Introduction/Motivation:
LLVM-IR supports integers of non-power-of-2 bitwidth, in the iN syntax.
Integers of non-power-of-two aren't particularly interesting or useful
on most hardware, so much so that no language in Clang has been
motivated to expose it before.
However, in the case of FPGA hardware normal integer types where the
full bitwidth isn't used, is extremely wasteful and has severe
performance/space concerns. Because of this, Intel has introduced this
functionality in the High Level Synthesis compiler[0]
under the name "Arbitrary Precision Integer" (ap_int for short). This
has been extremely useful and effective for our users, permitting them
to optimize their storage and operation space on an architecture where
both can be extremely expensive.
We are proposing upstreaming a more palatable version of this to the
community, in the form of this proposal and accompanying patch. We are
proposing the syntax _ExtInt(N). We intend to propose this to the WG14
committee[1], and the underscore-capital seems like the active direction
for a WG14 paper's acceptance. An alternative that Richard Smith
suggested on the initial review was __int(N), however we believe that
is much less acceptable by WG14. We considered _Int, however _Int is
used as an identifier in libstdc++ and there is no good way to fall
back to an identifier (since _Int(5) is indistinguishable from an
unnamed initializer of a template type named _Int).
[0]https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/software/programmable/quartus-prime/hls-compiler.html)
[1]http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2472.pdf
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D73967
Summary:
Previously, we treated CXXUuidofExpr as quite a special case: it was the
only kind of expression that could be a canonical template argument, it
could be a constant lvalue base object, and so on. In addition, we
represented the UUID value as a string, whose source form we did not
preserve faithfully, and that we partially parsed in multiple different
places.
With this patch, we create an MSGuidDecl object to represent the
implicit object of type 'struct _GUID' created by a UuidAttr. Each
UuidAttr holds a pointer to its 'struct _GUID' and its original
(as-written) UUID string. A non-value-dependent CXXUuidofExpr behaves
like a DeclRefExpr denoting that MSGuidDecl object. We cache an APValue
representation of the GUID on the MSGuidDecl and use it from constant
evaluation where needed.
This allows removing a lot of the special-case logic to handle these
expressions. Unfortunately, many parts of Clang assume there are only
a couple of interesting kinds of ValueDecl, so the total amount of
special-case logic is not really reduced very much.
This fixes a few bugs and issues:
* PR38490: we now support reading from GUID objects returned from
__uuidof during constant evaluation.
* Our Itanium mangling for a non-instantiation-dependent template
argument involving __uuidof no longer depends on which CXXUuidofExpr
template argument we happened to see first.
* We now predeclare ::_GUID, and permit use of __uuidof without
any header inclusion, better matching MSVC's behavior. We do not
predefine ::__s_GUID, though; that seems like a step too far.
* Our IR representation for GUID constants now uses the correct IR type
wherever possible. We will still fall back to using the
{i32, i16, i16, [8 x i8]}
layout if a definition of struct _GUID is not available. This is not
ideal: in principle the two layouts could have different padding.
Reviewers: rnk, jdoerfert
Subscribers: arphaman, cfe-commits, aeubanks
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78171
memchr consistent and comprehensible, and document them.
We previously allowed evaluation of memcmp on arrays of integers of any
size, so long as the call evaluated to 0, and allowed evaluation of
memchr on any array of integral type of size 1 (including enums). The
purpose of constant-evaluating these builtins is only to support
constexpr std::char_traits, so we now consistently allow them on arrays
of (possibly signed or unsigned) char only.
Summary:
Added basic representation and parsing/sema handling of array-shaping
operations. Array shaping expression is an expression of form ([s0]..[sn])base,
where s0, ..., sn must be a positive integer, base - a pointer. This
expression is a kind of cast operation that converts pointer expression
into an array-like kind of expression.
Reviewers: rjmccall, rsmith, jdoerfert
Subscribers: guansong, arphaman, cfe-commits, caomhin, kkwli0
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74144
Normally clang avoids creating expressions when it encounters semantic
errors, even if the parser knows which expression to produce.
This works well for the compiler. However, this is not ideal for
source-level tools that have to deal with broken code, e.g. clangd is
not able to provide navigation features even for names that compiler
knows how to resolve.
The new RecoveryExpr aims to capture the minimal set of information
useful for the tools that need to deal with incorrect code:
source range of the expression being dropped,
subexpressions of the expression.
We aim to make constructing RecoveryExprs as simple as possible to
ensure writing code to avoid dropping expressions is easy.
Producing RecoveryExprs can result in new code paths being taken in the
frontend. In particular, clang can produce some new diagnostics now and
we aim to suppress bogus ones based on Expr::containsErrors.
