https://github.com/pcc edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133534
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
pcc wrote:
I think this should be opt-in behavior. It might be useful if the goal is to
protect the stack, but in cases where the goal is to only protect the heap due
to the high cost of protecting the stack, this change would only add overhead.
If you are deploying a comprehensive stack prote
pcc wrote:
Adding Support maintainers
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/134197
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132857
>From 4eac4350b8a540aba5c5ed658353b4f6abaf329b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2025 22:15:52 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Address comments
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
---
llvm/l
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133530
>From b37a44fff650b06eda249060277d0c007226cad2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2025 21:51:44 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Fix CMake build
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
---
compiler-rt
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/134197
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -1951,9 +1952,23 @@ let Predicates = [HasPAuth] in {
let Uses = [X16];
}
+ def AUTxMxN : Pseudo<(outs GPR64:$AuthVal, GPR64common:$Scratch),
+ (ins GPR64:$Val, i32imm:$Key,
+i64imm:$Disc, GPR64:$AddrDisc),
+
@@ -2104,23 +2115,19 @@ void AArch64AsmPrinter::emitPtrauthAuthResign(const
MachineInstr *MI) {
break;
}
- auto AUTKey = (AArch64PACKey::ID)MI->getOperand(0).getImm();
- uint64_t AUTDisc = MI->getOperand(1).getImm();
- unsigned AUTAddrDisc = MI->getOperand(2).getReg(
@@ -1,279 +1,327 @@
; NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_llc_test_checks.py
; RUN: llc < %s -mtriple arm64e-apple-darwin -global-isel=0
-verify-machineinstrs \
-; RUN: -aarch64-ptrauth-auth-checks=none | FileCheck %s -DL="L"
--check-p
@@ -33,36 +33,45 @@ target datalayout = "e-m:o-i64:64-i128:128-n32:64-S128"
define i64 @test_auth_blend(i64 %arg, i64 %arg1) {
; UNCHECKED-LABEL: test_auth_blend:
-; UNCHECKED: %bb.0:
-; UNCHECKED-NEXT:mov x16, x0
-; UNCHECKED-NEXT:mov x17, x1
-; UNCHECKED-NEXT:
@@ -2146,23 +2153,19 @@ void AArch64AsmPrinter::emitPtrauthAuthResign(const
MachineInstr *MI) {
if (!IsAUTPAC)
return;
- auto PACKey = (AArch64PACKey::ID)MI->getOperand(3).getImm();
- uint64_t PACDisc = MI->getOperand(4).getImm();
- unsigned PACAddrDisc = MI->getOper
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132857
>From 4eac4350b8a540aba5c5ed658353b4f6abaf329b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2025 22:15:52 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Address comments
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
---
llvm/lib/T
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132857
>From 4eac4350b8a540aba5c5ed658353b4f6abaf329b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2025 22:15:52 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Address comments
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
---
llvm/lib/T
pcc wrote:
Sorry, I was having a problem with spr with this change so I pushed the
updated change directly to the branch.
I think there are some merge conflicts by now in the include list but they
should be easy to resolve.
--
Peter
On Sat, Jun 14, 2025, 17:58 Fangrui Song ***@***.***> wrote:
pcc wrote:
> At least a comment in the code would be good. A variety of people end up
> using these tools for tests, and I could see someone getting confused as to
> why the guid doesn't match what's e.g. in the ThinLTO index. For that
> understanding you'd have to read more than just what thi
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/143992
>From f11d7d544cc61dce582de538608bfd512147f90a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 16:06:14 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Upload correct patch
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
---
l
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/143992
>From f11d7d544cc61dce582de538608bfd512147f90a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 16:06:14 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Upload correct patch
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
---
llvm/
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/143992
>From f11d7d544cc61dce582de538608bfd512147f90a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 16:06:14 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Upload correct patch
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
---
llvm/
pcc wrote:
> This needs a caveat somewhere (either in printed usage message or in a
> comment) that this won't work for local linkage symbols (I suppose the user
> could give the "file:" prefix but that won't work if
> -funique-internal-linkage-names was specified etc).
I'm not sure that is w
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/143992
>From f11d7d544cc61dce582de538608bfd512147f90a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 16:06:14 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Upload correct patch
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
---
llvm/
https://github.com/pcc created https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/143992
This is useful for debugging ThinLTO issues.
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-
pcc wrote:
@MaskRay ping.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138366
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142887
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142887
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
pcc wrote:
> Could we have a test that demonstrates the new better instruction sequence
> (by precommiting to show the diff here)?
Done, see #143189
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142887
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-com
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142887
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142887
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142886
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142886
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141327
>From b36c74c344ed47b99e9bfdc28f9081c3c704d8c7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 23:08:59 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Format
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
---
llvm/lib/Transforms
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141327
>From b36c74c344ed47b99e9bfdc28f9081c3c704d8c7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 23:08:59 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Format
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
---
llvm/lib/Transforms
@@ -2478,3 +2479,76 @@ PreservedAnalyses LowerTypeTestsPass::run(Module &M,
return PreservedAnalyses::all();
return PreservedAnalyses::none();
}
+
+PreservedAnalyses SimplifyTypeTestsPass::run(Module &M,
+ ModuleAnalysisManager
@@ -2478,3 +2479,76 @@ PreservedAnalyses LowerTypeTestsPass::run(Module &M,
return PreservedAnalyses::all();
return PreservedAnalyses::none();
}
+
+PreservedAnalyses SimplifyTypeTestsPass::run(Module &M,
+ ModuleAnalysisManager
@@ -2478,3 +2479,76 @@ PreservedAnalyses LowerTypeTestsPass::run(Module &M,
return PreservedAnalyses::all();
return PreservedAnalyses::none();
}
+
+PreservedAnalyses SimplifyTypeTestsPass::run(Module &M,
+ ModuleAnalysisManager
@@ -2478,3 +2479,76 @@ PreservedAnalyses LowerTypeTestsPass::run(Module &M,
return PreservedAnalyses::all();
return PreservedAnalyses::none();
}
+
+PreservedAnalyses SimplifyTypeTestsPass::run(Module &M,
+ ModuleAnalysisManager
@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+; RUN: opt -S %s -passes=simplify-type-tests | FileCheck %s
pcc wrote:
Done
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141327
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
htt
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141327
>From b36c74c344ed47b99e9bfdc28f9081c3c704d8c7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 23:08:59 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Format
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
---
llvm/lib/Transforms
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141327
>From b36c74c344ed47b99e9bfdc28f9081c3c704d8c7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 23:08:59 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Format
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
---
llvm/lib/Transforms
@@ -7170,16 +7165,31 @@ bool X86TTIImpl::isProfitableToSinkOperands(Instruction
*I,
II->getIntrinsicID() == Intrinsic::fshr)
ShiftAmountOpNum = 2;
}
-
if (ShiftAmountOpNum == -1)
return false;
+ auto *ShiftAmount = &I->getOperandUse(ShiftAmountOpNum);
pcc wrote:
> Missing verifier checks?
Right, I guess the new operand can either be null (no deactivation symbol) or a
globalvariable.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133537
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm
@@ -1699,7 +1699,9 @@ LLVMValueRef LLVMConstantPtrAuth(LLVMValueRef Ptr,
LLVMValueRef Key,
LLVMValueRef Disc, LLVMValueRef AddrDisc) {
return wrap(ConstantPtrAuth::get(
unwrap(Ptr), unwrap(Key),
- unwrap(Disc), unwrap(AddrDisc)));
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141327
>From b36c74c344ed47b99e9bfdc28f9081c3c704d8c7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 23:08:59 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Format
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
---
llvm/lib/Transforms
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141327
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141327
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141327
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
pcc wrote:
> This PR doesn't entirely fix the problem. Another case that I'm seeing (and
> which is more effectively prevented by the previous approach) is where GVN
> PRE moves the zext behind a phi, and after subsequent optimization passes it
> turns into a phi pointing to other phis which u
pcc wrote:
Depends on #141326
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141716
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc created https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141716
isProfitableToSinkOperands() may now return a phi node. If it does,
check that all incoming values are identical and if so, replace the phi
use with a clone of the incoming value. Use this mechanism to sink phi
node o
pcc wrote:
I'm fixing the code generation for the test cases that I'm adding
(inhibit-zext-constant-hoist.ll) which were all extracted from a build of a
large internal program built with CFI. Previously f1 looked like this where
align was hoisted:
```
f1: #
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141324
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -1019,8 +1019,14 @@ LowerTypeTestsModule::importTypeId(StringRef TypeId) {
return C;
};
- if (TIL.TheKind != TypeTestResolution::Unsat)
-TIL.OffsetedGlobal = ImportGlobal("global_addr");
+ if (TIL.TheKind != TypeTestResolution::Unsat) {
+auto *GV = ImportGlo
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141324
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc approved this pull request.
Cloning makes sense to me at least to begin with. Since fat LTO is a seldomly
used feature, it may be better overall to be a bit less efficient in order to
reduce the overall maintenance burden.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/13
@@ -1951,9 +1952,23 @@ let Predicates = [HasPAuth] in {
let Uses = [X16];
}
+ def AUTxMxN : Pseudo<(outs GPR64:$AuthVal, GPR64common:$Scratch),
+ (ins GPR64:$Val, i32imm:$Key,
+i64imm:$Disc, GPR64:$AddrDisc),
+
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133538
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133538
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133537
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133537
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133536
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133536
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133535
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133535
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133534
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133534
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133533
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133533
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133531
>From 96e7da9a083888683c2ba00d97f886fd748ea10b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2025 20:30:57 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Undo unnecessary change
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
---
lld
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133531
>From 96e7da9a083888683c2ba00d97f886fd748ea10b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2025 20:30:57 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Undo unnecessary change
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
---
lld
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133530
>From b37a44fff650b06eda249060277d0c007226cad2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2025 21:51:44 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Fix CMake build
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
---
compiler-rt
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133530
>From b37a44fff650b06eda249060277d0c007226cad2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2025 21:51:44 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Fix CMake build
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
---
compiler-rt
pcc wrote:
I thought about it some more and decided to go with your suggested approach
anyway. Among other things, #133536 will mean that deactivation symbol support
will be needed for the pseudo instruction in order to avoid deactivation symbol
relocations being silently dropped, so it's best
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/134197
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/134197
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132857
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132857
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132857
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc created https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141327
This pass figures out whether inlining has exposed a constant address to
a lowered type test, and remove the test if so and the address is known
to pass the test. Unfortunately this pass ends up needing to reverse
eng
https://github.com/pcc created https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141325
LICM hoists instructions into the preheader, and CSE and GVN
can effectively perform a hoist by replacing an instruction with
one from another basic block, all of which can lead to the same
kinds of pessimizations tha
https://github.com/pcc created https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141326
Casts taking a constant expression (generally derived from a global
variable address) as an operand are not profitable to CSE because they
appear as subexpressions in the instruction sequence generated by the
LowerTyp
https://github.com/pcc created https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141324
This is either a vtable (in .data.rel.ro) or a jump table (in .text).
Either way it's expected to be in the low 2 GiB, so set the small
code model.
