From f02062f8896cfb6b684320fc8248d0e5c96035b3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Renato Golin Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 18:50:22 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Add warning about CHECK-DAG with variable definition git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@192479 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8 --- docs/CommandGuide/FileCheck.rst | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/CommandGuide/FileCheck.rst b/docs/CommandGuide/FileCheck.rst index 6be5fc336dc..a71007b6161 100644 --- a/docs/CommandGuide/FileCheck.rst +++ b/docs/CommandGuide/FileCheck.rst @@ -216,6 +216,19 @@ in the natural order: Bar b; // CHECK-DAG: @_ZTV3Bar = +``CHECK-NOT:`` directives could be mixed with ``CHECK-DAG:`` directives to +exclude strings between the surrounding ``CHECK-DAG:`` directives. As a result, +the surrounding ``CHECK-DAG:`` directives cannot be reordered, i.e. all +occurrences matching ``CHECK-DAG:`` before ``CHECK-NOT:`` must not fall behind +occurrences matching ``CHECK-DAG:`` after ``CHECK-NOT:``. For example, + +.. code-block:: llvm + + ; CHECK-DAG: BEFORE + ; CHECK-NOT: NOT + ; CHECK-DAG: AFTER + +This case will reject input strings where ``BEFORE`` occurs after ``AFTER``. With captured variables, ``CHECK-DAG:`` is able to match valid topological orderings of a DAG with edges from the definition of a variable to its use. @@ -230,19 +243,34 @@ sequences from the instruction scheduler. For example, In this case, any order of that two ``add`` instructions will be allowed. -``CHECK-NOT:`` directives could be mixed with ``CHECK-DAG:`` directives to -exclude strings between the surrounding ``CHECK-DAG:`` directives. As a result, -the surrounding ``CHECK-DAG:`` directives cannot be reordered, i.e. all -occurrences matching ``CHECK-DAG:`` before ``CHECK-NOT:`` must not fall behind -occurrences matching ``CHECK-DAG:`` after ``CHECK-NOT:``. For example, +If you are defining `and` using variables in the same ``CHECK-DAG:`` block, +be aware that the definition rule can match `after` its use. + +So, for instance, the code below will pass: .. code-block:: llvm - ; CHECK-DAG: BEFORE - ; CHECK-NOT: NOT - ; CHECK-DAG: AFTER + ; CHECK-DAG: vmov.32 [[REG2:d[0-9]+]][0] + ; CHECK-DAG: vmov.32 [[REG2]][1] + vmov.32 d0[1] + vmov.32 d0[0] -This case will reject input strings where ``BEFORE`` occurs after ``AFTER``. +While this other code, will not: + +.. code-block:: llvm + + ; CHECK-DAG: vmov.32 [[REG2:d[0-9]+]][0] + ; CHECK-DAG: vmov.32 [[REG2]][1] + vmov.32 d1[1] + vmov.32 d0[0] + +While this can be very useful, it's also dangerous, because in the case of +register sequence, you must have a strong order (read before write, copy before +use, etc). If the definition your test is looking for doesn't match (because +of a bug in the compiler), it may match further away from the use, and mask +real bugs away. + +In those cases, to enforce the order, use a non-DAG directive between DAG-blocks. The "CHECK-LABEL:" directive ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -- 2.34.1