[llvm] [SPIRV] Start adding support for `int128` (PR #170798)
Mikael Holmen via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Thu Dec 11 02:57:04 PST 2025
mikaelholmen wrote:
> Hi @AlexVlx
>
> I noticed that if I build with gcc and -DLLVM_ENABLE_EXPENSIVE_CHECKS=ON many SPIRV lit tests fail with this patch.
>
> E.g. `build-all-gcc132-expensive/bin/llc -O0 -verify-machineinstrs -mtriple=spirv64-unknown-unknown --spirv-ext=+SPV_ALTERA_arbitrary_precision_integers,+SPV_KHR_bit_instructions test/CodeGen/SPIRV/llvm-intrinsics/bitreverse_small_type.ll -o -` fails with
>
> ```
> [...]/gcc/13.2.0/include/c++/13.2.0/bits/stl_algo.h:4892:
> In function:
> void std::sort(_RAIter, _RAIter, _Compare) [with _RAIter =
> llvm::StringRef*; _Compare =
> llvm::SPIRVExtensionsParser::parse(llvm::cl::Option&, llvm::StringRef,
> llvm::StringRef, std::
> debug::set<llvm::SPIRV::Extension::Extension>&)::<lambda(auto:4&&,
> auto:5&&)>]
>
> Error: comparison doesn't meet irreflexive requirements, assert(!(a < a)).
>
> Objects involved in the operation:
> instance "functor" @ 0x7ffd92e1a6a0 {
> }
> iterator::value_type "ordered type" {
> }
> PLEASE submit a bug report to https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/ and include the crash backtrace and instructions to reproduce the bug.
> Stack dump:
> 0. Program arguments: build-all-gcc132-expensive/bin/llc -O0 -verify-machineinstrs -mtriple=spirv64-unknown-unknown --spirv-ext=+SPV_ALTERA_arbitrary_precision_integers,+SPV_KHR_bit_instructions test/CodeGen/SPIRV/llvm-intrinsics/bitreverse_small_type.ll -o -
> #0 0x0000000004e8fc6e llvm::sys::PrintStackTrace(llvm::raw_ostream&, int) (build-all-gcc132-expensive/bin/llc+0x4e8fc6e)
> #1 0x0000000004e8c5cb llvm::sys::RunSignalHandlers() (build-all-gcc132-expensive/bin/llc+0x4e8c5cb)
> #2 0x0000000004e8c70e SignalHandler(int, siginfo_t*, void*) Signals.cpp:0:0
> #3 0x00007fa6f7f28990 __restore_rt (/lib64/libpthread.so.0+0x12990)
> #4 0x00007fa6f58bf52f raise (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x4e52f)
> #5 0x00007fa6f5892e65 abort (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x21e65)
> #6 0x000000000080410d (build-all-gcc132-expensive/bin/llc+0x80410d)
> #7 0x000000000246ef29 llvm::SPIRVExtensionsParser::parse(llvm::cl::Option&, llvm::StringRef, llvm::StringRef, std::__debug::set<llvm::SPIRV::Extension::Extension, std::less<llvm::SPIRV::Extension::Extension>, std::allocator<llvm::SPIRV::Extension::Extension>>&) crtstuff.c:0:0
> #8 0x00000000024257e5 llvm::cl::opt<std::__debug::set<llvm::SPIRV::Extension::Extension, std::less<llvm::SPIRV::Extension::Extension>, std::allocator<llvm::SPIRV::Extension::Extension>>, false, llvm::SPIRVExtensionsParser>::handleOccurrence(unsigned int, llvm::StringRef, llvm::StringRef) crtstuff.c:0:0
> #9 0x0000000004d4b5c1 llvm::cl::ParseCommandLineOptions(int, char const* const*, llvm::StringRef, llvm::raw_ostream*, llvm::vfs::FileSystem*, char const*, bool) (build-all-gcc132-expensive/bin/llc+0x4d4b5c1)
> #10 0x0000000000806968 main (build-all-gcc132-expensive/bin/llc+0x806968)
> #11 0x00007fa6f58ab7e5 __libc_start_main (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x3a7e5)
> #12 0x00000000009510ee _start (build-all-gcc132-expensive/bin/llc+0x9510ee)
> Abort (core dumped)
> ```
>
> I guess it's this change that cause this
>
> ```
> bool SPIRVExtensionsParser::parse(cl::Option &O, StringRef ArgName,
> StringRef ArgValue,
> std::set<SPIRV::Extension::Extension> &Vals) {
> SmallVector<StringRef, 10> Tokens;
> ArgValue.split(Tokens, ",", -1, false);
> - std::sort(Tokens.begin(), Tokens.end());
> + llvm::sort(Tokens, [](auto &&LHS, auto &&RHS) {
> + // We want to ensure that we handle "all" first, to ensure that any
> + // subsequent disablement actually behaves as expected i.e. given
> + // --spv-ext=all,-foo, we first enable all and then disable foo; this should
> + // be revisited and simplified.
> + if (LHS == "all")
> + return true;
> + if (RHS == "all")
> + return false;
> + return !(RHS < LHS);
> + });
> ```
@AlexVlx
https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/algorithm/sort.html says the following:
```
comp - comparison function object (i.e. an object that satisfies the requirements of [Compare](https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/named_req/Compare.html)) which returns ​true if the first argument is less than (i.e. is ordered before) the second.
```
and then https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/named_req/Compare.html has the following requirement
```
For all a, comp(a, a) == false.
```
And with this patch we instead do
```
+ if (LHS == "all")
+ return true;
+ if (RHS == "all")
+ return false;
```
so ```comp("all","all") == true``` which doesn't follow the requirement.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/170798
More information about the llvm-commits
mailing list