flag continues to work
for now, but I'll likely remove it soon.
Most of the churn here is adding the IR attribute. I talked about this
Kristof Beyls and he seemed at least initially OK with this direction.
The idea of using a full attribute here is that we *do* expect at least
some forms of this for other architectures. There isn't anything
*inherently* x86-specific about this technique, just that we only have
an implementation for x86 at the moment.
While we could potentially expose this as a Clang-level attribute as
well, that seems like a good question to defer for the moment as it
isn't 100% clear whether that or some other programmer interface (or
both?) would be best. We'll defer the programmer interface side of this
for now, but at least get to the point where the feature can be enabled
without relying on implementation details.
This also allows us to do something that was really hard before: we can
enable *just* the indirect call retpolines when using SLH. For x86, we
don't have any other way to mitigate indirect calls. Other architectures
may take a different approach of course, and none of this is surfaced to
user-level flags.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51157
llvm-svn: 341363
a shorter name ('x86-slh') for the internal flags and pass name.
Without this, you can't use the -stop-after or -stop-before
infrastructure. I seem to have just missed this when originally adding
the pass.
The shorter name solves two problems. First, the flag names were ...
really long and hard to type/manage. Second, the pass name can't be the
exact same as the flag name used to enable this, and there are already
some users of that flag name so I'm avoiding changing it unnecessarily.
llvm-svn: 339836
Don't try to generate large PIC code for non-ELF targets. Neither COFF
nor MachO have relocations for large position independent code, and
users have been using "large PIC" code models to JIT 64-bit code for a
while now. With this change, if they are generating ELF code, their
JITed code will truly be PIC, but if they target MachO or COFF, it will
contain 64-bit immediates that directly reference external symbols. For
a JIT, that's perfectly fine.
llvm-svn: 337740
Spectre variant #1 for x86.
There is a lengthy, detailed RFC thread on llvm-dev which discusses the
high level issues. High level discussion is probably best there.
I've split the design document out of this patch and will land it
separately once I update it to reflect the latest edits and updates to
the Google doc used in the RFC thread.
This patch is really just an initial step. It isn't quite ready for
prime time and is only exposed via debugging flags. It has two major
limitations currently:
1) It only supports x86-64, and only certain ABIs. Many assumptions are
currently hard-coded and need to be factored out of the code here.
2) It doesn't include any options for more fine-grained control, either
of which control flow edges are significant or which loads are
important to be hardened.
3) The code is still quite rough and the testing lighter than I'd like.
However, this is enough for people to begin using. I have had numerous
requests from people to be able to experiment with this patch to
understand the trade-offs it presents and how to use it. We would also
like to encourage work to similar effect in other toolchains.
The ARM folks are actively developing a system based on this for
AArch64. We hope to merge this with their efforts when both are far
enough along. But we also don't want to block making this available on
that effort.
Many thanks to the *numerous* people who helped along the way here. For
this patch in particular, both Eric and Craig did a ton of review to
even have confidence in it as an early, rough cut at this functionality.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44824
llvm-svn: 336990
Reverting because this is causing failures in the LLDB test suite on
GreenDragon.
LLVM ERROR: unsupported relocation with subtraction expression, symbol
'__GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_' can not be undefined in a subtraction
expression
llvm-svn: 335894
Targets should be able to define whether or not they support the outliner
without the outliner being added to the pass pipeline. Before this, the
outliner pass would be added, and ask the target whether or not it supports the
outliner.
After this, it's possible to query the target in TargetPassConfig, before the
outliner pass is created. This ensures that passing -enable-machine-outliner
will not modify the pass pipeline of any target that does not support it.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D48683
llvm-svn: 335887
Add NoTrapAfterNoreturn target option which skips emission of traps
behind noreturn calls even if TrapUnreachable is enabled.
Enable the feature on Mach-O to save code size; Comments suggest it is
not possible to enable it for the other users of TrapUnreachable.
