[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44110] New: Optimizer for __builtin_bswap32 fails
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44110
Bug ID: 44110
Summary: Optimizer for __builtin_bswap32 fails
Product: clang
Version: 8.0
Hardware: PC
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P
Component: C++
Assignee: unassignedclangb...@nondot.org
Reporter: ditlef.mart...@gmail.com
CC: blitzrak...@gmail.com, dgre...@apple.com,
erik.pilking...@gmail.com, llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org,
richard-l...@metafoo.co.uk
The following code runs OK in Compiler Explorer with opts: -std=c++11 -O1
Fails running: -std=c++11 -O3
Byte swapping is omitted.
#include
#include
#include
inline
static void swap(uint32_t & value)
{
value = __builtin_bswap32(value);
}
inline
void swap(float & value)
{
swap(*(reinterpret_cast(&value)));
}
// Swap an array of values
template
inline void swap(PtrType * data, size_t length)
{
for (size_t i = 0; i < length; ++i)
swap(data[i]);
}
template
void output(const char * s, T v) // __attribute__((noinline))
{
std::cout << s << ": " << v << std::endl;
}
int main()
{
float vec1[2];
vec1[0] = rand(); vec1[1] = rand();
const float vec1Orig = vec1[0];
output("vec1[0] value before swap", vec1[0]);
swap(vec1, 2);
if (vec1[0] == vec1Orig)
output("Failed: vec1[0] value after swap", vec1[0]);
else
output("OK: vec1[0] value after swap", vec1[0]);
}
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.___
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44109] New: Backport rGc84c62c50aa8 into 9.0.1
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44109 Bug ID: 44109 Summary: Backport rGc84c62c50aa8 into 9.0.1 Product: new-bugs Version: 9.0 Hardware: Other OS: All Status: NEW Severity: release blocker Priority: P Component: new bugs Assignee: unassignedb...@nondot.org Reporter: amy.kw...@ibm.com CC: htmldevelo...@gmail.com, llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org Blocks: 43360 Hi, Is it possible to backport rGc84c62c50aa8 into 9.0.1? The Phabricator review is located here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64817 Thanks. Referenced Bugs: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43360 [Bug 43360] [meta] 9.0.1 Release Blockers -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 43360] [meta] 9.0.1 Release Blockers
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43360 Bug 43360 depends on bug 43830, which changed state. Bug 43830 Summary: lldb crashes when loading Python 3.6 interpreter https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43830 What|Removed |Added Status|CONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 43830] lldb crashes when loading Python 3.6 interpreter
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43830 Tom Stellard changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Fixed By Commit(s)|9357b5d df3ae1e |9357b5d df3ae1e 186c848 ||6d7bc60 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 43308] StackProtector - stack violation not caught
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43308 Tom Stellard changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed By Commit(s)|r373216 r373219 r373220 |r373216 r373219 r373220 ||c1d76f4 76817ab 28c1f51 Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #10 from Tom Stellard --- Merged: c1d76f4 76817ab 28c1f51 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 43360] [meta] 9.0.1 Release Blockers
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43360 Bug 43360 depends on bug 43308, which changed state. Bug 43308 Summary: StackProtector - stack violation not caught https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43308 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 41926] select statement crashes wasm64 backend
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41926 Dan Gohman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dan433...@gmail.com Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Dan Gohman --- On LLVM master, there's now an error message when using wasm64, as it indeed is experimental and generally not usable yet. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/5b74c39d7222d6a8e449d63e7b5eeada712e6fcb -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 43354] Crash when compiling a simple hello world into webassembly
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43354 Dan Gohman changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED CC||dan433...@gmail.com Status|CONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #8 from Dan Gohman --- A warning for this has now been added on LLVM master: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/5b74c39d7222d6a8e449d63e7b5eeada712e6fcb -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44106] New: clang_getCursorExtent yields invalid range for macro expansions
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44106
Bug ID: 44106
Summary: clang_getCursorExtent yields invalid range for macro
expansions
Product: clang
Version: trunk
Hardware: PC
OS: Windows NT
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P
Component: libclang
Assignee: unassignedclangb...@nondot.org
Reporter: ta...@outlook.com
CC: kli...@google.com, llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org,
richard-l...@metafoo.co.uk
Currently libclang exposes `CXSourceRange clang_getCursorExtent(CXCursor C)`,
this function
(https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/master/clang/tools/libclang/CIndex.cpp#L6129)
gets the raw extent and then calls cxloc::translateSourceRange.
cxloc::translateSourceRange
(https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/master/clang/tools/libclang/CIndex.cpp#L142)
currently has the following comment:
/// Translate a Clang source range into a CIndex source range.