We deliberately produce RecoveryExprs only in the parser for now to
minimize the code affected by this patch. Producing RecoveryExprs in
Sema potentially allows to preserve more information (e.g. type of an
expression), but also results in more code being affected. E.g.
SFINAE checks will have to take presence of RecoveryExprs into account.
Initial implementation only works in C++ mode, as it relies on compiler
postponing diagnostics on dependent expressions. C and ObjC often do not
do this, so they require more work to make sure we do not produce too
many bogus diagnostics on the new expressions.
See documentation of RecoveryExpr for more details.
original patch from Ilya
This change is based on https://reviews.llvm.org/D61722
Reviewers: sammccall, rsmith
Reviewed By: sammccall, rsmith
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69330
and objects with mutable subobjects.
The standard wording doesn't really cover these cases; accepting all
such cases seems most in line with what we do in other cases and what
other compilers do. (Essentially this means we're assuming that objects
external to the evaluation are always in-lifetime.)
constant initialization.
Removing this zeroing regressed our code generation in a few cases, also
fixed here. We now compute whether a variable has constant destruction
even if it doesn't have a constant initializer, by trying to destroy a
default-initialized value, and skip emitting a trivial default
constructor for a variable even if it has non-trivial (but perhaps
constant) destruction.
whether a call is to a builtin.
We already had a general mechanism to do this but for some reason
weren't using it. In passing, check for the other unary operators that
can intervene in a reasonably-direct function call (we already handled
'&' but missed '*' and '+').
This reverts commit aaae6b1b617378362462c1685e754813ed82b394,
reinstating af80b8ccc5772c14920d4554b7ca7e15f2fad1c4, with a fix to
clang-tidy.
Summary:
Changes:
- Calls to consteval function are now evaluated in constant context but IR is still generated for them.
- Add diagnostic for taking address of a consteval function in non-constexpr context.
- Add diagnostic for address of consteval function accessible at runtime.
- Add tests
Reviewers: rsmith, aaron.ballman
Reviewed By: rsmith
Subscribers: mgrang, riccibruno, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63960
whether a call is to a builtin.
We already had a general mechanism to do this but for some reason
weren't using it. In passing, check for the other unary operators that
can intervene in a reasonably-direct function call (we already handled
'&' but missed '*' and '+').
Implement support for C++2a requires-expressions.
Re-commit after compilation failure on some platforms due to alignment issues with PointerIntPair.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50360
GCC supports the conditional operator on VectorTypes that acts as a
'select' in C++ mode. This patch implements the support. Types are
converted as closely to GCC's behavior as possible, though in a few
places consistency with our existing vector type support was preferred.
Note that this implementation is different from the OpenCL version in a
number of ways, so it unfortunately required a different implementation.
First, the SEMA rules and promotion rules are significantly different.
Secondly, GCC implements COND[i] != 0 ? LHS[i] : RHS[i] (where i is in
the range 0- VectorSize, for each element). In OpenCL, the condition is
COND[i] < 0 ? LHS[i]: RHS[i].
In the process of implementing this, it was also required to make the
expression COND ? LHS : RHS type dependent if COND is type dependent,
since the type is now dependent on the condition. For example:
T ? 1 : 2;
Is not typically type dependent, since the result can be deduced from
the operands. HOWEVER, if T is a VectorType now, it could change this
to a 'select' (basically a swizzle with a non-constant mask) with the 1
and 2 being promoted to vectors themselves.
While this is a change, it is NOT a standards incompatible change. Based
on my (and D. Gregor's, at the time of writing the code) reading of the
standard, the expression is supposed to be type dependent if ANY
sub-expression is type dependent.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71463
This change introduces three new builtins (which work on both pointers
and integers) that can be used instead of common bitwise arithmetic:
__builtin_align_up(x, alignment), __builtin_align_down(x, alignment) and
__builtin_is_aligned(x, alignment).
I originally added these builtins to the CHERI fork of LLVM a few years ago
to handle the slightly different C semantics that we use for CHERI [1].
Until recently these builtins (or sequences of other builtins) were
required to generate correct code. I have since made changes to the default
C semantics so that they are no longer strictly necessary (but using them
does generate slightly more efficient code). However, based on our experience
using them in various projects over the past few years, I believe that adding
these builtins to clang would be useful.
