[TLI][NFC] Fix ordering of ArmPL and SLEEF tests #2

mgabka · 2024-01-10T13:29:44Z

This patch sorts the tests which check if SLEEF and ArmPL mappings are used,
in the order of the math functions base names.

This patch sorts the tests which check if SLEEF and ArmPL mappings are used, in the order of the math functions base names.

…vm#75394) Calling one of pthread join/detach interceptor on an already joined/detached thread causes asserts such as: AddressSanitizer: CHECK failed: sanitizer_thread_arg_retval.cpp:56 "((t)) != (0)" (0x0, 0x0) (tid=1236094) #0 0x555555634f8b in __asan::CheckUnwind() compiler-rt/lib/asan/asan_rtl.cpp:69:3 #1 0x55555564e06e in __sanitizer::CheckFailed(char const*, int, char const*, unsigned long long, unsigned long long) compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_termination.cpp:86:24 #2 0x5555556491df in __sanitizer::ThreadArgRetval::BeforeJoin(unsigned long) const compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_thread_arg_retval.cpp:56:3 #3 0x5555556198ed in Join<___interceptor_pthread_tryjoin_np(void*, void**)::<lambda()> > compiler-rt/lib/asan/../sanitizer_common/sanitizer_thread_arg_retval.h:74:26 #4 0x5555556198ed in pthread_tryjoin_np compiler-rt/lib/asan/asan_interceptors.cpp:311:29 The assert are replaced by error codes.

Add custom combine to lower load <3 x i8> as the more efficient sequence below: ldrb wX, [x0, #2] ldrh wY, [x0] orr wX, wY, wX, lsl llvm#16 fmov s0, wX At the moment, there are almost no cases in which such vector operations will be generated automatically. The motivating case is non-power-of-2 SLP vectorization: llvm#77790

This test is currently flaky on a local Windows amd64 build. The reason is that it relies on the order of `process.threads` but this order is nondeterministic: If we print lldb's inputs and outputs while running, we can see that the breakpoints are always being set correctly, and always being hit: ```sh runCmd: breakpoint set -f "main.c" -l 2 output: Breakpoint 1: where = a.out`func_inner + 1 at main.c:2:9, address = 0x0000000140001001 runCmd: breakpoint set -f "main.c" -l 7 output: Breakpoint 2: where = a.out`main + 17 at main.c:7:5, address = 0x0000000140001021 runCmd: run output: Process 52328 launched: 'C:\workspace\llvm-project\llvm\build\lldb-test-build.noindex\functionalities\unwind\zeroth_frame\TestZerothFrame.test_dwarf\a.out' (x86_64) Process 52328 stopped * thread #1, stop reason = breakpoint 1.1 frame #0: 0x00007ff68f6b1001 a.out`func_inner at main.c:2:9 1 void func_inner() { -> 2 int a = 1; // Set breakpoint 1 here ^ 3 } 4 5 int main() { 6 func_inner(); 7 return 0; // Set breakpoint 2 here ``` However, sometimes the backtrace printed in this test shows that the process is stopped inside NtWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory from `ntdll.dll`: ```sh Backtrace at the first breakpoint: frame #0: 0x00007ffecc7b3bf4 ntdll.dll`NtWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory + 20 frame #1: 0x00007ffecc74585e ntdll.dll`RtlClearThreadWorkOnBehalfTicket + 862 frame #2: 0x00007ffecc3e257d kernel32.dll`BaseThreadInitThunk + 29 frame #3: 0x00007ffecc76af28 ntdll.dll`RtlUserThreadStart + 40 ``` When this happens, the test fails with an assertion error that the stopped thread's zeroth frame's current line number does not match the expected line number. This is because the test is looking at the wrong thread: `process.threads[0]`. If we print the list of threads each time the test is run, we notice that threads are sometimes in a different order, within `process.threads`: ```sh Thread 0: thread #4: tid = 0x9c38, 0x00007ffecc7b3bf4 ntdll.dll`NtWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory + 20 Thread 1: thread #2: tid = 0xa950, 0x00007ffecc7b3bf4 ntdll.dll`NtWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory + 20 Thread 2: thread #1: tid = 0xab18, 0x00007ff64bc81001 a.out`func_inner at main.c:2:9, stop reason = breakpoint 1.1 Thread 3: thread #3: tid = 0xc514, 0x00007ffecc7b3bf4 ntdll.dll`NtWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory + 20 Thread 0: thread #3: tid = 0x018c, 0x00007ffecc7b3bf4 ntdll.dll`NtWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory + 20 Thread 1: thread #1: tid = 0x85c8, 0x00007ff7130c1001 a.out`func_inner at main.c:2:9, stop reason = breakpoint 1.1 Thread 2: thread #2: tid = 0xf344, 0x00007ffecc7b3bf4 ntdll.dll`NtWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory + 20 Thread 3: thread #4: tid = 0x6a50, 0x00007ffecc7b3bf4 ntdll.dll`NtWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory + 20 ``` Use `self.thread()` to consistently select the correct thread, instead. Co-authored-by: kendal <[email protected]>