///
/// Clang internally represents ranges where the end location points to the
/// start of the token at the end. However, for external clients it is more
/// useful to have a CXSourceRange be a proper half-open interval. This routine
/// does the appropriate translation.
This comment makes sense and gives an understanding that for an expression
like: `x + 2000` the range used by clang is `x + 2` and it will translate it to
be the full `x + 2000`.
However, the logic the method runs includes some special handling for macro
expansions that ultimately gives you a range of ‘macro start’ to ‘expansion
end’.
This conversion means that for a given macro the range you get back can include
thousands of in-between tokens that are unrelated.
An example of this is the following code where the range of the APPROX_PI
literal in the method starts at the 3 in the macro but ends just before the
semicolon in the method.
That is, the returned range is “Line 1, Column 19” to “Line 5, Column 21”; when
it is expected to be “Line 1, Column 19” to “Line 1, Column 26”.
#define APPROX_PI 3.14159
double getApproxPI()
{
return APPROX_PI;
}
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.___
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44107] New: class template argument deduction does not perform pointer decay
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44107
Bug ID: 44107
Summary: class template argument deduction does not perform
pointer decay
Product: clang
Version: 9.0
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P
Component: C++17
Assignee: unassignedclangb...@nondot.org
Reporter: alisda...@me.com
CC: blitzrak...@gmail.com, erik.pilking...@gmail.com,
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org, richard-l...@metafoo.co.uk
This simple program shows the fail:
#include
void func() {}
int main() {
std::pair y{"hello", func};
}
'func' is deduced as a function type, not decayed to a function pointer type.
Similarly, the diagnostic message suggests that the string literal is deducing
as an array, rather than decaying to a pointer-to-element.
This same test compiles cleanly with gcc and Intel/EDG front ends in the online
compilers at Compiler Explorer:
https://godbolt.org/z/dP38XN
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.___
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44105] New: Clang generates @PLT branches for powerpc, even when built without -fPIC
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44105
Bug ID: 44105
Summary: Clang generates @PLT branches for powerpc, even when
built without -fPIC
Product: clang
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Macintosh
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P
Component: LLVM Codegen
Assignee: unassignedclangb...@nondot.org
Reporter: chmeeed...@gmail.com
CC: llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org, neeil...@live.com,
richard-l...@metafoo.co.uk
A simple program:
int main(int);
int __start(void) {
return main(0);
}
When built with clang for powerpc: cc -m32 -ffreestanding -o freestanding.o
generates R_PPC_PLTREL24 relocations, when it should be generating only
R_PPC_REL32 relocations, and letting the linker do the fixups. These
R_PPC_PLTREL24 relocations appear to be forcing GNU ld to use BSS-PLT instead
of secure-PLT. Generating to asm, hand-removing the @PLT annotation, GNU ld
does not choose bss-plt.