These builtins have the following benefit over bit-manipulation and casts
via uintptr_t:
- The named builtins clearly convey the semantics of the operation. While
checking alignment using __builtin_is_aligned(x, 16) versus
((x & 15) == 0) is probably not a huge win in readably, I personally find
__builtin_align_up(x, N) a lot easier to read than (x+(N-1))&~(N-1).
- They preserve the type of the argument (including const qualifiers). When
using casts via uintptr_t, it is easy to cast to the wrong type or strip
qualifiers such as const.
- If the alignment argument is a constant value, clang can check that it is
a power-of-two and within the range of the type. Since the semantics of
these builtins is well defined compared to arbitrary bit-manipulation,
it is possible to add a UBSAN checker that the run-time value is a valid
power-of-two. I intend to add this as a follow-up to this change.
- The builtins avoids int-to-pointer casts both in C and LLVM IR.
In the future (i.e. once most optimizations handle it), we could use the new
llvm.ptrmask intrinsic to avoid the ptrtoint instruction that would normally
be generated.
- They can be used to round up/down to the next aligned value for both
integers and pointers without requiring two separate macros.
- In many projects the alignment operations are already wrapped in macros (e.g.
roundup2 and rounddown2 in FreeBSD), so by replacing the macro implementation
with a builtin call, we get improved diagnostics for many call-sites while
only having to change a few lines.
- Finally, the builtins also emit assume_aligned metadata when used on pointers.
This can improve code generation compared to the uintptr_t casts.
[1] In our CHERI compiler we have compilation mode where all pointers are
implemented as capabilities (essentially unforgeable 128-bit fat pointers).
In our original model, casts from uintptr_t (which is a 128-bit capability)
to an integer value returned the "offset" of the capability (i.e. the
difference between the virtual address and the base of the allocation).
This causes problems for cases such as checking the alignment: for example, the
expression `if ((uintptr_t)ptr & 63) == 0` is generally used to check if the
pointer is aligned to a multiple of 64 bytes. The problem with offsets is that
any pointer to the beginning of an allocation will have an offset of zero, so
this check always succeeds in that case (even if the address is not correctly
aligned). The same issues also exist when aligning up or down. Using the
alignment builtins ensures that the address is used instead of the offset. While
I have since changed the default C semantics to return the address instead of
the offset when casting, this offset compilation mode can still be used by
passing a command-line flag.
Reviewers: rsmith, aaron.ballman, theraven, fhahn, lebedev.ri, nlopes, aqjune
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman, lebedev.ri
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71499
Add constexpr evaluation for ExtVectorElementExpr nodes by evaluating
the underlying vector expression. Add basic folding for the case that
Evaluate does not return an LValue.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71133
The AST for the constexpr.cl test contains address space conversion
nodes to cast through the implicit generic address space. These
caused the evaluator to reject the input as constexpr in C++ for
OpenCL mode, whereas the input was considered constexpr in plain C++
mode as the AST won't have address space cast nodes then.
Fixes PR44177.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71015
Array members are not yet handled. In addition, defaulted comparisons
can't yet find comparison operators by unqualified lookup (only by
member lookup and ADL). These issues will be fixed in follow-on changes.
If the lambda used 'this' without without capturing it, an error was
emitted, but the constant evaluator would still attempt to lookup the
capture, and failing to find it, dereference a null pointer.
This only happens in C++17 (as that's when lambdas were made
potentially-constexpr). Therefore, I also updated the
lambda-expressions.cpp test to run in both C++14 and C++17 modes.
Summary:
Removed the ```-fforce-experimental-new-constant-interpreter flag```, leaving
only the ```-fexperimental-new-constant-interpreter``` one. The interpreter
now always emits an error on an unsupported feature.
Allowing the interpreter to bail out would require a mapping from APValue to
interpreter memory, which will not be necessary in the final version. It is
more sensible to always emit an error if the interpreter fails.
Reviewers: jfb, Bigcheese, rsmith, dexonsmith
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70071
Current EvalInfo ctor causes EnableNewConstInterp to be true even though
it is supposed to be false on MSVC 2017. This is because a virtual function
getLangOpts() is called in member initializer lists, whereas on MSVC
member ctors are called before function virtual function pointers are
initialized.
This patch fixes that.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70729
This reverts commit 08ea1ee2db5f9d6460fef1d79d0d1d1a5eb78982.
It broke ./ClangdTests/FindExplicitReferencesTest.All
on the bots, see comments on https://reviews.llvm.org/D69360
non-constant.
We previously failed the entire condition evaluation if an unmodeled
side-effect was encountered in an argument, even if that argument was
unused in the attribute's condition.
Part of C++20 Concepts implementation effort. Added Concept Specialization Expressions that are created when a concept is refe$
D41217 on Phabricator.
(recommit after fixing failing Parser test on windows)
llvm-svn: 374903
