Allow compatible extension attributes for tail calls

If the tail-callee and caller give the same bits via the same signext/zeroext
attribute then a tail-call should be allowed, since the extension has already
been done by the callee.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@188159 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8

3 files changed, 95 insertions, 17 deletions

diff --git a/lib/CodeGen/Analysis.cpp b/lib/CodeGen/Analysis.cpp
index d8f6704..332a042 100644
--- a/lib/CodeGen/Analysis.cpp
+++ b/lib/CodeGen/Analysis.cpp
@@ -320,6 +320,7 @@ static const Value *getNoopInput(const Value *V,
 static bool slotOnlyDiscardsData(const Value *RetVal, const Value *CallVal,
                                  SmallVectorImpl<unsigned> &RetIndices,
                                  SmallVectorImpl<unsigned> &CallIndices,
+                                 bool AllowDifferingSizes,
                                  const TargetLoweringBase &TLI) {
 
   // Trace the sub-value needed by the return value as far back up the graph as
@@ -350,7 +351,8 @@ static bool slotOnlyDiscardsData(const Value *RetVal, const Value *CallVal,
   // all the bits that are needed by the "ret" have been provided by the "tail
   // call". FIXME: with sufficiently cunning bit-tracking, we could look through
   // extensions too.
-  if (BitsProvided < BitsRequired)
+  if (BitsProvided < BitsRequired ||
+      (!AllowDifferingSizes && BitsProvided != BitsRequired))
     return false;
 
   return true;
@@ -516,19 +518,38 @@ bool llvm::isInTailCallPosition(ImmutableCallSite CS,
   // return type is.
   if (isa<UndefValue>(Ret->getOperand(0))) return true;
 
-  // Conservatively require the attributes of the call to match those of
-  // the return. Ignore noalias because it doesn't affect the call sequence.
-  const Function *F = ExitBB->getParent();
-  AttributeSet CallerAttrs = F->getAttributes();
-  if (AttrBuilder(CallerAttrs, AttributeSet::ReturnIndex).
-        removeAttribute(Attribute::NoAlias) !=
-      AttrBuilder(CallerAttrs, AttributeSet::ReturnIndex).
-        removeAttribute(Attribute::NoAlias))
-    return false;
+  // Make sure the attributes attached to each return are compatible.
+  AttrBuilder CallerAttrs(ExitBB->getParent()->getAttributes(),
+                          AttributeSet::ReturnIndex);
+  AttrBuilder CalleeAttrs(cast<CallInst>(I)->getAttributes(),
+                          AttributeSet::ReturnIndex);
+
+  // Noalias is completely benign as far as calling convention goes, it
+  // shouldn't affect whether the call is a tail call.
+  CallerAttrs = CallerAttrs.removeAttribute(Attribute::NoAlias);
+  CalleeAttrs = CalleeAttrs.removeAttribute(Attribute::NoAlias);
+
+  bool AllowDifferingSizes = true;
+  if (CallerAttrs.contains(Attribute::ZExt)) {
+    if (!CalleeAttrs.contains(Attribute::ZExt))
+      return false;
+
+    AllowDifferingSizes = false;
+    CallerAttrs.removeAttribute(Attribute::ZExt);
+    CalleeAttrs.removeAttribute(Attribute::ZExt);
+  } else if (CallerAttrs.contains(Attribute::SExt)) {
+    if (!CalleeAttrs.contains(Attribute::SExt))
+      return false;
+
+    AllowDifferingSizes = false;
+    CallerAttrs.removeAttribute(Attribute::SExt);
+    CalleeAttrs.removeAttribute(Attribute::SExt);
+  }
 
-  // It's not safe to eliminate the sign / zero extension of the return value.
-  if (CallerAttrs.hasAttribute(AttributeSet::ReturnIndex, Attribute::ZExt) ||
-      CallerAttrs.hasAttribute(AttributeSet::ReturnIndex, Attribute::SExt))
+  // If they're still different, there's some facet we don't understand
+  // (currently only "inreg", but in future who knows). It may be OK but the
+  // only safe option is to reject the tail call.
+  if (CallerAttrs != CalleeAttrs)
     return false;
 
   const Value *RetVal = Ret->getOperand(0), *CallVal = I;
@@ -570,7 +591,8 @@ bool llvm::isInTailCallPosition(ImmutableCallSite CS,
 