rdar://41530228
DifferentialRevision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48674
llvm-svn: 335877
The large code model allows code and data segments to exceed 2GB, which
means that some symbol references may require a displacement that cannot
be encoded as a displacement from RIP. The large PIC model even relaxes
the assumption that the GOT itself is within 2GB of all code. Therefore,
we need a special code sequence to materialize it:
.LtmpN:
leaq .LtmpN(%rip), %rbx
movabsq $_GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_-.LtmpN, %rax # Scratch
addq %rax, %rbx # GOT base reg
From that, non-local references go through the GOT base register instead
of being PC-relative loads. Local references typically use GOTOFF
symbols, like this:
movq extern_gv@GOT(%rbx), %rax
movq local_gv@GOTOFF(%rbx), %rax
All calls end up being indirect:
movabsq $local_fn@GOTOFF, %rax
addq %rbx, %rax
callq *%rax
The medium code model retains the assumption that the code segment is
less than 2GB, so calls are once again direct, and the RIP-relative
loads can be used to access the GOT. Materializing the GOT is easy:
leaq _GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_(%rip), %rbx # GOT base reg
DSO local data accesses will use it:
movq local_gv@GOTOFF(%rbx), %rax
Non-local data accesses will use RIP-relative addressing, which means we
may not always need to materialize the GOT base:
movq extern_gv@GOTPCREL(%rip), %rax
Direct calls are basically the same as they are in the small code model:
They use direct, PC-relative addressing, and the PLT is used for calls
to non-local functions.
This patch adds reasonably comprehensive testing of LEA, but there are
lots of interesting folding opportunities that are unimplemented.
I restricted the MCJIT/eh-lg-pic.ll test to Linux, since the large PIC
code model is not implemented for MachO yet.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47211
llvm-svn: 335508
Summary:
The large code model allows code and data segments to exceed 2GB, which
means that some symbol references may require a displacement that cannot
be encoded as a displacement from RIP. The large PIC model even relaxes
the assumption that the GOT itself is within 2GB of all code. Therefore,
we need a special code sequence to materialize it:
.LtmpN:
leaq .LtmpN(%rip), %rbx
movabsq $_GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_-.LtmpN, %rax # Scratch
addq %rax, %rbx # GOT base reg
From that, non-local references go through the GOT base register instead
of being PC-relative loads. Local references typically use GOTOFF
symbols, like this:
movq extern_gv@GOT(%rbx), %rax
movq local_gv@GOTOFF(%rbx), %rax
All calls end up being indirect:
movabsq $local_fn@GOTOFF, %rax
addq %rbx, %rax
callq *%rax
The medium code model retains the assumption that the code segment is
less than 2GB, so calls are once again direct, and the RIP-relative
loads can be used to access the GOT. Materializing the GOT is easy:
leaq _GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_(%rip), %rbx # GOT base reg
DSO local data accesses will use it:
movq local_gv@GOTOFF(%rbx), %rax
Non-local data accesses will use RIP-relative addressing, which means we
may not always need to materialize the GOT base:
movq extern_gv@GOTPCREL(%rip), %rax
Direct calls are basically the same as they are in the small code model:
They use direct, PC-relative addressing, and the PLT is used for calls
to non-local functions.
This patch adds reasonably comprehensive testing of LEA, but there are
lots of interesting folding opportunities that are unimplemented.
Reviewers: chandlerc, echristo
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47211
llvm-svn: 335297
All COFF targets should use @IMGREL32 relocations for symbol differences
against __ImageBase. Do the same for getSectionForConstant, so that
immediates lowered to globals get merged across TUs.
Patch by Chris January
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47783
llvm-svn: 334523
This patch aims to provide correct dwarf unwind information in function
epilogue for X86.
It consists of two parts. The first part inserts CFI instructions that set
appropriate cfa offset and cfa register in emitEpilogue() in
X86FrameLowering. This part is X86 specific.
The second part is platform independent and ensures that:
* CFI instructions do not affect code generation (they are not counted as
instructions when tail duplicating or tail merging)
* Unwind information remains correct when a function is modified by
different passes. This is done in a late pass by analyzing information
about cfa offset and cfa register in BBs and inserting additional CFI
directives where necessary.
Added CFIInstrInserter pass:
* analyzes each basic block to determine cfa offset and register are valid
at its entry and exit
* verifies that outgoing cfa offset and register of predecessor blocks match
incoming values of their successors
* inserts additional CFI directives at basic block beginning to correct the
rule for calculating CFA
Having CFI instructions in function epilogue can cause incorrect CFA
calculation rule for some basic blocks. This can happen if, due to basic
block reordering, or the existence of multiple epilogue blocks, some of the
blocks have wrong cfa offset and register values set by the epilogue block
above them.
CFIInstrInserter is currently run only on X86, but can be used by any target
that implements support for adding CFI instructions in epilogue.
Patch by Violeta Vukobrat.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42848
llvm-svn: 330706
The key idea is to lower COPY nodes populating EFLAGS by scanning the
uses of EFLAGS and introducing dedicated code to preserve the necessary
state in a GPR. In the vast majority of cases, these uses are cmovCC and
jCC instructions. For such cases, we can very easily save and restore
the necessary information by simply inserting a setCC into a GPR where
the original flags are live, and then testing that GPR directly to feed
the cmov or conditional branch.
