[llvm] 83de1ef - [LangRef] Comment on validity of volatile ops on null (#139803)
via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Thu May 22 06:12:38 PDT 2025
Author: Luigi Sartor Piucco
Date: 2025-05-22T15:12:34+02:00
New Revision: 83de1efae389707f7fd03bf3ed2e42934122b4fb
URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/83de1efae389707f7fd03bf3ed2e42934122b4fb
DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/83de1efae389707f7fd03bf3ed2e42934122b4fb.diff
LOG: [LangRef] Comment on validity of volatile ops on null (#139803)
Some hardware (for example, certain AVR chips) have peripheral registers
mapped to the data space address 0. Although a volatile load/store on
`ptr null` already generates expected code, the wording in the LangRef
makes operations on null seem like undefined behavior in all cases. This
commit adds a comment that, for volatile operations, it may be defined
behavior to access the address null, if the architecture permits it. The
intended use case is MMIO registers with hard-coded addresses that
include bit-value 0. A simple CodeGen test is included for AVR, as an
architecture known to have this quirk, that does `load volatile` and
`store volatile` to `ptr null`, expecting to generate `lds <reg>, 0` and
`sts 0, <reg>`.
See [this
thread](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/213817-t-lang/topic/Adding.20the.20possibility.20of.20volatile.20access.20to.20address.200)
and [the
RFC](https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-volatile-access-to-non-dereferenceable-memory-may-be-well-defined/86303)
for discussion and context.
Added:
llvm/test/CodeGen/AVR/volatile-null.ll
Modified:
llvm/docs/LangRef.rst
Removed:
################################################################################
diff --git a/llvm/docs/LangRef.rst b/llvm/docs/LangRef.rst
index b59f94eb47616..ad0755e1531df 100644
--- a/llvm/docs/LangRef.rst
+++ b/llvm/docs/LangRef.rst
@@ -3573,7 +3573,8 @@ can read and/or modify state which is not accessible via a regular load
or store in this module. Volatile operations may use addresses which do
not point to memory (like MMIO registers). This means the compiler may
not use a volatile operation to prove a non-volatile access to that
-address has defined behavior.
+address has defined behavior. This includes addresses typically forbidden,
+such as the pointer with bit-value 0.
The allowed side-effects for volatile accesses are limited. If a
non-volatile store to a given address would be legal, a volatile
@@ -4292,7 +4293,10 @@ The semantics of non-zero address spaces are target-specific. Memory
access through a non-dereferenceable pointer is undefined behavior in
any address space. Pointers with the bit-value 0 are only assumed to
be non-dereferenceable in address space 0, unless the function is
-marked with the ``null_pointer_is_valid`` attribute.
+marked with the ``null_pointer_is_valid`` attribute. However, *volatile*
+access to any non-dereferenceable address may have defined behavior
+(according to the target), and in this case the attribute is not needed
+even for address 0.
If an object can be proven accessible through a pointer with a
diff erent address space, the access may be modified to use that
diff --git a/llvm/test/CodeGen/AVR/volatile-null.ll b/llvm/test/CodeGen/AVR/volatile-null.ll
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000..fa49e07eb0680
--- /dev/null
+++ b/llvm/test/CodeGen/AVR/volatile-null.ll
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+; RUN: llc < %s -mtriple=avr | FileCheck %s
+
+define i8 @load_volatile_null() {
+; CHECK-LABEL: load_volatile_null:
+; CHECK: lds r24, 0
+ %result = load volatile i8, ptr null
+ ret i8 %result
+}
+
+define void @store_volatile_null(i8 %a) {
+; CHECK-LABEL: store_volatile_null:
+; CHECK: sts 0, r24
+ store volatile i8 %a, ptr null
+ ret void
+}
More information about the llvm-commits
mailing list