- Oct 20, 2013
-
-
Michael Gottesman authored
One optimization simplify-cfg performs is the converting of switches to lookup tables if the switch has > 4 cases. This is done by: 1. Finding the max/min case value and calculating the switch case range. 2. Create a lookup table basic block. 3. Perform a check in the switch's BB to see if the input value is in the switch's case range. If the input value satisfies said predicate branch to the lookup table BB, otherwise branch to the switch's default destination BB using the default value as the result. The conditional check consists of subtracting the min case value of the table from any input iN value and then ensuring that said value is unsigned less than the size of the lookup table represented as an iN value. If the lookup table is a covered lookup table, the size of the table will be N which is 0 as an iN value. Thus the comparison will be an `icmp ult` of an iN value against 0 which is always false yielding the incorrect result. This patch fixes this problem by recognizing if we have a covered lookup table and if we do, unconditionally jumps to the lookup table BB since the covering property of the lookup table implies no input values could not be handled by said BB. rdar://15268442 llvm-svn: 193045
-
David Majnemer authored
This fixes PR17591. N.B. This actually goes beyond what the standard mandates by requiring the restriction to hold for declarations instead of definitions. This is believed to be a defect in the standard and an LWG issue has been submitted. llvm-svn: 193044
-
Peter Collingbourne authored
llvm-svn: 193043
-
Peter Collingbourne authored
This ensures that the prefix data is treated as part of the function for the purpose of debug info. This provides a better debugging experience, among other things by allowing a debug info client to correctly look up a function in debug info given a function pointer. llvm-svn: 193042
-
Peter Collingbourne authored
r182712 attempted to do this, but it failed to handle data emitted via EmitBytes. llvm-svn: 193041
-
- Oct 19, 2013
-
-
Rafael Espindola authored
llvm-svn: 193040
-
Rafael Espindola authored
* NamedDecl and CXXMethodDecl were missing getMostRecentDecl. * The const version can just forward to the non const. * getMostRecentDecl can use cast instead of cast_or_null. This then removes some casts from the callers. llvm-svn: 193039
-
Benjamin Kramer authored
llvm-svn: 193038
-
Rafael Espindola authored
Thanks to David Blaikie for noticing it. llvm-svn: 193037
-
Rafael Espindola authored
Thanks to Sean Silva for the suggestion. llvm-svn: 193036
-
Bill Wendling authored
If the predecessor's being spliced into a landing pad, then we need the PHIs to come first and the rest of the predecessor's code to come *after* the landing pad instruction. llvm-svn: 193035
-
Yaron Keren authored
llvm-svn: 193034
-
Yaron Keren authored
llvm-svn: 193033
-
Bill Wendling authored
llvm-svn: 193032
-
Yaron Keren authored
llvm-svn: 193031
-
Rui Ueyama authored
llvm-svn: 193030
-
Rui Ueyama authored
This patch fixes a bug in r190608. The results of a comparison function passed to std::sort must be transitive, which is, if a < b and b < c, and if a != b, a < c must be also true. CompareAtoms::compare did not actually guarantee the transitivity. As a result the sort results were sometimes just wrong. Consider there are three atoms, X, Y, and Z, whose file ordinals are 1, 2, 3, respectively. Z has a property "layout-after X". In this case, all the following conditionals become true: X < Y because X's ordinal is less than Y's Y < Z because Y's ordinal is less than Z's Z < X because of the layout-after relationship This is not of course transitive. The reason why this happened is because we used follow-on relationships for comparison if two atoms falls in the same follow-on chain, but we used each atom's properties if they did not. This patch fixes the issue by using follow-on root atoms for comparison to get consistent results. Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1980 llvm-svn: 193029
-
Rafael Espindola authored
llvm-svn: 193028
-
Rafael Espindola authored
Redeclarable already had a isFirstDecl, but it was missing from DeclBase. llvm-svn: 193027
-
Rafael Espindola authored
llvm-svn: 193026
-
Rafael Espindola authored
llvm-svn: 193025
-
Eric Christopher authored
llvm-svn: 193024
-
Eric Christopher authored
llvm-svn: 193023
-
Nick Lewycky authored
pick up the common bits ubsan actually needs. Also remove whole-archive when we aren't trying to re-export the symbols. llvm-svn: 193022
-
Andrew Trick authored
llvm-svn: 193021
-
Kaelyn Uhrain authored
Now that CorrectTypo knows how to correctly search classes for typo correction candidates, there is no good reason to only replace an existing CXXScopeSpecifier if it refers to a namespace. While the actual enablement was a matter of changing a single comparison, the fallout from enabling the functionality required a lot more code changes (including my two previous commits). llvm-svn: 193020
-
Kaelyn Uhrain authored
NestedNameSpecifier that replaces an existing specifier. llvm-svn: 193019
-
Kaelyn Uhrain authored
essentially the same. llvm-svn: 193018
-
Rui Ueyama authored
We should dead-strip atoms only if they are created for COMDAT symbols. If we remove non-COMDAT atoms from a binary, it will no longer be guaranteed that the binary will work correctly. In COFF, you can manipulate the order of section contents in the resulting binary by section name. For example, if you have four sections .data$unique_prefix_{a,b,c,d}, it's guaranteed that the contents of A, B, C, and D will be consecutive in the resulting .data section in that order. Thus, you can access B's and C's contents by incrementing a pointer pointing to A until it reached to D. That's why we cannot dead-strip B or C even if no one is directly referencing to them. Some object files in the standard library actually use that technique. llvm-svn: 193017
-
Jim Ingham authored
and unions the same way that C would. <rdar://problem/11987906> llvm-svn: 193016
-
Andrew Trick authored
SCEV currently fails to compute loop counts for nonunit stride loops. This comes up frequently. It prevents loop optimization and forces vectorization to insert extra loop checks. For example: void foo(int n, int *x) { for (int i = 0; i < n; i += 3) { x[i] = i; x[i+1] = i+1; x[i+2] = i+2; } } We need to properly handle the case in which limit > INT_MAX-stride. In the above case: n > INT_MAX-3. In this case the loop counter will step beyond the limit and overflow at the same time. However, knowing that signed integer overlow in undefined, we can assume the loop test behavior is arbitrary after overflow. This obeys both C undefined behavior rules, and the more strict LLVM poison value rules. I'm finally fixing this in response to Hal Finkel's persistence. The most probable reason that we never optimized this before is that we were being careful to handle case where the developer expected a side-effect free infinite loop relying on overflow: for (int i = 0; i < n; i += s) { ++j; } return j; If INT_MAX+1 is a multiple of s and n > INT_MAX-s, then we might expect an infinite loop. However there are plenty of ways to achieve this effect without relying on undefined behavior of signed overflow. llvm-svn: 193015
-
Bill Wendling authored
llvm-svn: 193014
-
Nadav Rotem authored
llvm-svn: 193013
-
Bill Wendling authored
llvm-svn: 193012
-
NAKAMURA Takumi authored
llvm-svn: 193011
-
DeLesley Hutchins authored
llvm-svn: 193010
-
Bill Wendling authored
llvm-svn: 193009
-
Bill Wendling authored
Update to reflect current GC APIs and usage. The example code is taken from the Erlang GC implementation. llvm-svn: 193008
-
Michael J. Spencer authored
llvm-svn: 193007
-
Hans Wennborg authored
llvm-svn: 193006
-