From bc8114f73339f49619dc1b4c016ccbf6f9ca0082 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sanjay Patel Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 18:25:47 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] CGSCC should not treat intrinsic calls like function calls (PR21403) Make the handling of calls to intrinsics in CGSCC consistent: they are not treated like regular function calls because they are never lowered to function calls. Without this patch, we can get dangling pointer asserts from the subsequent loop that processes callsites because it already ignores intrinsics. See http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21403 for more details / discussion. Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6124 git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@221802 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8 --- lib/Analysis/IPA/CallGraphSCCPass.cpp | 9 ++++++++- .../Transforms/InstCombine/no_cgscc_assert.ll | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 test/Transforms/InstCombine/no_cgscc_assert.ll diff --git a/lib/Analysis/IPA/CallGraphSCCPass.cpp b/lib/Analysis/IPA/CallGraphSCCPass.cpp index c27edbfa2ff..665aa7f046e 100644 --- a/lib/Analysis/IPA/CallGraphSCCPass.cpp +++ b/lib/Analysis/IPA/CallGraphSCCPass.cpp @@ -243,7 +243,14 @@ bool CGPassManager::RefreshCallGraph(CallGraphSCC &CurSCC, assert(!CallSites.count(I->first) && "Call site occurs in node multiple times"); - CallSites.insert(std::make_pair(I->first, I->second)); + + CallSite CS(I->first); + if (CS) { + Function *Callee = CS.getCalledFunction(); + // Ignore intrinsics because they're not really function calls. + if (!Callee || !(Callee->isIntrinsic())) + CallSites.insert(std::make_pair(I->first, I->second)); + } ++I; } diff --git a/test/Transforms/InstCombine/no_cgscc_assert.ll b/test/Transforms/InstCombine/no_cgscc_assert.ll new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..cec5297695b --- /dev/null +++ b/test/Transforms/InstCombine/no_cgscc_assert.ll @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ +; RUN: opt < %s -inline -instcombine -S | FileCheck %s + +; PR21403: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21403 +; When the call to sqrtf is replaced by an intrinsic call to fabs, +; it should not cause a problem in CGSCC. + +define float @bar(float %f) #0 { + %mul = fmul fast float %f, %f + %call1 = call float @sqrtf(float %mul) #0 + ret float %call1 + +; CHECK-LABEL: @bar( +; CHECK-NEXT: call float @llvm.fabs.f32 +; CHECK-NEXT: ret float +} + +declare float @sqrtf(float) #0 + +attributes #0 = { readnone "unsafe-fp-math"="true" } -- 2.34.1