[llvm] r244247 - Fix possible infinite loop in shrink wrapping when searching for save/restore
Kit Barton via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Thu Aug 6 12:01:57 PDT 2015
Author: kbarton
Date: Thu Aug 6 14:01:57 2015
New Revision: 244247
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=244247&view=rev
Log:
Fix possible infinite loop in shrink wrapping when searching for save/restore
points.
There is an infinite loop that can occur in Shrink Wrapping while searching
for the Save/Restore points.
Part of this search checks whether the save/restore points are located in
different loop nests and if so, uses the (post) dominator trees to find the
immediate (post) dominator blocks. However, if the current block does not have
any immediate (post) dominators then this search will result in an infinite
loop. This can occur in code containing an infinite loop.
The modification checks whether the immediate (post) dominator is different from
the current save/restore block. If it is not, then the search terminates and the
current location is not considered as a valid save/restore point for shrink wrapping.
Phabricator: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11607
Modified:
llvm/trunk/lib/CodeGen/ShrinkWrap.cpp
llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/AArch64/arm64-shrink-wrapping.ll
llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/ARM/arm-shrink-wrapping.ll
llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/X86/x86-shrink-wrapping.ll
Modified: llvm/trunk/lib/CodeGen/ShrinkWrap.cpp
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/lib/CodeGen/ShrinkWrap.cpp?rev=244247&r1=244246&r2=244247&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- llvm/trunk/lib/CodeGen/ShrinkWrap.cpp (original)
+++ llvm/trunk/lib/CodeGen/ShrinkWrap.cpp Thu Aug 6 14:01:57 2015
@@ -309,12 +309,30 @@ void ShrinkWrap::updateSaveRestorePoints
// Fix (C).
if (Save && Restore && Save != Restore &&
MLI->getLoopFor(Save) != MLI->getLoopFor(Restore)) {
- if (MLI->getLoopDepth(Save) > MLI->getLoopDepth(Restore))
- // Push Save outside of this loop.
- Save = FindIDom<>(*Save, Save->predecessors(), *MDT);
- else
- // Push Restore outside of this loop.
- Restore = FindIDom<>(*Restore, Restore->successors(), *MPDT);
+ if (MLI->getLoopDepth(Save) > MLI->getLoopDepth(Restore)) {
+ // Push Save outside of this loop if immediate dominator is different
+ // from save block. If immediate dominator is not different, bail out.
+ MachineBasicBlock *IDom = FindIDom<>(*Save, Save->predecessors(), *MDT);
+ if (IDom != Save)
+ Save = IDom;
+ else {
+ Save = nullptr;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+ else {
+ // Push Restore outside of this loop if immediate post-dominator is
+ // different from restore block. If immediate post-dominator is not
+ // different, bail out.
+ MachineBasicBlock *IPdom =
+ FindIDom<>(*Restore, Restore->successors(), *MPDT);
+ if (IPdom != Restore)
+ Restore = IPdom;
+ else {
+ Restore = nullptr;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
}
}
}
Modified: llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/AArch64/arm64-shrink-wrapping.ll
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/AArch64/arm64-shrink-wrapping.ll?rev=244247&r1=244246&r2=244247&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/AArch64/arm64-shrink-wrapping.ll (original)
+++ llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/AArch64/arm64-shrink-wrapping.ll Thu Aug 6 14:01:57 2015
@@ -539,3 +539,32 @@ if.end:
declare void @abort() #0
attributes #0 = { noreturn nounwind }
+
+; Make sure that we handle infinite loops properly When checking that the Save
+; and Restore blocks are control flow equivalent, the loop searches for the
+; immediate (post) dominator for the (restore) save blocks. When either the Save
+; or Restore block is located in an infinite loop the only immediate (post)
+; dominator is itself. In this case, we cannot perform shrink wrapping, but we
+; should return gracefully and continue compilation.
+; The only condition for this test is the compilation finishes correctly.
+;
+; CHECK-LABEL: infiniteloop
+; CHECK: ret
+define void @infiniteloop() {
+entry:
+ br i1 undef, label %if.then, label %if.end
+
+if.then:
+ %ptr = alloca i32, i32 4
+ br label %for.body
+
+for.body: ; preds = %for.body, %entry
+ %sum.03 = phi i32 [ 0, %if.then ], [ %add, %for.body ]
+ %call = tail call i32 bitcast (i32 (...)* @something to i32 ()*)()
+ %add = add nsw i32 %call, %sum.03
+ store i32 %add, i32* %ptr
+ br label %for.body
+
+if.end:
+ ret void
+}
Modified: llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/ARM/arm-shrink-wrapping.ll
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/ARM/arm-shrink-wrapping.ll?rev=244247&r1=244246&r2=244247&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/ARM/arm-shrink-wrapping.ll (original)
+++ llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/ARM/arm-shrink-wrapping.ll Thu Aug 6 14:01:57 2015
@@ -534,3 +534,31 @@ if.end:
declare void @abort() #0
attributes #0 = { noreturn nounwind }
+
+; Make sure that we handle infinite loops properly When checking that the Save
+; and Restore blocks are control flow equivalent, the loop searches for the
+; immediate (post) dominator for the (restore) save blocks. When either the Save
+; or Restore block is located in an infinite loop the only immediate (post)
+; dominator is itself. In this case, we cannot perform shrink wrapping, but we
+; should return gracefully and continue compilation.
+; The only condition for this test is the compilation finishes correctly.
+; CHECK-LABEL: infiniteloop
+; CHECK: pop
+define void @infiniteloop() {
+entry:
+ br i1 undef, label %if.then, label %if.end
+
+if.then:
+ %ptr = alloca i32, i32 4
+ br label %for.body
+
+for.body: ; preds = %for.body, %entry
+ %sum.03 = phi i32 [ 0, %if.then ], [ %add, %for.body ]
+ %call = tail call i32 asm sideeffect "mov $0, #1", "=r,~{r4}"()
+ %add = add nsw i32 %call, %sum.03
+ store i32 %add, i32* %ptr
+ br label %for.body
+
+if.end:
+ ret void
+}
Modified: llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/X86/x86-shrink-wrapping.ll
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/X86/x86-shrink-wrapping.ll?rev=244247&r1=244246&r2=244247&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/X86/x86-shrink-wrapping.ll (original)
+++ llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/X86/x86-shrink-wrapping.ll Thu Aug 6 14:01:57 2015
@@ -637,3 +637,33 @@ if.end:
declare void @abort() #0
attributes #0 = { noreturn nounwind }
+
+
+; Make sure that we handle infinite loops properly When checking that the Save
+; and Restore blocks are control flow equivalent, the loop searches for the
+; immediate (post) dominator for the (restore) save blocks. When either the Save
+; or Restore block is located in an infinite loop the only immediate (post)
+; dominator is itself. In this case, we cannot perform shrink wrapping, but we
+; should return gracefully and continue compilation.
+; The only condition for this test is the compilation finishes correctly.
+;
+; CHECK-LABEL: infiniteloop
+; CHECK: retq
+define void @infiniteloop() {
+entry:
+ br i1 undef, label %if.then, label %if.end
+
+if.then:
+ %ptr = alloca i32, i32 4
+ br label %for.body
+
+for.body: ; preds = %for.body, %entry
+ %sum.03 = phi i32 [ 0, %if.then ], [ %add, %for.body ]
+ %call = tail call i32 asm "movl $$1, $0", "=r,~{ebx}"()
+ %add = add nsw i32 %call, %sum.03
+ store i32 %add, i32* %ptr
+ br label %for.body
+
+if.end:
+ ret void
+}
More information about the llvm-commits
mailing list