[llvm] [X86] Update tailcc-ssp.ll assertions using update_llc_test_checks.py (PR #143500)

[via llvm-commits]

llvmbot wrote:


<!--LLVM PR SUMMARY COMMENT-->

@llvm/pr-subscribers-backend-x86

Author: Omair Javaid (omjavaid)

<details>
<summary>Changes</summary>

The assertions in llvm/test/CodeGen/X86/tailcc-ssp.ll were outdated. The initial comment indicated they were generated with `utils/update_llc_test_checks.py UTC_ARGS: --version 5`, but this was not accurate based on the file's content.

Running `utils/update_llc_test_checks.py` regenerated the assertions, aligning them with the current `llc` output. This commit ensures that the test's claimed behavior accurately reflects the actual `llc` output, even though the tests were already passing.

This was identified by @<!-- -->efriedma-quic during review of #<!-- -->136290. Submitting a separate PR to make sure these changes stay isolated.



---
Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/143500.diff


1 Files Affected:

- (modified) llvm/test/CodeGen/X86/tailcc-ssp.ll (+43-12) 


``````````diff
diff --git a/llvm/test/CodeGen/X86/tailcc-ssp.ll b/llvm/test/CodeGen/X86/tailcc-ssp.ll
index 5211e4fe9eef9..7ea5dd49f0242 100644
--- a/llvm/test/CodeGen/X86/tailcc-ssp.ll
+++ b/llvm/test/CodeGen/X86/tailcc-ssp.ll
@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ define void @tailcall_unrelated_frame() sspreq {
 ; WINDOWS-NEXT:    callq __security_check_cookie
 ; WINDOWS-NEXT:    int3
 ; WINDOWS-NEXT:    .seh_endproc
-
+;
 ; LINUX-LABEL: tailcall_unrelated_frame:
 ; LINUX:       # %bb.0:
 ; LINUX-NEXT:    pushq %rax
@@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ define void @tailcall_unrelated_frame() sspreq {
 ; LINUX-NEXT:    .cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
 ; LINUX-NEXT:    callq __stack_chk_fail at PLT
 
+
   call void @bar()
   tail call void @bar()
   ret void
@@ -105,18 +106,48 @@ define void @tailcall_unrelated_frame() sspreq {
 declare void @callee()
 define void @caller() sspreq {
 ; WINDOWS-LABEL: caller:
-; WINDOWS: callq   callee
-; WINDOWS: callq   callee
-; WINDOWS: cmpq    __security_cookie(%rip), %rcx
-; WINDOWS: jne
-; WINDOWS: callq   __security_check_cookie
-
+; WINDOWS:       # %bb.0:
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    subq $40, %rsp
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    .seh_stackalloc 40
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    .seh_endprologue
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    movq __security_cookie(%rip), %rax
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    xorq %rsp, %rax
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    movq %rax, {{[0-9]+}}(%rsp)
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    callq callee
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    callq callee
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    movq {{[0-9]+}}(%rsp), %rcx
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    xorq %rsp, %rcx
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    cmpq __security_cookie(%rip), %rcx
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    jne .LBB2_2
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:  # %bb.1:
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    .seh_startepilogue
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    addq $40, %rsp
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    .seh_endepilogue
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    retq
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:  .LBB2_2:
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    callq __security_check_cookie
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    int3
+; WINDOWS-NEXT:    .seh_endproc
+;
 ; LINUX-LABEL: caller:
-; LINUX: callq   callee at PLT
-; LINUX: callq   callee at PLT
-; LINUX: cmpq
-; LINUX: jne
-; LINUX: callq   __stack_chk_fail at PLT
+; LINUX:       # %bb.0:
+; LINUX-NEXT:    pushq %rax
+; LINUX-NEXT:    .cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
+; LINUX-NEXT:    movq %fs:40, %rax
+; LINUX-NEXT:    movq %rax, (%rsp)
+; LINUX-NEXT:    callq callee at PLT
+; LINUX-NEXT:    callq callee at PLT
+; LINUX-NEXT:    movq %fs:40, %rax
+; LINUX-NEXT:    cmpq (%rsp), %rax
+; LINUX-NEXT:    jne .LBB2_2
+; LINUX-NEXT:  # %bb.1: # %SP_return
+; LINUX-NEXT:    popq %rax
+; LINUX-NEXT:    .cfi_def_cfa_offset 8
+; LINUX-NEXT:    retq
+; LINUX-NEXT:  .LBB2_2: # %CallStackCheckFailBlk
+; LINUX-NEXT:    .cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
+; LINUX-NEXT:    callq __stack_chk_fail at PLT
+
 
   tail call void @callee()
   call void @callee()

``````````

</details>


https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/143500