PPC: Allocate RS spill slot for unaligned i64 load/store

This fixes another bug found by llvm-stress!

If we happen to be doing an i64 load or store into a stack slot that has less
than a 4-byte alignment, then the frame-index elimination may need to use an
indexed load or store instruction (because the offset may not be a multiple of
4, a requirement of the STD/LD instructions). The extra register needed to hold
the offset comes from the register scavenger, and it is possible that the
scavenger will need to use an emergency spill slot. As a result, we need to
make sure that a spill slot is allocated when doing an i64 load/store into a
less-than-4-byte-aligned stack slot.

Because test cases for things like this tend to be fairly fragile, I've
concatenated a few small bugpoint-reduced test cases together to form the
regression test.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@185907 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8

1 files changed, 33 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCISelLowering.cpp b/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCISelLowering.cpp
index 1759c04..cf41c02 100644
--- a/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCISelLowering.cpp
+++ b/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCISelLowering.cpp
@@ -1030,6 +1030,35 @@ bool PPCTargetLowering::SelectAddressRegReg(SDValue N, SDValue &Base,
   return false;
 }
 
+// If we happen to be doing an i64 load or store into a stack slot that has
+// less than a 4-byte alignment, then the frame-index elimination may need to
+// use an indexed load or store instruction (because the offset may not be a
+// multiple of 4). The extra register needed to hold the offset comes from the
+// register scavenger, and it is possible that the scavenger will need to use
+// an emergency spill slot. As a result, we need to make sure that a spill slot
+// is allocated when doing an i64 load/store into a less-than-4-byte-aligned
+// stack slot.
+static void fixupFuncForFI(SelectionDAG &DAG, int FrameIdx, EVT VT) {
+  // FIXME: This does not handle the LWA case.
+  if (VT != MVT::i64)
+    return;
+
+  // This should not be needed for negative FIs, which come from argument
+  // lowering, because the ABI should guarentee the necessary alignment.
+  if (FrameIdx < 0)
+    return;
+
+  MachineFunction &MF = DAG.getMachineFunction();
+  MachineFrameInfo *MFI = MF.getFrameInfo();
+
+  unsigned Align = MFI->getObjectAlignment(FrameIdx);
+  if (Align >= 4)
+    return;
+
+  PPCFunctionInfo *FuncInfo = MF.getInfo<PPCFunctionInfo>();
+  FuncInfo->setHasNonRISpills();
+}
+
 /// Returns true if the address N can be represented by a base register plus
 /// a signed 16-bit displacement [r+imm], and if it is not better
 /// represented as reg+reg.  If Aligned is true, only accept displacements
@@ -1051,6 +1080,7 @@ bool PPCTargetLowering::SelectAddressRegImm(SDValue N, SDValue &Disp,
       Disp = DAG.getTargetConstant(imm, N.getValueType());
       if (FrameIndexSDNode *FI = dyn_cast<FrameIndexSDNode>(N.getOperand(0))) {
         Base = DAG.getTargetFrameIndex(FI->getIndex(), N.getValueType());
+        fixupFuncForFI(DAG, FI->getIndex(), N.getValueType());
       } else {
         Base = N.getOperand(0);
       }
@@ -1115,9 +1145,10 @@ bool PPCTargetLowering::SelectAddressRegImm(SDValue N, SDValue &Disp,
   }
 
   Disp = DAG.getTargetConstant(0, getPointerTy());
-  if (FrameIndexSDNode *FI = dyn_cast<FrameIndexSDNode>(N))
+  if (FrameIndexSDNode *FI = dyn_cast<FrameIndexSDNode>(N)) {
     Base = DAG.getTargetFrameIndex(FI->getIndex(), N.getValueType());
-  else
+    fixupFuncForFI(DAG, FI->getIndex(), N.getValueType());
+  } else
     Base = N;
   return true;      // [r+0]
 }