Fix possible infinite loop in shrink wrapping when searching for save/restore

points.

There is an infinite loop that can occur in Shrink Wrapping while searching
for the Save/Restore points.

Part of this search checks whether the save/restore points are located in
different loop nests and if so, uses the (post) dominator trees to find the
immediate (post) dominator blocks. However, if the current block does not have
any immediate (post) dominators then this search will result in an infinite
loop. This can occur in code containing an infinite loop.

The modification checks whether the immediate (post) dominator is different from
the current save/restore block. If it is not, then the search terminates and the
current location is not considered as a valid save/restore point for shrink wrapping.

Phabricator: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11607

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@244247 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8

diff --git a/lib/CodeGen/ShrinkWrap.cpp b/lib/CodeGen/ShrinkWrap.cpp
index f8ec1f358c4f4d67e5643ec190fb946d4b54fe7e..261b8402bc03be957f50543af93649c3e48d97fb 100644 (file)
--- a/lib/CodeGen/ShrinkWrap.cpp
+++ b/lib/CodeGen/ShrinkWrap.cpp
@@ -309,12 +309,30 @@ void ShrinkWrap::updateSaveRestorePoints(MachineBasicBlock &MBB) {
     // Fix (C).
     if (Save && Restore && Save != Restore &&
         MLI->getLoopFor(Save) != MLI->getLoopFor(Restore)) {
-      if (MLI->getLoopDepth(Save) > MLI->getLoopDepth(Restore))
-        // Push Save outside of this loop.
-        Save = FindIDom<>(*Save, Save->predecessors(), *MDT);
-      else
-        // Push Restore outside of this loop.
-        Restore = FindIDom<>(*Restore, Restore->successors(), *MPDT);
+      if (MLI->getLoopDepth(Save) > MLI->getLoopDepth(Restore)) {
+        // Push Save outside of this loop if immediate dominator is different
+        // from save block. If immediate dominator is not different, bail out. 
+        MachineBasicBlock *IDom = FindIDom<>(*Save, Save->predecessors(), *MDT);
+        if (IDom != Save)
+          Save = IDom;
+        else {
+          Save = nullptr;
+          break;
+        }
+      }
+      else {
+        // Push Restore outside of this loop if immediate post-dominator is
+        // different from restore block. If immediate post-dominator is not
+        // different, bail out. 
+        MachineBasicBlock *IPdom =
+          FindIDom<>(*Restore, Restore->successors(), *MPDT);
+        if (IPdom != Restore)
+          Restore = IPdom; 
+        else {
+          Restore = nullptr;
+          break;
+        }
+      }      
     }
   }
 }

diff --git a/test/CodeGen/AArch64/arm64-shrink-wrapping.ll b/test/CodeGen/AArch64/arm64-shrink-wrapping.ll
index 599712be401c6f437cea35aa9758a09225a53f51..c547e8ecebaa7990fae8d592fb14c38205ca629f 100644 (file)
--- a/test/CodeGen/AArch64/arm64-shrink-wrapping.ll
+++ b/test/CodeGen/AArch64/arm64-shrink-wrapping.ll
@@ -539,3 +539,32 @@ if.end:
 declare void @abort() #0
 
 attributes #0 = { noreturn nounwind }
+
+; Make sure that we handle infinite loops properly When checking that the Save
+; and Restore blocks are control flow equivalent, the loop searches for the
+; immediate (post) dominator for the (restore) save blocks. When either the Save
+; or Restore block is located in an infinite loop the only immediate (post)
+; dominator is itself. In this case, we cannot perform shrink wrapping, but we
+; should return gracefully and continue compilation.
+; The only condition for this test is the compilation finishes correctly.
+;
+; CHECK-LABEL: infiniteloop
+; CHECK: ret
+define void @infiniteloop() {
+entry:
+  br i1 undef, label %if.then, label %if.end
+
+if.then:
+  %ptr = alloca i32, i32 4
+  br label %for.body
+
+for.body:                                         ; preds = %for.body, %entry
+  %sum.03 = phi i32 [ 0, %if.then ], [ %add, %for.body ]
+  %call = tail call i32 bitcast (i32 (...)* @something to i32 ()*)()
+  %add = add nsw i32 %call, %sum.03
+  store i32 %add, i32* %ptr
+  br label %for.body
+
+if.end:
+  ret void
+}