However, things are a bit more tricky if arithmetic is using the flags.
This patch handles the vast majority of cases that seem to come up in
practice: adc, adcx, adox, rcl, and rcr; all without taking advantage of
partially preserved EFLAGS as LLVM doesn't currently model that at all.
There are a large number of operations that techinaclly observe EFLAGS
currently but shouldn't in this case -- they typically are using DF.
Currently, they will not be handled by this approach. However, I have
never seen this issue come up in practice. It is already pretty rare to
have these patterns come up in practical code with LLVM. I had to resort
to writing MIR tests to cover most of the logic in this pass already.
I suspect even with its current amount of coverage of arithmetic users
of EFLAGS it will be a significant improvement over the current use of
pushf/popf. It will also produce substantially faster code in most of
the common patterns.
This patch also removes all of the old lowering for EFLAGS copies, and
the hack that forced us to use a frame pointer when EFLAGS copies were
found anywhere in a function so that the dynamic stack adjustment wasn't
a problem. None of this is needed as we now lower all of these copies
directly in MI and without require stack adjustments.
Lots of thanks to Reid who came up with several aspects of this
approach, and Craig who helped me work out a couple of things tripping
me up while working on this.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45146
llvm-svn: 329657
Summary:
The ShadowCallStack pass instruments functions marked with the
shadowcallstack attribute. The instrumented prolog saves the return
address to [gs:offset] where offset is stored and updated in [gs:0].
The instrumented epilog loads/updates the return address from [gs:0]
and checks that it matches the return address on the stack before
returning.
Reviewers: pcc, vitalybuka
Reviewed By: pcc
Subscribers: cryptoad, eugenis, craig.topper, mgorny, llvm-commits, kcc
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44802
llvm-svn: 329139
If a load follows a store and reloads data that the store has written to memory, Intel microarchitectures can in many cases forward the data directly from the store to the load, This "store forwarding" saves cycles by enabling the load to directly obtain the data instead of accessing the data from cache or memory.
A "store forward block" occurs in cases that a store cannot be forwarded to the load. The most typical case of store forward block on Intel Core microarchiticutre that a small store cannot be forwarded to a large load.
The estimated penalty for a store forward block is ~13 cycles.
This pass tries to recognize and handle cases where "store forward block" is created by the compiler when lowering memcpy calls to a sequence
of a load and a store.
The pass currently only handles cases where memcpy is lowered to XMM/YMM registers, it tries to break the memcpy into smaller copies.
breaking the memcpy should be possible since there is no atomicity guarantee for loads and stores to XMM/YMM.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41330
Change-Id: Ib48836ccdf6005989f7d4466fa2035b7b04415d9
llvm-svn: 328973
If a load follows a store and reloads data that the store has written to memory, Intel microarchitectures can in many cases forward the data directly from the store to the load, This "store forwarding" saves cycles by enabling the load to directly obtain the data instead of accessing the data from cache or memory.
A "store forward block" occurs in cases that a store cannot be forwarded to the load. The most typical case of store forward block on Intel Core microarchiticutre that a small store cannot be forwarded to a large load.
The estimated penalty for a store forward block is ~13 cycles.
This pass tries to recognize and handle cases where "store forward block" is created by the compiler when lowering memcpy calls to a sequence
of a load and a store.
The pass currently only handles cases where memcpy is lowered to XMM/YMM registers, it tries to break the memcpy into smaller copies.
breaking the memcpy should be possible since there is no atomicity guarantee for loads and stores to XMM/YMM.
Change-Id: Ic41aa9ade6512e0478db66e07e2fde41b4fb35f9
llvm-svn: 325128
It asserts building Chromium; see PR36346.
(This also reverts the follow-up r324836.)
> If a load follows a store and reloads data that the store has written to memory, Intel microarchitectures can in many cases forward the data directly from the store to the load, This "store forwarding" saves cycles by enabling the load to directly obtain the data instead of accessing the data from cache or memory.
> A "store forward block" occurs in cases that a store cannot be forwarded to the load. The most typical case of store forward block on Intel Core microarchiticutre that a small store cannot be forwarded to a large load.
> The estimated penalty for a store forward block is ~13 cycles.
>
> This pass tries to recognize and handle cases where "store forward block" is created by the compiler when lowering memcpy calls to a sequence
> of a load and a store.
>
> The pass currently only handles cases where memcpy is lowered to XMM/YMM registers, it tries to break the memcpy into smaller copies.
> breaking the memcpy should be possible since there is no atomicity guarantee for loads and stores to XMM/YMM.
llvm-svn: 324887
Amy Huang