iterator/pointer comparison issue that yields undefined behavior. This updates
Swift for the landing of this change in swift-llvm/stable.
I am going to cherry-pick the given change into swift-llvm/stable since there is no
reason not to do this now and it will prevent more of these conversions from
creeping into the code base.
We really want to avoid as much undefined behavior as we possibly can.
remove the mixed concept that was SILFileLocation.
Also add support for a third type of underlying storage that will be used
for deserialized debug lcoations from textual SIL.
NFC
<rdar://problem/22706994>
Similarly to how we've always handled parameter types, we
now recursively expand tuples in result types and separately
determine a result convention for each result.
The most important code-generation change here is that
indirect results are now returned separately from each
other and from any direct results. It is generally far
better, when receiving an indirect result, to receive it
as an independent result; the caller is much more likely
to be able to directly receive the result in the address
they want to initialize, rather than having to receive it
in temporary memory and then copy parts of it into the
target.
The most important conceptual change here that clients and
producers of SIL must be aware of is the new distinction
between a SILFunctionType's *parameters* and its *argument
list*. The former is just the formal parameters, derived
purely from the parameter types of the original function;
indirect results are no longer in this list. The latter
includes the indirect result arguments; as always, all
the indirect results strictly precede the parameters.
Apply instructions and entry block arguments follow the
argument list, not the parameter list.
A relatively minor change is that there can now be multiple
direct results, each with its own result convention.
This is a minor change because I've chosen to leave
return instructions as taking a single operand and
apply instructions as producing a single result; when
the type describes multiple results, they are implicitly
bound up in a tuple. It might make sense to split these
up and allow e.g. return instructions to take a list
of operands; however, it's not clear what to do on the
caller side, and this would be a major change that can
be separated out from this already over-large patch.
Unsurprisingly, the most invasive changes here are in
SILGen; this requires substantial reworking of both call
emission and reabstraction. It also proved important
to switch several SILGen operations over to work with
RValue instead of ManagedValue, since otherwise they
would be forced to spuriously "implode" buffers.
Having a separate address and container value returned from alloc_stack is not really needed in SIL.
Even if they differ we have both addresses available during IRGen, because a dealloc_stack is always dominated by the corresponding alloc_stack in the same function.
Although this commit quite large, most changes are trivial. The largest non-trivial change is in IRGenSIL.
This commit is a NFC regarding the generated code. Even the generated SIL is the same (except removed #0, #1 and @local_storage).
Debug variable info may be attached to debug_value, debug_value_addr,
alloc_box, and alloc_stack instructions.
In order to write textual SIL -> SIL testcases that exercise the handling
of debug information by SIL passes, we need to make a couple of additions
to the textual SIL language. In memory, the debug information attached to
SIL instructions references information from the AST. If we want to create
debug info from parsing a textual .sil file, these bits need to be made
explicit.
Performance Notes: This is memory neutral for compilations from Swift
source code, because the variable name is still stored in the AST. For
compilations from textual source the variable name is stored in tail-
allocated memory following the SIL instruction that introduces the
variable.
<rdar://problem/22707128>
(libraries now)
It has been generally agreed that we need to do this reorg, and now
seems like the perfect time. Some major pass reorganization is in the
works.
This does not have to be the final word on the matter. The consensus
among those working on the code is that it's much better than what we
had and a better starting point for future bike shedding.
Note that the previous organization was designed to allow separate
analysis and optimization libraries. It turns out this is an
artificial distinction and not an important goal.
