Skip to content
Commit ba40896f authored by Heejin Ahn's avatar Heejin Ahn
Browse files

[WebAssembly] Fix try placement in fixing unwind mismatches

Summary:
In CFGStackify, `fixUnwindMismatches` function fixes unwind destination
mismatches created by `try` marker placement. For example,
```
try
  ...
  call @qux  ;; This should throw to the caller!
catch
  ...
end
```
When `call @qux` is supposed to throw to the caller, it is possible that
it is wrapped inside a `catch` so in case it throws it ends up unwinding
there incorrectly. (Also it is possible `call @qux` is supposed to
unwind to another `catch` within the same function.)

To fix this, we wrap this inner `call @qux` with a nested
`try`-`catch`-`end` sequence, and within the nested `catch` body, branch
to the right destination:
```
block $l0
  try
    ...
    try                 ;; new nested try
      call @qux
    catch               ;; new nested catch
      local.set n       ;; store exnref to a local
      br $l0
    end
  catch
    ...
  end
end
local.get n             ;; retrieve exnref back
rethrow                 ;; rethrow to the caller
```

The previous algorithm placed the nested `try` right before the `call`.
But it is possible that there are stackified instructions before the
call from which the call takes arguments.
```
try
  ...
  i32.const 5
  call @qux  ;; This should throw to the caller!
catch
  ...
end
```

In this case we have to place `try` before those stackified
instructions.
```
block $l0
  try
    ...
    try                 ;; this should go *before* 'i32.const 5'
      i32.const 5
      call @qux
    catch
      local.set n
      br $l0
    end
  catch
    ...
  end
end
local.get n
rethrow
```

We correctly handle this in the first normal `try` placement phase
(`placeTryMarker` function), but failed to handle this in this
`fixUnwindMismatches`.

Reviewers: dschuff

Subscribers: sbc100, jgravelle-google, hiraditya, sunfish, llvm-commits

Tags: #llvm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77950
parent 9b1a0d30
Loading
Loading
Loading
Loading
0% Loading or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Please to comment