…izations of function templates to USRGenerator (llvm#98027) Given the following: ``` template<typename T> struct A { void f(int); // #1 template<typename U> void f(U); // #2 template<> void f<int>(int); // #3 }; ``` Clang will generate the same USR for `#1` and `#2`. This patch fixes the issue by including the template arguments of dependent class scope explicit specializations in their USRs.

This patch adds a frame recognizer for Clang's `__builtin_verbose_trap`, which behaves like a `__builtin_trap`, but emits a failure-reason string into debug-info in order for debuggers to display it to a user. The frame recognizer triggers when we encounter a frame with a function name that begins with `__clang_trap_msg`, which is the magic prefix Clang emits into debug-info for verbose traps. Once such frame is encountered we display the frame function name as the `Stop Reason` and display that frame to the user. Example output: ``` (lldb) run warning: a.out was compiled with optimization - stepping may behave oddly; variables may not be available. Process 35942 launched: 'a.out' (arm64) Process 35942 stopped * thread #1, queue = 'com.apple.main-thread', stop reason = Misc.: Function is not implemented frame #1: 0x0000000100003fa4 a.out`main [inlined] Dummy::func(this=<unavailable>) at verbose_trap.cpp:3:5 [opt] 1 struct Dummy { 2 void func() { -> 3 __builtin_verbose_trap("Misc.", "Function is not implemented"); 4 } 5 }; 6 7 int main() { (lldb) bt * thread #1, queue = 'com.apple.main-thread', stop reason = Misc.: Function is not implemented frame #0: 0x0000000100003fa4 a.out`main [inlined] __clang_trap_msg$Misc.$Function is not implemented$ at verbose_trap.cpp:0 [opt] * frame #1: 0x0000000100003fa4 a.out`main [inlined] Dummy::func(this=<unavailable>) at verbose_trap.cpp:3:5 [opt] frame #2: 0x0000000100003fa4 a.out`main at verbose_trap.cpp:8:13 [opt] frame #3: 0x0000000189d518b4 dyld`start + 1988 ```

``` UBSan-Standalone-sparc :: TestCases/Misc/Linux/diag-stacktrace.cpp ``` `FAIL`s on 32 and 64-bit Linux/sparc64 (and on Solaris/sparcv9, too: the test isn't Linux-specific at all). With `UBSAN_OPTIONS=fast_unwind_on_fatal=1`, the stack trace shows a duplicate innermost frame: ``` compiler-rt/test/ubsan/TestCases/Misc/Linux/diag-stacktrace.cpp:14:31: runtime error: execution reached the end of a value-returning function without returning a value #0 0x7003a708 in f() compiler-rt/test/ubsan/TestCases/Misc/Linux/diag-stacktrace.cpp:14:35 #1 0x7003a708 in f() compiler-rt/test/ubsan/TestCases/Misc/Linux/diag-stacktrace.cpp:14:35 #2 0x7003a714 in g() compiler-rt/test/ubsan/TestCases/Misc/Linux/diag-stacktrace.cpp:17:38 ``` which isn't seen with `fast_unwind_on_fatal=0`. This turns out to be another fallout from fixing `__builtin_return_address`/`__builtin_extract_return_addr` on SPARC. In `sanitizer_stacktrace_sparc.cpp` (`BufferedStackTrace::UnwindFast`) the `pc` arg is the return address, while `pc1` from the stack frame (`fr_savpc`) is the address of the `call` insn, leading to a double entry for the innermost frame in `trace_buffer[]`. This patch fixes this by moving the adjustment before all uses. Tested on `sparc64-unknown-linux-gnu` and `sparcv9-sun-solaris2.11` (with the `ubsan/TestCases/Misc/Linux` tests enabled). (cherry picked from commit 3368a32)