diff --git a/test/CodeGen/ARM/arm-shrink-wrapping.ll b/test/CodeGen/ARM/arm-shrink-wrapping.ll
index f033ac473095129b47c781733deb3db7091964a2..28ffca8344ea58613df8572dbc5d2ea675369cf0 100644 (file)
--- a/test/CodeGen/ARM/arm-shrink-wrapping.ll
+++ b/test/CodeGen/ARM/arm-shrink-wrapping.ll
@@ -534,3 +534,31 @@ if.end:
 declare void @abort() #0
 
 attributes #0 = { noreturn nounwind }
+
+; Make sure that we handle infinite loops properly When checking that the Save
+; and Restore blocks are control flow equivalent, the loop searches for the
+; immediate (post) dominator for the (restore) save blocks. When either the Save
+; or Restore block is located in an infinite loop the only immediate (post)
+; dominator is itself. In this case, we cannot perform shrink wrapping, but we
+; should return gracefully and continue compilation.
+; The only condition for this test is the compilation finishes correctly.
+; CHECK-LABEL: infiniteloop
+; CHECK: pop
+define void @infiniteloop() {
+entry:
+  br i1 undef, label %if.then, label %if.end
+
+if.then:
+  %ptr = alloca i32, i32 4
+  br label %for.body
+
+for.body:                                         ; preds = %for.body, %entry
+  %sum.03 = phi i32 [ 0, %if.then ], [ %add, %for.body ]
+  %call = tail call i32 asm sideeffect "mov $0, #1", "=r,~{r4}"()
+  %add = add nsw i32 %call, %sum.03
+  store i32 %add, i32* %ptr
+  br label %for.body
+
+if.end:
+  ret void
+}

diff --git a/test/CodeGen/X86/x86-shrink-wrapping.ll b/test/CodeGen/X86/x86-shrink-wrapping.ll
index 8c91335d91a2b47680d40eef5940d38b7d540aac..c6d20d5835d67747b7e3364a2f63e65a4801ceae 100644 (file)
--- a/test/CodeGen/X86/x86-shrink-wrapping.ll
+++ b/test/CodeGen/X86/x86-shrink-wrapping.ll
@@ -637,3 +637,33 @@ if.end:
 declare void @abort() #0
 
 attributes #0 = { noreturn nounwind }
+
+
+; Make sure that we handle infinite loops properly When checking that the Save
+; and Restore blocks are control flow equivalent, the loop searches for the
+; immediate (post) dominator for the (restore) save blocks. When either the Save
+; or Restore block is located in an infinite loop the only immediate (post)
+; dominator is itself. In this case, we cannot perform shrink wrapping, but we
+; should return gracefully and continue compilation.
+; The only condition for this test is the compilation finishes correctly.
+;
+; CHECK-LABEL: infiniteloop
+; CHECK: retq
+define void @infiniteloop() {
+entry:
+  br i1 undef, label %if.then, label %if.end
+
+if.then:
+  %ptr = alloca i32, i32 4
+  br label %for.body
+
+for.body:                                         ; preds = %for.body, %entry
+  %sum.03 = phi i32 [ 0, %if.then ], [ %add, %for.body ]
+  %call = tail call i32 asm "movl $$1, $0", "=r,~{ebx}"()
+  %add = add nsw i32 %call, %sum.03
+  store i32 %add, i32* %ptr
+  br label %for.body
+
+if.end:
+  ret void
+}