[clang] [clang] LazyOffsetPtr: Use native pointer width (PR #111995)

[John McCall via cfe-commits]

================
@@ -326,25 +326,25 @@ struct LazyOffsetPtr {
   ///
   /// If the low bit is clear, a pointer to the AST node. If the low
   /// bit is set, the upper 63 bits are the offset.
-  mutable uint64_t Ptr = 0;
+  mutable uintptr_t Ptr = 0;
 
 public:
   LazyOffsetPtr() = default;
-  explicit LazyOffsetPtr(T *Ptr) : Ptr(reinterpret_cast<uint64_t>(Ptr)) {}
+  explicit LazyOffsetPtr(T *Ptr) : Ptr(reinterpret_cast<uintptr_t>(Ptr)) {}
 
-  explicit LazyOffsetPtr(uint64_t Offset) : Ptr((Offset << 1) | 0x01) {
-    assert((Offset << 1 >> 1) == Offset && "Offsets must require < 63 bits");
+  explicit LazyOffsetPtr(uintptr_t Offset) : Ptr((Offset << 1) | 0x01) {
+    assert((Offset << 1 >> 1) == Offset && "Offsets must fit in addressable bits");
     if (Offset == 0)
       Ptr = 0;
   }
 
   LazyOffsetPtr &operator=(T *Ptr) {
-    this->Ptr = reinterpret_cast<uint64_t>(Ptr);
+    this->Ptr = reinterpret_cast<uintptr_t>(Ptr);
     return *this;
   }
 
-  LazyOffsetPtr &operator=(uint64_t Offset) {
-    assert((Offset << 1 >> 1) == Offset && "Offsets must require < 63 bits");
+  LazyOffsetPtr &operator=(uintptr_t Offset) {
----------------
rjmccall wrote:

Right, so the existence of a function that returns the address of internal storage is obviously always going to make abstraction very difficult.  The perfectly portable way to write this is to use a union and a separate bool, and the whole point of this type is that that's a very inefficient way to store this information; we want it to be more compact, and we're willing to accept some non-portable assumptions to get that.  So that's why I think the key question is whether we can change the clients to remove the need for `getAddressOfPointer` first.  Once we do that, the rest of this becomes significantly more trivial.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111995