Not sure if this is a clang bug or LLVM bug, as the intermediate LLVM listing
is difficult to decipher.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.___
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 37728] [meta] Make llvm passes debug info invariant
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37728 Bug 37728 depends on bug 43964, which changed state. Bug 43964 Summary: BranchFolder not debug invariant https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43964 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 43964] BranchFolder not debug invariant
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43964 Jeremy Morse changed: What|Removed |Added CC||apra...@apple.com, ||v...@apple.com bjorn.a.petters...@ericsson.com changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed By Commit(s)||rG898de302919b Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #4 from Jeremy Morse --- Hi, Bjorn wrote: > It seems like BlockFolder (BlockFolding.cpp) isn't caring that much about > CFI instruction inside the tail, but it does make sure it isn't chopping of > CFI instructions in the beginning of the block. I get the impression that this might be an artefact of its "advance then rewind" approach, rather than something deliberate. One of the comments in the large block you delete in D70091 illustrates a CFI_INSTRUCTION inside a tail that shouldn't be "chopped off". Then again, I know pretty much nothing about CFI anyway. Paul wrote: > CFI (call frame information) is emitted whenever unwinding is a possibility. > That can be with -g, it can also be with -fexceptions (and other similar > codegen options). This sounds unpleasant -- if I understand correctly, then if only '-g' was specified then we want to prioritise not changing codegen; but if -fexceptions was specified then codegen _should_ change to make exceptions operate correctly? That could then (potentially) mean two different ways of treating CFI_INSTRUCTION. --- Comment #5 from bjorn.a.petters...@ericsson.com --- The -g invariance introduced by https://reviews.llvm.org/D66467 has now been fixed in rG898de302919b (https://reviews.llvm.org/D70091). The fix restores the old behavior to say that a found common tail cover the whole basic block even if debug instructions are found before the tail. As the earlier comments talk a lot about CFI directives I want to highlight that the fix does not change anything related to CFI directives. If such instructions are found before the common tail, then we still need to split the BB when doing a tail merge. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] Issue 16867 in oss-fuzz: llvm:clangd-fuzzer: Stack-overflow in llvm::json::Parser::parseValue
Updates: Labels: Deadline-Approaching Comment #2 on issue 16867 by sheriff...@chromium.org: llvm:clangd-fuzzer: Stack-overflow in llvm::json::Parser::parseValue https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=16867#c2 This bug is approaching its deadline for being fixed, and will be automatically derestricted within 7 days. If a fix is planned within 2 weeks after the deadline has passed, a grace extension can be granted. - Your friendly Sheriffbot -- You received this message because: 1. You were specifically CC'd on the issue You may adjust your notification preferences at: https://bugs.chromium.org/hosting/settings Reply to this email to add a comment. ___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44104] New: LLDB looking for wrong version of lldb-server
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44104 Bug ID: 44104 Summary: LLDB looking for wrong version of lldb-server Product: Packaging Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P Component: deb packages Assignee: unassignedb...@nondot.org Reporter: peterhul...@gmail.com CC: llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org Using the LLVM 9 packages from https://apt.llvm.org/ for Debian 10 Buster. Attempting to debug an executable fails: $ lldb --version lldb version 9.0.1 $ lldb myprog (lldb) target create "myprog" Current executable set to 'myprog' (x86_64). (lldb) run error: process launch failed: unable to locate lldb-server-9.0.1 I would expect this to run "myprog" under the debugger. I have these (2nd & 3rd are symlinks to lldb-server) $ ls /usr/lib/llvm-9/bin/lldb-server* /usr/lib/llvm-9/bin/lldb-server/usr/lib/llvm-9/bin/lldb-server-9.0.0 /usr/lib/llvm-9/bin/lldb-server-9 The exact version is $ apt list lldb-9 Listing... Done lldb-9/unknown,now 1:9~+20191120043105+0f34f1b9318-1~exp1~20191120153646.83 amd64 [installed] Work-around (untested) is to create the missing symlink "lldb-server-9.0.1" manually. Related to bug #35292 but that is quite old and applies to a different version. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44090] Corrupt test cases discovered with improved verifier
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44090 Krzysztof Parzyszek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #1 from Krzysztof Parzyszek --- Fixed in 824b25fc02 and e8d1578131. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44103] New: labels emitted twice
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44103 Bug ID: 44103 Summary: labels emitted twice Product: libraries Version: 7.0 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P Component: MC Assignee: unassignedb...@nondot.org Reporter: baem...@gmx.de CC: llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 39464] __builtin_ia32_addcarry_u64 produces better code then __builtin_addcll.
