llvm dev - Feb 2017 - clang/llvm support for %= in inline assembly

from https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Extended-Asm.html

Under certain circumstances, GCC may duplicate (or remove duplicates
of)
> your assembly code when optimizing. This can lead to unexpected duplicate
> symbol errors during compilation if your asm code defines symbols or
> labels. Using ‘%=’ (see AssemblerTemplate) may help resolve this problem.

‘%=’
> Outputs a number that is unique to each instance of the asm statement in
> the entire compilation. This option is useful when creating local labels
> and referring to them multiple times in a single template that generates
> multiple assembler instructions.


I tried to implement %= in my front-end but I ran into this problem with
the optimizer. So in order to have this feature, LLVM would need to support
it in the IR language.

As far as I can tell, Clang does not support this feature. Is it a
reasonable feature request?

Regards,
Andrew
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170205/88d1176d/attachment.html>

I think we may already support it. At least that's the implication from the
post-commit thread of r288093, in particular this reply from Reid
https://www.mail-archive.com/cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org/msg43592.html

Do you have a test case?

-- Sean Silva

On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 10:30 PM, Andrew Kelley via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> from https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Extended-Asm.html
>
> Under certain circumstances, GCC may duplicate (or remove duplicates of)
>> your assembly code when optimizing. This can lead to unexpected
duplicate
>> symbol errors during compilation if your asm code defines symbols or
>> labels. Using ‘%=’ (see AssemblerTemplate) may help resolve this
problem.
>
>
> ‘%=’
>> Outputs a number that is unique to each instance of the asm statement
in
>> the entire compilation. This option is useful when creating local
labels
>> and referring to them multiple times in a single template that
generates
>> multiple assembler instructions.
>
>
>
> I tried to implement %= in my front-end but I ran into this problem with
> the optimizer. So in order to have this feature, LLVM would need to support
> it in the IR language.
>
> As far as I can tell, Clang does not support this feature. Is it a
> reasonable feature request?
>
> Regards,
> Andrew
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170205/d4a229b1/attachment.html>

I encountered this issue of unique asm label names just now, in
https://bugs.freebsd.org/216771 .  A very simple test case is this:

  void foo(void)
  {
    asm volatile(
      "named_label:\n"
      "jnz named_label\n"
    );
  }

  void bar(void)
  {
    foo();
  }

Compiling this with any form of optimization gives an error, because clang is
attempting to inline foo() into bar(), thereby cloning the inline asm part:

  $ clang -O -c test.c
  test.c:4:5: error: invalid symbol redefinition
      "named_label:\n"
      ^
  <inline asm>:1:2: note: instantiated into assembly here
          named_label:
          ^
  1 error generated.

This error is very confusing to the end user, IMHO.  Either clang should
uniq-ify each of these labels automatically, when inlining functions, or it
should give you advice on how to use anonymous asm labels, or %= macros.

Appending %= to the label name only works if you append at least one ':'
to the asm statement, otherwise it isn't seen as a so-called "assembler
template", apparently:

  void foo(void)
  {
    asm volatile(
      "named_label_%=:\n"
      "jnz named_label_%=\n"
      :
    );
  }

  void bar(void)
  {
    foo();
  }

Resulting in:

  $ clang -O -S test.c -o -
          .text
          .file   "test.c"
          .globl  foo
          .p2align        4, 0x90
          .type   foo, at function
  foo:                                    # @foo
  # BB#0:                                 # %entry
          pushl   %ebp
          movl    %esp, %ebp
          #APP
  named_label_0:
          jne     named_label_0

          #NO_APP
          popl    %ebp
          retl
  .Lfunc_end0:
          .size   foo, .Lfunc_end0-foo

          .globl  bar
          .p2align        4, 0x90
          .type   bar, at function
  bar:                                    # @bar
  # BB#0:                                 # %entry
          pushl   %ebp
          movl    %esp, %ebp
          #APP
  named_label_1:
          jne     named_label_1

          #NO_APP
          popl    %ebp
          retl
  .Lfunc_end1:
          .size   bar, .Lfunc_end1-bar

This is with clang 4.0.0 from the release_40 branch.  I have no idea when the %=
support was added.

-Dimitry
> On 05 Feb 2017, at 10:50, Sean Silva via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> I think we may already support it. At least that's the implication from
the post-commit thread of r288093, in particular this reply from Reid
https://www.mail-archive.com/cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org/msg43592.html
> 
> Do you have a test case?
> 
> -- Sean Silva
> 
> On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 10:30 PM, Andrew Kelley via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> from https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Extended-Asm.html
> 
> Under certain circumstances, GCC may duplicate (or remove duplicates of)
your assembly code when optimizing. This can lead to unexpected duplicate symbol
errors during compilation if your asm code defines symbols or labels. Using ‘%=’
(see AssemblerTemplate) may help resolve this problem.
> 
> ‘%=’
> Outputs a number that is unique to each instance of the asm statement in
the entire compilation. This option is useful when creating local labels and
referring to them multiple times in a single template that generates multiple
assembler instructions.
> 
> 
> I tried to implement %= in my front-end but I ran into this problem with
the optimizer. So in order to have this feature, LLVM would need to support it
in the IR language.
> 
> As far as I can tell, Clang does not support this feature. Is it a
reasonable feature request?
> 
> Regards,
> Andrew
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170205/8f1e2a6b/attachment.sig>