[LLVMdev] clang branching using label

[Jianzhou Zhao]

On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 4:18 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
>> Clang normally generates code that looks like
>>
>> ....
>> ;<label>:22                                      ; preds = %0
>>    %23 = call i32 (i8*, ...)* @printf(i8* getelementptr inbounds ([24 x i8]*
>> @.str, i32 0, i32 0))
>>    br label %24
>>
>> ;<label>:24                                      ; preds = %22, %0
>>    %25 = load i32* %tmphigh, align 4
>>    %26 = and i32 %25, 65535
>>    store i32 %26, i32* %high1, align 4
>> .....
>>
>>
>> If I insert some instructions before %25 so it will look like:
>> ....
>> ;<label>:22                                      ; preds = %0
>>    %23 = call i32 (i8*, ...)* @printf(i8* getelementptr inbounds ([24 x i8]*
>> @.str, i32 0, i32 0))
>>    br label %24
>>
>> ;<label>:24
>>    %var = add i32 %7,   0          ; for testing
>>    %25 = load i32* %tmphigh, align 4
>>    %26 = and i32 %25, 65535
>>    store i32 %26, i32* %high1, align 4
>> .....
>>
>> Will %var get evaluated or it will be skipped?
>
> It will be evaluated.
>
>> How does the branching work since the label is commented out?
>
> Labels and most other names only exist for the convenience of human readers.
> LLVM knows that a basic block has ended because of "br label %24".  This is
> an example of a terminator instruction: an instruction that only occurs as
> the last instruction of a basic block (every basic block must finish with
> one).  Thus LLVM knows where all basic blocks start and end by just looking
> at the terminator instructions.  It doesn't need labels.

Does clang have any flags for generating readable (named) labels in
LLVM? That could be useful for debugging code.

>
>  Does it assume
>> %24 is the nop before %25?
>
> I didn't understand this question.  When printing human readable IR, LLVM prints
> a numerical name like %24 for things which have no name internally.  It has to
> put something since otherwise it wouldn't be able to read the IR back in again.
> The numbers it chooses just increment sequentially.  This makes it hard to
> modify such human readable IR by hand since you have to preserve the sequential
> numbering.  (If you want everything to have a real name use opt's -instnamer
> pass).
>
>>
>> How about the following case where a variable assignment does not occur?
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "a variable assignment does not occur".
> An instruction like "%var = add i32 %7, 0" isn't really an assignment to
> a variable "%var" since (thanks to SSA form) it isn't possible to "assign"
> anything else to "%var" later.  Instead "%var" is just a name for the value
> of "add i32 %7, 0".  In any case it is exactly the same:
>
>>
>> ....
>>    %37 = icmp sle i32 %33, %36
>>    br i1 %37, label %38, label %217
> ^^  Terminator instruction, so basic block finishes here
>>
>> ;38:
>>    store i32 0, i32* %j, align 4
> ^^ Thus this is the first instruction of the next basic block
>>    br label %39
>>
>> .....
>> which is changed to
>>
>> ......
>>    %37 = icmp sle i32 %33, %36
>>    br i1 %37, label %38, label %217
> ^^  Terminator instruction, so basic block finishes here
>>
>> ;38:
>>    store i32 0, i32* %p, align 4
> ^^ Thus this is the first instruction of the next basic block
>>    store i32 0, i32* %j, align 4
>>    br label %39
>> .....
>>
>> Will both store instructions get executed?
>
> Yes.
>
>> Does the empty line before the commented out label number have any real
>> function?
>
> No.
>
> Ciao, Duncan.
>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev



-- 
Jianzhou