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39464 Simon Pilgrim changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Fixed By Commit(s)||rG002625113ba8,rG257acbf6ae ||e9 --- Comment #5 from Simon Pilgrim --- Test coverage was added at rG002625113ba8 Confirmed fixed in rG257acbf6aee9 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44102] New: Missed canonicalizations for losslessness checks of signed integer demotions
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44102
Bug ID: 44102
Summary: Missed canonicalizations for losslessness checks of
signed integer demotions
Product: libraries
Version: trunk
Hardware: PC
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P
Component: Scalar Optimizations
Assignee: unassignedb...@nondot.org
Reporter: lebedev...@gmail.com
CC: llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
Much like https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44100
we have a missed canonicalization for signed pattern:
Given
signed short t4(signed short x) {
x+=1;
return x;
}
signed short t5(signed short x) {
x-=1;
return x;
}
With -fsanitize=implicit-conversion we produce:
%2 = sext i16 %0 to i32, !dbg !15
%5 = add nsw i32 %2, 32769, !dbg !15
%6 = icmp ult i32 %5, 65536, !dbg !15
and
%2 = sext i16 %0 to i32, !dbg !22
%5 = add nsw i32 %2, 32767, !dbg !22
%6 = icmp ult i32 %5, 65536, !dbg !22
https://godbolt.org/z/eyc6qN
But in these cases we can simply check the original %0:
Name: sext-signed-trunc-check - increment
Pre: C2 == 65536 && C1 == (C2/2)+C3 && C3 > 0 && C3 u<= C2
%ZZ_IGNOREME = C3
%conv = sext i16 %x to i32
%zz = add i32 %conv, C1
%cmp = icmp ult i32 %zz, C2
=>
%ZZ_IGNOREME = C3
%cmp = icmp slt i16 %x, (trunc (C2/2) - trunc (C3))
Name: sext-signed-trunc-check - decrement
Pre: C2 == 65536 && C1 == (C2/2)+C3 && C3 < 0 && C3 > -C2
%ZZ_IGNOREME = C3
%conv = sext i16 %x to i32
%zz = add i32 %conv, C1
%cmp = icmp ult i32 %zz, C2
=>
%ZZ_IGNOREME = C3
%cmp = icmp sge i16 %x, (-(trunc (C2/2)) - (trunc (C3)))
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/GC57
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.___
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44101] New: PowerPC64: clang crash during compilation of crafty
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44101 Bug ID: 44101 Summary: PowerPC64: clang crash during compilation of crafty Product: clang Version: 9.0 Hardware: Other OS: FreeBSD Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P Component: C Assignee: unassignedclangb...@nondot.org Reporter: pku...@anongoth.pl CC: blitzrak...@gmail.com, dgre...@apple.com, erik.pilking...@gmail.com, llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org, richard-l...@metafoo.co.uk Created attachment 22852 --> https://bugs.llvm.org/attachment.cgi?id=22852&action=edit patch Happens during compilation of games/crafty port on FreeBSD/powerpc64-elfv2: cc -O2 -pipe -fstack-protector-strong -fno-strict-aliasing -Wall -Wno-array-bounds -pipe -O3 \ -mpopcnt -pthread -DHASHSTATS -DTRACE -DBOOKDIR=\"/usr/local/lib/crafty\" -DLOGDIR=\"/tmp\" -DRCDIR=\"~/\" -DTBDIR=\"/usr/local/lib/crafty/TB\" -DPERSDIR=\"/usr/local/lib/crafty/cpf\" -DSKILL -DCPUS=1 -DSYZYGY -DTEST -DCPUS=4 -DUNIX -c crafty.c cc: warning: argument unused during compilation: '-mpopcnt' [-Wunused-command-line-argument] In file included from :338: :12:9: warning: 'CPUS' macro redefined [-Wmacro-redefined] #define CPUS 4 ^ :9:9: note: previous definition is here #define CPUS 1 ^ Assertion failed: ((OpInfo.ConstraintType == TargetLowering::C_RegisterClass || OpInfo.ConstraintType == TargetLowering::C_Register || OpInfo.ConstraintType == TargetLowering::C_Immediate) && "Unknown constraint type!"), function visitInlineAsm, file /usr/src/contrib/llvm/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGBuilder.cpp, line 8274. Stack dump: 0. Program arguments: /usr/bin/cc -cc1 -triple powerpc64-unknown-freebsd13.0 -emit-obj -disable-free -main-file-name crafty.c -mrelocation-model pic -pic-level 2 -mthread-model posix -relaxed-aliasing -masm-verbose -mconstructor-aliases -munwind-tables -fuse-init-array -target-cpu ppc64 -target-feature +secure-plt -mfloat-abi hard -dwarf-column-info -debugger-tuning=gdb -momit-leaf-frame-pointer -coverage-notes-file /tmp/usr/ports/games/crafty/work/crafty-25.2_1/crafty.gcno -resource-dir /usr/lib/clang/9.0.0 -D HASHSTATS -D TRACE -D BOOKDIR="/usr/local/lib/crafty" -D LOGDIR="/tmp" -D RCDIR="~/" -D TBDIR="/usr/local/lib/crafty/TB" -D PERSDIR="/usr/local/lib/crafty/cpf" -D SKILL -D CPUS=1 -D SYZYGY -D TEST -D CPUS=4 -D UNIX -O3 -Wall -Wno-array-bounds -fdebug-compilation-dir /tmp/usr/ports/games/crafty/work/crafty-25.2_1 -ferror-limit 19 -fmessage-length 106 -pthread -stack-protector 2 -fno-signed-char -fobjc-runtime=gnustep -fdiagnostics-show-option -fcolor-diagnostics -vectorize-loops -vectorize-slp -faddrsig -o crafty.o -x c crafty.c 1. parser at end of file 2. Code generation 3. Running pass 'Function Pass Manager' on module 'crafty.c'. 4. Running pass 'PowerPC DAG->DAG Pattern Instruction Selection' on function '@RootMoveList' #0 0x136f5e50 PrintStackTrace /usr/src/contrib/llvm/lib/Support/Unix/Signals.inc:533:13 #1 0x136f64cc /usr/src/contrib/llvm/lib/Support/Unix/Signals.inc:593:3 #2 0x136f3790 RunSignalHandlers /usr/src/contrib/llvm/lib/Support/Signals.cpp:67:5 #3 0x136f6c44 SignalHandler /usr/src/contrib/llvm/lib/Support/Unix/Signals.inc:375:3 #4 0x0008151d176c handle_signal /usr/src/lib/libthr/thread/thr_sig.c:248:3 cc: error: unable to execute command: Abort trap (core dumped) cc: error: clang frontend command failed due to signal (use -v to see invocation) FreeBSD clang version 9.0.0 (tags/RELEASE_900/final 372316) (based on LLVM 9.0.0) Target: powerpc64-unknown-freebsd13.0 Thread model: posix InstalledDir: /usr/bin Obviously, passing -mpopcnt is a bug in crafty, but the point here is clang's crash. I've attached the preprocessed souce file and the running script. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44100] New: Missed canonicalizations for losslessness checks of unsigned integer demotions
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44100
Bug ID: 44100
Summary: Missed canonicalizations for losslessness checks of
unsigned integer demotions
Product: libraries
Version: trunk
Hardware: PC
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P
Component: Scalar Optimizations
Assignee: unassignedb...@nondot.org
Reporter: lebedev...@gmail.com
CC: llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
Given
unsigned short t0(unsigned short x) {
x+=1;
return x;
}
unsigned short t1(unsigned short x) {
x-=1;
return x;
}
With -fsanitize=implicit-conversion we produce:
%3 = add nuw nsw i32 %2, 1, !dbg !15
%4 = trunc i32 %3 to i16, !dbg !15
%5 = icmp ult i32 %3, 65536, !dbg !15
and
%2 = zext i16 %0 to i32, !dbg !22
%3 = add nsw i32 %2, -1, !dbg !22
%4 = trunc i32 %3 to i16, !dbg !22
%5 = icmp ult i32 %3, 65536, !dbg !22
https://godbolt.org/z/Us33sA
But in these cases we can simply check the original %2:
Name: unsigned truncation check - increment
Pre: C2 u>= C1
%add = add nuw i32 %conv, C1 ; has extra uses
%cmp = icmp ult i32 %add, C2 ; is truncation NUW?
=>
%cmp = icmp ult i32 %conv, (C2-C1)
Name: unsigned truncation check - decrement
Pre: C1 <= 0 ; C1 is non-positive
%conv = zext i16 %x to i32
%add = add i32 %conv, C1 ; has extra uses
%cmp = icmp ult i32 %add, 65536 ; is truncation NUW?
=>
%cmp = icmp uge i32 %conv, -C1
https://rise4fun.com/Alive/x35G
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.___
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] Issue 18118 in oss-fuzz: llvm:llvm-opt-fuzzer--x86_64-indvars: Timeout in llvm-opt-fuzzer--x86_64-indvars
Updates: Status: WontFix Comment #3 on issue 18118 by ClusterFuzz-External: llvm:llvm-opt-fuzzer--x86_64-indvars: Timeout in llvm-opt-fuzzer--x86_64-indvars https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=18118#c3 ClusterFuzz testcase 5652023936024576 is flaky and no longer crashes, so closing issue. If this is incorrect, please file a bug on https://github.com/google/oss-fuzz/issues/new -- You received this message because: 1. You were specifically CC'd on the issue You may adjust your notification preferences at: https://bugs.chromium.org/hosting/settings Reply to this email to add a comment. ___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
