I don't think we test invalid bitcode records in any detail, so no test
here - just a change for consistency with existing error checks in
surrounding code.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@232215 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
We only defer loading metadata inside ParseModule when ShouldLazyLoadMetadata
is true and we have not loaded any Metadata block yet.
This commit implements all-or-nothing loading of Metadata. If there is a
request to load any metadata block, we will load all deferred metadata blocks.
We make sure the deferred metadata blocks are loaded before we materialize any
function or a module.
The default value of the added parameter ShouldLazyLoadMetadata for
getLazyBitcodeModule is false, so the default behavior stays the same.
We only set the parameter to true when creating LTOModule in local contexts.
These can only really be used for parsing symbols, so it's unnecessary to ever
load the metadata blocks.
If we are going to enable lazy-loading of Metadata for other usages of
getLazyBitcodeModule, where deferred metadata blocks need to be loaded, we can
expose BitcodeReader::materializeMetadata to Module, similar to
Module::materialize.
rdar://19804575
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@232198 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Like r230414, add bitcode support including backwards compatibility, for
an explicit type parameter to GEP.
At the suggestion of Duncan I tried coalescing the two older bitcodes into a
single new bitcode, though I did hit a wrinkle: I couldn't figure out how to
create an explicit abbreviation for a record with a variable number of
arguments (the indicies to the gep). This means the discriminator between
inbounds and non-inbounds gep is a full variable-length field I believe? Is my
understanding correct? Is there a way to create such an abbreviation? Should I
just use two bitcodes as before?
Reviewers: dexonsmith
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7736
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@230415 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
I've taken my best guess at this, but I've cargo culted in places & so
explanations/corrections would be great.
This seems to pass all the tests (check-all, covering clang and llvm) so I
believe that pretty well exercises both the backwards compatibility and common
(same version) compatibility given the number of checked in bitcode files we
already have. Is that a reasonable approach to testing here? Would some more
explicit tests be desired?
1) is this the right way to do back-compat in this case (looking at the number
of entries in the bitcode record to disambiguate between the old schema and
the new?)
2) I don't quite understand the logarithm logic to choose the encoding type of
the type parameter in the abbreviation description, but I found another
instruction doing the same thing & it seems to work. Is that the right
approach?
Reviewers: dexonsmith
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7655
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@230414 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
While fuzzing LLVM bitcode files, I discovered that (1) the bitcode reader doesn't check that alignments are no larger than 2**29; (2) downstream code doesn't check the range; and (3) for values out of range, corresponding large memory requests (based on alignment size) will fail. This code fixes the bitcode reader to check for valid alignments, fixing this problem.
This CL fixes alignment value on global variables, functions, and instructions: alloca, load, load atomic, store, store atomic.
Patch by Karl Schimpf (kschimpf@google.com).
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@230180 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
When writing the bitcode serialization for the new debug info hierarchy,
I assumed two fields would never be null.
Drop that assumption, since it's brittle (and crashes the
`BitcodeWriter` if wrong), and is a check better left for the verifier
anyway. (No need for a bitcode upgrade here, since the new hierarchy is
still not in place.)
The fields in question are `MDCompileUnit::getFile()` and
`MDDerivedType::getBaseType()`, the latter of which isn't null in
test/Transforms/Mem2Reg/ConvertDebugInfo2.ll (see !14, a pointer to
nothing). While the testcase might have bitrotted, there's no reason
for the bitcode format to rely on non-null for metadata operands.
This also fixes a bug in `AsmWriter` where if the `file:` is null it
isn't emitted (caught by the double-round trip in the testcase I'm
adding) -- this is a required field in `LLParser`.
I'll circle back to ConvertDebugInfo2. Once the specialized nodes are
in place, I'll be trying to turn the debug info verifier back on by
default (in the newer module pass form committed r206300) and throwing
more logic in there. If the testcase has bitrotted (as opposed to me
not understanding the schema correctly) I'll fix it then.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@229960 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Follow-up to r229740, which removed `DITemplate*::getContext()` after my
upgrade script revealed that scopes are always `nullptr` for template
parameters. This is the other shoe: drop `scope:` from
`MDTemplateParameter` and its two subclasses. (Note: a bitcode upgrade
would be pointless, since the hierarchy hasn't been moved into place.)
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@229791 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
The metadata/value split introduced a major regression reading large
bitcode files that contain debug info (or other cyclic (non-self
reference) metadata graphs). For the first time in a while, I dropped
from libLTO.dylib down to `llvm-lto` with a non-trivial bitcode file
(~350MB), and I hit this when reading the result of ld64's `-save-temps`
in `llvm-lto`.
Here's pseudo-code for what was going on:
read-main-metadata-block:
for each md:
if has-fwd-ref: // Only true for cyclic graphs.
any-fwd-refs <- true
if any-fwd-refs:
foreach md:
resolve-cycles(md) // Handle cycles.
foreach function:
read-function-metadata-block: // Such as !alias, !loop
if any-fwd-refs:
foreach md: // (all metadata, not just this block)
resolve-cycles(md) // A no-op, but the loop is expensive!!
This commit resets the `AnyFwdRefs` flag to `false`. This on its own
was enough to change my Release+Asserts `llvm-lto` time for reading this
bitcode from over 20 minutes (I gave up on it) to 20 seconds. I've gone
further by tracking the min/max metadata forward-references in a
metadata block. This protects against a schema that has lots of
functions that each reference their own metadata cycle.
Unfortunately, this regression is in the 3.6 branch as well.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@229421 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Summary:
When creating {insert,extract}value instructions from a BitcodeReader, we
weren't verifying the fields were valid.
Bugs found with afl-fuzz
Reviewers: rafael
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7325
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@229345 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
David Blaikie
Manman Ren
Benjamin Kramer
Yaron Keren
JF Bastien
Duncan P. N. Exon Smith
Filipe Cabecinhas
Aaron Ballman