[PATCH] D79719: [AIX] Implement AIX special alignment rule about double/long double

[Xiangling Liao via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

Xiangling_L marked an inline comment as done.
Xiangling_L added inline comments.


================
Comment at: clang/test/Layout/aix-double-struct-member.cpp:1
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -emit-llvm-only -triple powerpc-ibm-aix-xcoff \
+// RUN:     -fdump-record-layouts -fsyntax-only %s 2>/dev/null | \
----------------
hubert.reinterpretcast wrote:
> I am concerned that none of the tests actually create an instance of the classes under test and check the alignment (or related adjustments) in the IR. That is, we set up the preferred alignment value but don't check that we use it where we should.
> 
> As it is, it seems array new/delete has problems:
> ```
> #include <assert.h>
> extern "C" void *calloc(decltype(sizeof 0), decltype(sizeof 0));
> extern "C" void free(void *);
> extern "C" int printf(const char *, ...);
> 
> extern void *allocated_ptr;
> extern decltype(sizeof 0) allocated_size;
> struct B {
>   double d;
>   ~B() {}
>   static void *operator new[](decltype(sizeof 0) sz);
>   static void operator delete[](void *p, decltype(sizeof 0) sz);
> };
> B *allocBp();
> 
> #ifdef ALLOCBP
> void *allocated_ptr;
> decltype(sizeof 0) allocated_size;
> void *B::operator new[](decltype(sizeof 0) sz) {
>   void *alloc = calloc(1u, allocated_size = sz);
>   printf("%p: %s\n", alloc, __PRETTY_FUNCTION__);
>   printf("%zu\n", sz);
>   return allocated_ptr = alloc;
> }
> void B::operator delete[](void *p, decltype(sizeof 0) sz) {
>   printf("%p: %s\n", p, __PRETTY_FUNCTION__);
>   printf("%zu\n", sz);
>   assert(sz == allocated_size);
>   assert(p == allocated_ptr);
>   free(p);
> }
> B *allocBp() { return new B[2]; }
> #endif
> 
> #ifdef MAIN
> int main(void) { delete[] allocBp(); }
> #endif
> ```
> 
> The `xlclang++` invocation from XL C/C++ generates padding before the 32-bit `new[]` cookie. I'm not seeing that padding with this patch.
Thank. I will create more practical testcases as you mentioned in your concern. And regarding to `padding before the 32-bit new[] cookie` issue, I am wondering is that part of `power` alignment rule or what rules do we follow to generate this kind of padding?


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D79719/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D79719