-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[TBAA] Test for tbaa.struct metadata with bitfields in big endian layout #87617
[TBAA] Test for tbaa.struct metadata with bitfields in big endian layout #87617
Conversation
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang Author: Julian Nagele (juliannagele) ChangesThis test exposes what I think is invalid tbaa.struct metadata currently generated for bitfields when using big endian layout. The regions given by Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/87617.diff 1 Files Affected:
diff --git a/clang/test/CodeGen/tbaa-struct-be.cpp b/clang/test/CodeGen/tbaa-struct-be.cpp
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000000..537e6e9ce31779
--- /dev/null
+++ b/clang/test/CodeGen/tbaa-struct-be.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
+// NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_cc_test_checks.py UTC_ARGS: --version 4
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple aarch64_be-apple-darwin -emit-llvm -o - -O1 %s | \
+// RUN: FileCheck -check-prefixes=CHECK %s
+//
+// Check TBAA metadata for struct copies for big endian architecture.
+// FIXME: The tbaa.struct metadata generated below is invalid: it
+// contains overlapping regions.
+
+struct NamedBitfields {
+ int f1 : 8;
+ int f2 : 8;
+ unsigned f3 : 1;
+ unsigned f4 : 15;
+ int f5;
+ double f6;
+};
+
+// CHECK-LABEL: define dso_local void @_Z4copyP14NamedBitfieldsS0_(
+// CHECK-SAME: ptr nocapture noundef writeonly [[A1:%.*]], ptr nocapture noundef readonly [[A2:%.*]]) local_unnamed_addr #[[ATTR0:[0-9]+]] {
+// CHECK-NEXT: entry:
+// CHECK-NEXT: tail call void @llvm.memcpy.p0.p0.i64(ptr noundef nonnull align 8 dereferenceable(16) [[A1]], ptr noundef nonnull align 8 dereferenceable(16) [[A2]], i64 16, i1 false), !tbaa.struct [[TBAA_STRUCT2:![0-9]+]]
+// CHECK-NEXT: ret void
+//
+void copy(NamedBitfields *a1, NamedBitfields *a2) {
+ *a1 = *a2;
+}
+
+//.
+// CHECK: [[TBAA_STRUCT2]] = !{i64 2, i64 4, [[META3:![0-9]+]], i64 4, i64 4, [[META6:![0-9]+]], i64 8, i64 8, [[META8:![0-9]+]]}
+// CHECK: [[META3]] = !{[[META4:![0-9]+]], [[META4]], i64 0}
+// CHECK: [[META4]] = !{!"omnipotent char", [[META5:![0-9]+]], i64 0}
+// CHECK: [[META5]] = !{!"Simple C++ TBAA"}
+// CHECK: [[META6]] = !{[[META7:![0-9]+]], [[META7]], i64 0}
+// CHECK: [[META7]] = !{!"int", [[META4]], i64 0}
+// CHECK: [[META8]] = !{[[META9:![0-9]+]], [[META9]], i64 0}
+// CHECK: [[META9]] = !{!"double", [[META4]], i64 0}
+//.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, thanks!
This test exposes what I think is invalid tbaa.struct metadata currently generated for bitfields when using big endian layout. The regions given by
!{i64 2, i64 4, [[META3:![0-9]+]], i64 4, i64 4 ...
are overlapping. This issue was originally observed in #86709.