Skip to content
Commit 5ff5ddd0 authored by Reid Kleckner's avatar Reid Kleckner
Browse files

[Win64] Insert int3 into trailing empty BBs

Otherwise, the Win64 unwinder considers direct branches to such empty
trailing BBs to be a branch out of the function. It treats such a branch
as a tail call, which can only be part of an epilogue. If the unwinder
misclassifies such a branch as part of the epilogue, it will fail to
unwind the stack further. This can lead to bad stack traces, or failure
to handle exceptions properly. This is described in
https://llvm.org/PR45064#c4, and by the comment at the top of the
X86AvoidTrailingCallPass.cpp file.

It should be safe to insert int3 for such blocks. An empty trailing BB
that reaches this pass is pretty much guaranteed to be unreachable.  If
a program executed such a block, it would fall off the end of the
function.

Most of the complexity in this patch comes from threading through the
"EHFuncletEntry" boolean on the MIRParser and registering the pass so we
can stop and start codegen around it. I used an MIR test because we
should teach LLVM to optimize away these branches as a follow-up.

Reviewed By: hans

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D76531
parent ebf83c36
Loading
Loading
Loading
Loading
0% Loading or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment