[llvm-commits] [llvm] r156387 - /llvm/trunk/lib/Bitcode/Reader/BitcodeReader.cpp

[Nuno Lopes]

Why?
Does LLVM 3.0 or 3.1 still emit the attributes in index 0?  The  
conclusion of the previous thread was that we only need to maintain  
compatibility from 3.0 onwards.

Nuno


Citando Stephen Hines <srhines at google.com>:

> Hi Nuno,
>
> Would you please revert this change as well?
>
> Thanks,
> Steve
>
> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Nuno Lopes <nunoplopes at sapo.pt> wrote:
>
>> Author: nlopes
>> Date: Tue May  8 12:07:35 2012
>> New Revision: 156387
>>
>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=156387&view=rev
>> Log:
>> remove autoupgrade code for old function attributes format.
>> I still left another fixme regarding alignment, because I'm unsure how to
>> remove that code without breaking things
>>
>> Modified:
>>    llvm/trunk/lib/Bitcode/Reader/BitcodeReader.cpp
>>
>> Modified: llvm/trunk/lib/Bitcode/Reader/BitcodeReader.cpp
>> URL:
>> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/lib/Bitcode/Reader/BitcodeReader.cpp?rev=156387&r1=156386&r2=156387&view=diff
>>
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- llvm/trunk/lib/Bitcode/Reader/BitcodeReader.cpp (original)
>> +++ llvm/trunk/lib/Bitcode/Reader/BitcodeReader.cpp Tue May  8 12:07:35
>> 2012
>> @@ -458,12 +458,6 @@
>>       if (Record.size() & 1)
>>         return Error("Invalid ENTRY record");
>>
>> -      // FIXME : Remove this autoupgrade code in LLVM 3.0.
>> -      // If Function attributes are using index 0 then transfer them
>> -      // to index ~0. Index 0 is used for return value attributes but
>> used to be
>> -      // used for function attributes.
>> -      Attributes RetAttribute;
>> -      Attributes FnAttribute;
>>       for (unsigned i = 0, e = Record.size(); i != e; i += 2) {
>>         // FIXME: remove in LLVM 3.0
>>         // The alignment is stored as a 16-bit raw value from bits 31--16.
>> @@ -480,34 +474,10 @@
>>             Attributes((Record[i+1] & (0xffffull << 32)) >> 11);
>>
>>         Record[i+1] = ReconstitutedAttr.Raw();
>> -        if (Record[i] == 0)
>> -          RetAttribute = ReconstitutedAttr;
>> -        else if (Record[i] == ~0U)
>> -          FnAttribute = ReconstitutedAttr;
>> -      }
>> -
>> -      Attributes OldRetAttrs = (Attribute::NoUnwind|Attribute::NoReturn|
>> -                              Attribute::ReadOnly|Attribute::ReadNone);
>> -
>> -      if (FnAttribute == Attribute::None && RetAttribute !=
>> Attribute::None &&
>> -          (RetAttribute & OldRetAttrs)) {
>> -        if (FnAttribute == Attribute::None) { // add a slot so they get
>> added.
>> -          Record.push_back(~0U);
>> -          Record.push_back(0);
>> -        }
>> -
>> -        FnAttribute  |= RetAttribute & OldRetAttrs;
>> -        RetAttribute &= ~OldRetAttrs;
>>       }
>>
>>       for (unsigned i = 0, e = Record.size(); i != e; i += 2) {
>> -        if (Record[i] == 0) {
>> -          if (RetAttribute != Attribute::None)
>> -            Attrs.push_back(AttributeWithIndex::get(0, RetAttribute));
>> -        } else if (Record[i] == ~0U) {
>> -          if (FnAttribute != Attribute::None)
>> -            Attrs.push_back(AttributeWithIndex::get(~0U, FnAttribute));
>> -        } else if (Attributes(Record[i+1]) != Attribute::None)
>> +        if (Attributes(Record[i+1]) != Attribute::None)
>>           Attrs.push_back(AttributeWithIndex::get(Record[i],
>>
>> Attributes(Record[i+1])));
>>       }
>>