Commit Graph

9 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Jordan Rose
de7b8ff071 Replace 'delete's with std::unique_ptr throughout SILOptimizer 2018-09-18 09:44:01 -07:00
Michael Gottesman
234fcc1771 [pass-manager] notifyDeleteFunction => notifyWillDeleteFunction.
This name makes it clear that the function has not yet been deleted and also
contrasts with the past tense used in the API notifyAddedOrModifiedFunction to
show that said function has already added/modified the function.
2018-07-16 14:11:06 -07:00
Michael Gottesman
190008418e [pass-manager] notifyAddFunction => notifyAddedOrModifiedFunction.
The name notifyAddFunction is actively harmful since the pass manager uses this
entrypoint to notify analyses of added *OR* modified functions. It is up to the
caller analysis to distinguish in between these cases.

I am not vouching for the design, just trying to make names match the
current behavior.
2018-07-16 13:10:28 -07:00
Michael Gottesman
56d100f493 [analysis] Standardize AnalysisKind by moving it out of SILAnalysis into its own "struct enum" in a non-nested scope.
Generally in the SIL/SILOptimizer libraries we have been putting kinds in the
swift namespace, not a nested scope in a type in swift (see ValueKind as an
example of this).
2018-07-15 11:00:33 -07:00
Devin Coughlin
47d9de9751 [Exclusivity] Relax closure enforcement on separate stored properties (#10789)
Make the static enforcement of accesses in noescape closures stored-property
sensitive. This will relax the existing enforcement so that the following is
not diagnosed:

struct MyStruct {
   var x = X()
   var y = Y()

  mutating
  func foo() {
    x.mutatesAndTakesClosure() {
      _ = y.read() // no-warning
   }
  }
}

To do this, update the access summary analysis to summarize accesses to
subpaths of a capture.

rdar://problem/32987932
2017-07-10 13:33:22 -07:00
Devin Coughlin
2501dd71de Revert "[Exclusivity] Relax closure enforcement on separate stored properties" 2017-07-05 20:19:50 -07:00
Devin Coughlin
86dff5c0a7 [Exclusivity] Relax closure enforcement on separate stored properties
Make the static enforcement of accesses in noescape closures stored-property
sensitive. This will relax the existing enforcement so that the following is
not diagnosed:

struct MyStruct {
   var x = X()
   var y = Y()

  mutating
  func foo() {
    x.mutatesAndTakesClosure() {
      _ = y.read()
   }
  }
}

To do this, update the access summary analysis to be stored-property sensitive.

rdar://problem/32987932
2017-07-05 16:09:54 -07:00
Devin Coughlin
06b9ed7501 [Exclusivity] Switch static checking to use IndexTrie instead of ProjectionPath
IndexTrie is a more light-weight representation and it works well in this case.
This requires recovering the represented sequence from an IndexTrieNode, so
also add a getParent() method.
2017-06-15 18:37:23 -07:00
Devin Coughlin
d2ac3d556b [Exclusivity] Add analysis pass summarizing accesses to inout_aliasable args
Add an interprocedural SIL analysis pass that summarizes the accesses that
closures make on their @inout_aliasable captures. This will be used to
statically enforce exclusivity for calls to functions that take noescape
closures.

The analysis summarizes the accesses on each argument independently and
uses the BottomUpIPAnalysis utility class to iterate to a fixed point when
there are cycles in the call graph.

For now, the analysis is not stored-property-sensitive -- that will come in a
later commit.
2017-06-15 07:59:18 -07:00