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

[Omair Javaid via llvm-commits]

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

>From 75b5e975eda4d52d3cfe6631a5ea6ba076e98599 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Muhammad Omair Javaid <omair.javaid at linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 14:21:16 +0500
Subject: [PATCH] [X86] Update tailcc-ssp.ll assertions

The assertions in llvm/test/CodeGen/X86/tailcc-ssp.ll were outdated.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.
---
 llvm/test/CodeGen/X86/tailcc-ssp.ll | 55 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------
 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

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()