[M68k][NFC] Rename M68kOperand::Kind to KindTy - #112
Merged
cuviper merged 1 commit intoAug 25, 2021
Conversation
Rename the M68kOperand::Type enumeration to KindTy to avoid ambiguity with the Kind field when referencing enumeration values e.g. `Kind::Value`. This works around a compilation error under GCC 5, where GCC won't lookup enum class values if you have a similarly named field (see https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60994). The error in question is: `M68kAsmParser.cpp:857:8: error: 'Kind' is not a class, namespace, or enumeration` Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108723
|
Could you please also file a bug blocking https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=release-13.0.0 to backport this to the upstream release branch? |
Author
|
@nikic, okay, I've filed https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51630. |
vext01
pushed a commit
to vext01/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 7, 2024
…tation Remove intrinsic annotation.
alexcrichton
pushed a commit
to alexcrichton/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
Swift async functions can miscompile on Windows ARM64 at `-O2`, when there's enough register pressure that a local gets scavenged into the callee-save area: the local ends up sharing an address with the saved caller x29, so the epilogue restores a value the function has already overwritten. swiftlang/swift#90920 has a reduced repro. `assignCalleeSavedSpillSlots` creates the swift async context object before the callee-save loop instead of inside it next to the FP slot. MachineFrameInfo ends up with it above the frame record while the prologue stores it below at FP-8, and the 8 byte disagreement leaves a hole in the middle of the callee-save area. PEI's scavenger hands that hole to the local. Only reproduces at -O2 and up since scavenging is gated on the opt level. ``` sub sp, sp, rust-lang#112 str x19, [sp, rust-lang#16] // 8-byte Spill str x21, [sp, rust-lang#24] // 8-byte Spill stp x23, x24, [sp, rust-lang#32] // 16-byte Folded Spill stp x25, x26, [sp, rust-lang#48] // 16-byte Folded Spill stp x27, x28, [sp, rust-lang#64] // 16-byte Folded Spill stp x29, x30, [sp, rust-lang#88] // 16-byte Folded Spill str xzr, [sp, rust-lang#80] add x29, sp, rust-lang#88 ... str x7, [x29] // 8-byte Spill ... ldr x1, [x29] // 8-byte Reload ldp x29, x30, [sp, rust-lang#88] // 16-byte Folded Reload ``` This creates the object inside the loop so the two agree. The other option was leaving the creation site alone and teaching MachineFrameInfo about the expanded 24 byte FP/LR slot, but that puts the layout in two places. Not sure which is preferred here, I don't know this code well. This also asserts the saved FP object resolves to FP+0, since nothing checks that today. Reverting the fix makes it fire on the same funclet. `store-swift-async-context-clobber-live-reg.ll` already miscompiles with `-regalloc=fast`, so this isn't Swift specific.
nikic
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 21, 2026
Swift async functions can miscompile on Windows ARM64 at `-O2`, when there's enough register pressure that a local gets scavenged into the callee-save area: the local ends up sharing an address with the saved caller x29, so the epilogue restores a value the function has already overwritten. swiftlang/swift#90920 has a reduced repro. `assignCalleeSavedSpillSlots` creates the swift async context object before the callee-save loop instead of inside it next to the FP slot. MachineFrameInfo ends up with it above the frame record while the prologue stores it below at FP-8, and the 8 byte disagreement leaves a hole in the middle of the callee-save area. PEI's scavenger hands that hole to the local. Only reproduces at -O2 and up since scavenging is gated on the opt level. ``` sub sp, sp, #112 str x19, [sp, #16] // 8-byte Spill str x21, [sp, #24] // 8-byte Spill stp x23, x24, [sp, #32] // 16-byte Folded Spill stp x25, x26, [sp, #48] // 16-byte Folded Spill stp x27, x28, [sp, #64] // 16-byte Folded Spill stp x29, x30, [sp, #88] // 16-byte Folded Spill str xzr, [sp, #80] add x29, sp, #88 ... str x7, [x29] // 8-byte Spill ... ldr x1, [x29] // 8-byte Reload ldp x29, x30, [sp, #88] // 16-byte Folded Reload ``` This creates the object inside the loop so the two agree. The other option was leaving the creation site alone and teaching MachineFrameInfo about the expanded 24 byte FP/LR slot, but that puts the layout in two places. Not sure which is preferred here, I don't know this code well. This also asserts the saved FP object resolves to FP+0, since nothing checks that today. Reverting the fix makes it fire on the same funclet. `store-swift-async-context-clobber-live-reg.ll` already miscompiles with `-regalloc=fast`, so this isn't Swift specific. (cherry picked from commit c358e8d)
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Rename the M68kOperand::Type enumeration to KindTy to avoid ambiguity
with the Kind field when referencing enumeration values e.g.
Kind::Value.This works around a compilation error under GCC 5, where GCC won't
lookup enum class values if you have a similarly named field
(see https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60994).
The error in question is:
M68kAsmParser.cpp:857:8: error: 'Kind' is not a class, namespace, or enumerationDifferential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108723
This is needed for the M68k backend to compile with the Ubuntu LTS builder (see rust-lang/rust#88321).
CC @glaubitz, @jrtc27, not sure who I need to include on this for review.