___
llvm-branch-commit
@@ -7538,6 +7538,14 @@ static bool IsEligibleForTrivialRelocation(Sema &SemaRef,
if (!SemaRef.IsCXXTriviallyRelocatableType(Field->getType()))
return false;
}
+
+ // FIXME: PFP should not affect trivial relocatability, instead it should
+ // affect the implementat
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140312
>From 1399ec4fdf8fe08000b590844f4e24c31a310a01 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 16:20:57 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Add test with variable count
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
--
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138366
>From d67e152baaf8487e5cb049166ce61e905011171e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 18:25:54 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] ELF: Add branch-to-branch optimization.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Conte
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140312
>From 1399ec4fdf8fe08000b590844f4e24c31a310a01 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 16:20:57 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Add test with variable count
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
--
pcc wrote:
Right, this feature doesn't change section sizes, so there shouldn't be an
interaction with SHT_LLVM_BB_ADDR_MAP. AFAICT LLD doesn't contain code that
parses SHT_LLVM_BB_ADDR_MAP so I don't see value in adding a test for it.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138366
_
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138366
>From 03060849dc81f83ec48f05995ac8fd6df846c25b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Fri, 2 May 2025 16:57:28 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] =?UTF-8?q?[=F0=9D=98=80=F0=9D=97=BD=F0=9D=97=BF]=20in?=
=?U
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138366
>From e0581c892d07d8bb5518fa412b75b8830f5fb14a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 18:25:54 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] ELF: Add branch-to-branch optimization.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Conte
@@ -0,0 +1,92 @@
+//===- TargetImpl.h -*- C++
-*-===//
+//
+// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM
Exceptions.
+// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apa
@@ -0,0 +1,92 @@
+//===- TargetImpl.h -*- C++
-*-===//
+//
+// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM
Exceptions.
+// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apa
@@ -975,6 +977,62 @@ void AArch64::relocateAlloc(InputSectionBase &sec, uint8_t
*buf) const {
}
}
+static std::optional getControlTransferAddend(InputSection &is,
+Relocation &r) {
+ // Identify a control transfer rel
@@ -0,0 +1,92 @@
+//===- TargetImpl.h -*- C++
-*-===//
+//
+// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM
Exceptions.
+// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apa
https://github.com/pcc edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138366
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/pcc edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138366
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ struct S trivially_relocatable_if_eligible {
};
// CHECK: @_Z4testP1SS0_
-// CHECK: call void @llvm.memmove.p0.p0.i64
+// CHECK: call void @llvm.memmove.p0.p0.i64({{.*}}, i64 8
pcc wrote:
Done
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140312
https://github.com/pcc updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140312
>From 1399ec4fdf8fe08000b590844f4e24c31a310a01 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Collingbourne
Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 16:20:57 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Add test with variable count
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
--
@@ -4425,6 +4425,14 @@ RValue CodeGenFunction::EmitBuiltinExpr(const GlobalDecl
GD, unsigned BuiltinID,
Address Dest = EmitPointerWithAlignment(E->getArg(0));
Address Src = EmitPointerWithAlignment(E->getArg(1));
Value *SizeVal = EmitScalarExpr(E->getArg(2));
+
https://github.com/pcc created https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140312
The builtin is documented to copy `count` elements, but the implementation
copies `count` bytes. Fix that.
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.
@@ -362,6 +362,17 @@ class LangOptionsBase {
BKey
};
+ enum class PointerFieldProtectionKind {
pcc wrote:
I think that allowing this level of customization should be implemented as part
of the separate opt-in solution (e.g. it may be a property of the
https://github.com/pcc commented:
Hi Oliver, thanks for your comments! I'll address them below.
> Thoughts:
>
> This should be opt-in on a field or struct granularity, not just a global
> behavior.
This would certainly be easier if it were an opt-in behavior, as it would allow
avoiding a sub
@@ -2201,6 +2215,22 @@ void CodeGenFunction::EmitCXXConstructorCall(
EmitTypeCheck(CodeGenFunction::TCK_ConstructorCall, Loc, This,
getContext().getRecordType(ClassDecl), CharUnits::Zero());
+ // When initializing an object that has pointer field protect
1 - 100 of 253 matches
Mail list logo