     // Finally, we can check whether the value produced by the tail call at this
     // index is compatible with the value we return.
-    if (!slotOnlyDiscardsData(RetVal, CallVal, TmpRetPath, TmpCallPath, TLI))
+    if (!slotOnlyDiscardsData(RetVal, CallVal, TmpRetPath, TmpCallPath,
+                              AllowDifferingSizes, TLI))
       return false;
 
     CallEmpty  = !nextRealType(CallSubTypes, CallPath);
diff --git a/test/CodeGen/X86/sibcall.ll b/test/CodeGen/X86/sibcall.ll
index 7b774f6..589e9ec 100644
--- a/test/CodeGen/X86/sibcall.ll
+++ b/test/CodeGen/X86/sibcall.ll
@@ -106,10 +106,10 @@ declare i32 @bar2(i32, i32, i32)
 define signext i16 @t8() nounwind ssp {
 entry:
 ; 32-LABEL: t8:
-; 32: calll {{_?}}bar3
+; 32: jmp {{_?}}bar3
 
 ; 64-LABEL: t8:
-; 64: callq {{_?}}bar3
+; 64: jmp {{_?}}bar3
   %0 = tail call signext i16 @bar3() nounwind      ; <i16> [#uses=1]
   ret i16 %0
 }
@@ -122,7 +122,7 @@ entry:
 ; 32: calll *
 
 ; 64-LABEL: t9:
-; 64: callq *
+; 64: jmpq *
   %0 = bitcast i32 (i32)* %x to i16 (i32)*
   %1 = tail call signext i16 %0(i32 0) nounwind
   ret i16 %1
diff --git a/test/CodeGen/X86/tail-call-attrs.ll b/test/CodeGen/X86/tail-call-attrs.ll
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..17ebe99
--- /dev/null
+++ b/test/CodeGen/X86/tail-call-attrs.ll
@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+; RUN: llc -mtriple=x86_64-apple-darwin -o - %s | FileCheck %s
+
+; Simple case: completely identical returns, even with extensions, shouldn't be
+; a barrier to tail calls.
+declare zeroext i1 @give_bool()
+define zeroext i1 @test_bool() {
+; CHECK-LABEL: test_bool:
+; CHECK: jmp
+  %call = tail call zeroext i1 @give_bool()
+  ret i1 %call
+}
+
+; Here, there's more zero extension to be done between the call and the return,
+; so a tail call is impossible (well, according to current Clang practice
+; anyway. The AMD64 ABI isn't crystal clear on the matter).
+declare zeroext i32 @give_i32()
+define zeroext i8 @test_i32() {
+; CHECK-LABEL: test_i32:
+; CHECK: callq _give_i32
+; CHECK: movzbl %al, %eax
+; CHECK: ret
+
+  %call = tail call zeroext i32 @give_i32()
+  %val = trunc i32 %call to i8
+  ret i8 %val
+}
+
+; Here, one function is zeroext and the other is signext. To the extent that
+; these both mean something they are incompatible so no tail call is possible.
+declare zeroext i16 @give_unsigned_i16()
+define signext i16 @test_incompatible_i16() {
+; CHECK-LABEL: test_incompatible_i16:
+; CHECK: callq _give_unsigned_i16
+; CHECK: cwtl
+; CHECK: ret
+
+  %call = tail call zeroext i16 @give_unsigned_i16()
+  ret i16 %call
+}
+
+declare inreg i32 @give_i32_inreg()
+define i32 @test_inreg_to_normal() {
+; CHECK-LABEL: test_inreg_to_normal:
+; CHECK: callq _give_i32_inreg
+; CHECK: ret
+  %val = tail call inreg i32 @give_i32_inreg()
+  ret i32 %val
+}
+
+define inreg i32 @test_normal_to_inreg() {
+; CHECK-LABEL: test_normal_to_inreg:
+; CHECK: callq _give_i32
+; CHECK: ret
+  %val = tail call i32 @give_i32()
+  ret i32 %val
+}