) Currently, process of replacing bitwise operations consisting of `LSR`/`LSL` with `And` is performed by `DAGCombiner`. However, in certain cases, the `AND` generated by this process can be removed. Consider following case: ``` lsr x8, x8, llvm#56 and x8, x8, #0xfc ldr w0, [x2, x8] ret ``` In this case, we can remove the `AND` by changing the target of `LDR` to `[X2, X8, LSL #2]` and right-shifting amount change to 56 to 58. after changed: ``` lsr x8, x8, llvm#58 ldr w0, [x2, x8, lsl #2] ret ``` This patch checks to see if the `SHIFTING` + `AND` operation on load target can be optimized and optimizes it if it can.

`JITDylibSearchOrderResolver` local variable can be destroyed before completion of all callbacks. Capture it together with `Deps` in `OnEmitted` callback. Original error: ``` ==2035==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-use-after-return on address 0x7bebfa155b70 at pc 0x7ff2a9a88b4a bp 0x7bec08d51980 sp 0x7bec08d51978 READ of size 8 at 0x7bebfa155b70 thread T87 (tf_xla-cpu-llvm) #0 0x7ff2a9a88b49 in operator() llvm/lib/ExecutionEngine/Orc/RTDyldObjectLinkingLayer.cpp:55:58 #1 0x7ff2a9a88b49 in __invoke<(lambda at llvm/lib/ExecutionEngine/Orc/RTDyldObjectLinkingLayer.cpp:55:9) &, const llvm::DenseMap<llvm::orc::JITDylib *, llvm::DenseSet<llvm::orc::SymbolStringPtr, llvm::DenseMapInfo<llvm::orc::SymbolStringPtr, void> >, llvm::DenseMapInfo<llvm::orc::JITDylib *, void>, llvm::detail::DenseMapPair<llvm::orc::JITDylib *, llvm::DenseSet<llvm::orc::SymbolStringPtr, llvm::DenseMapInfo<llvm::orc::SymbolStringPtr, void> > > > &> libcxx/include/__type_traits/invoke.h:149:25 #2 0x7ff2a9a88b49 in __call<(lambda at llvm/lib/ExecutionEngine/Orc/RTDyldObjectLinkingLayer.cpp:55:9) &, const llvm::DenseMap<llvm::orc::JITDylib *, llvm::DenseSet<llvm::orc::SymbolStringPtr, llvm::DenseMapInfo<llvm::orc::SymbolStringPtr, void> >, llvm::DenseMapInfo<llvm::orc::JITDylib *, void>, llvm::detail::DenseMapPair<llvm::orc::JITDylib *, llvm::DenseSet<llvm::orc::SymbolStringPtr, llvm::DenseMapInfo<llvm::orc::SymbolStringPtr, void> > > > &> libcxx/include/__type_traits/invoke.h:224:5 #3 0x7ff2a9a88b49 in operator() libcxx/include/__functional/function.h:210:12 #4 0x7ff2a9a88b49 in void std::__u::__function::__policy_invoker<void (llvm::DenseMap<llvm::orc::JITDylib*, llvm::DenseSet<llvm::orc::SymbolStringPtr, ```

[TLI][NFC] Fix ordering of ArmPL and SLEEF tests

9be744d

This patch sorts the tests which check if SLEEF and ArmPL mappings are used, in the order of the math functions base names.

mgabka closed this Jan 10, 2024

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[TLI][NFC] Fix ordering of ArmPL and SLEEF tests #2

[TLI][NFC] Fix ordering of ArmPL and SLEEF tests #2

mgabka commented Jan 10, 2024

[TLI][NFC] Fix ordering of ArmPL and SLEEF tests #2

[TLI][NFC] Fix ordering of ArmPL and SLEEF tests #2

Conversation

mgabka commented Jan 10, 2024