Skip to content

[CIR] Improve aligned store support #1637

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 22, 2025

Conversation

andykaylor
Copy link
Collaborator

This change corrects the alignment of store operations and fixes a related problem with calculation of member offsets (we weren't accounting for the alignment of the field whose offset we were calculating.

Many tests are affected by this, but most just needed a wildcard match to ignore the explicit alignment which wasn't present before. In cases where I updated a check for a specific alignment value, I compared against classic codegen to verify that we are now producing the same alignment.

Two new tests are added align-store.c and alignment.cpp. The second of these partially copies a test of the same name from clang/test/CodeGen. It's testing globals and isn't directly related to the code changes here, but we didn't seem to have a test for this. I put the store alignment tests in a different file because inconsistency between CIR and LLVM IR in placement of globals would have made a combined test difficult to follow.

This addresses #1204

This change corrects the alignment of store operations and fixes a related
problem with calculation of member offsets (we weren't accounting for
the alignment of the field whose offset we were calculating.
Copy link
Collaborator

@erichkeane erichkeane left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Change seems reasonable, though I admittedly only quick-scrolled through the tests.

Copy link
Member

@bcardosolopes bcardosolopes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice, thanks!

Copy link
Collaborator

@xlauko xlauko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm, besides nit

Comment on lines 897 to 898
align = mlir::IntegerAttr::get(mlir::IntegerType::get(getContext(), 64),
alignment);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
align = mlir::IntegerAttr::get(mlir::IntegerType::get(getContext(), 64),
alignment);
align = getI64IntegerAttr(alignment);

@andykaylor andykaylor merged commit 311a5aa into llvm:main May 22, 2025
9 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants