MFC r309124:

Upgrade our copies of clang, llvm, lldb, compiler-rt and libc++ to 3.9.0
release, and add lld 3.9.0.  Also completely revamp the build system for
clang, llvm, lldb and their related tools.

Please note that from 3.5.0 onwards, clang, llvm and lldb require C++11
support to build; see UPDATING for more information.

Release notes for llvm, clang and lld are available here:
<http://llvm.org/releases/3.9.0/docs/ReleaseNotes.html>
<http://llvm.org/releases/3.9.0/tools/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.html>
<http://llvm.org/releases/3.9.0/tools/lld/docs/ReleaseNotes.html>

Thanks to Ed Maste, Bryan Drewery, Andrew Turner, Antoine Brodin and Jan
Beich for their help.

Relnotes:	yes

MFC r309147:

Pull in r282174 from upstream llvm trunk (by Krzysztof Parzyszek):

  [PPC] Set SP after loading data from stack frame, if no red zone is
  present

  Follow-up to r280705: Make sure that the SP is only restored after
  all data is loaded from the stack frame, if there is no red zone.

  This completes the fix for
  https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=26519.

  Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24466

Reported by:    Mark Millard
PR:             214433

MFC r309149:

Pull in r283060 from upstream llvm trunk (by Hal Finkel):

  [PowerPC] Refactor soft-float support, and enable PPC64 soft float

  This change enables soft-float for PowerPC64, and also makes
  soft-float disable all vector instruction sets for both 32-bit and
  64-bit modes. This latter part is necessary because the PPC backend
  canonicalizes many Altivec vector types to floating-point types, and
  so soft-float breaks scalarization support for many operations. Both
  for embedded targets and for operating-system kernels desiring
  soft-float support, it seems reasonable that disabling hardware
  floating-point also disables vector instructions (embedded targets
  without hardware floating point support are unlikely to have Altivec,
  etc. and operating system kernels desiring not to use floating-point
  registers to lower syscall cost are unlikely to want to use vector
  registers either). If someone needs this to work, we'll need to
  change the fact that we promote many Altivec operations to act on
  v4f32. To make it possible to disable Altivec when soft-float is
  enabled, hardware floating-point support needs to be expressed as a
  positive feature, like the others, and not a negative feature,
  because target features cannot have dependencies on the disabling of
  some other feature. So +soft-float has now become -hard-float.

  Fixes PR26970.

Pull in r283061 from upstream clang trunk (by Hal Finkel):

  [PowerPC] Enable soft-float for PPC64, and +soft-float -> -hard-float

  Enable soft-float support on PPC64, as the backend now supports it.
  Also, the backend now uses -hard-float instead of +soft-float, so set
  the target features accordingly.

  Fixes PR26970.

Reported by:	Mark Millard
PR:		214433

MFC r309212:

Add a few missed clang 3.9.0 files to OptionalObsoleteFiles.

MFC r309262:

Fix packaging for clang, lldb and lld 3.9.0

During the upgrade of clang/llvm etc to 3.9.0 in r309124, the PACKAGE
directive in the usr.bin/clang/*.mk files got dropped accidentally.

Restore it, with a few minor changes and additions:
* Correct license in clang.ucl to NCSA
* Add PACKAGE=clang for clang and most of the "ll" tools
* Put lldb in its own package
* Put lld in its own package

Reviewed by:	gjb, jmallett
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D8666

MFC r309656:

During the bootstrap phase, when building the minimal llvm library on
PowerPC, add lib/Support/Atomic.cpp.  This is needed because upstream
llvm revision r271821 disabled the use of std::call_once, which causes
some fallback functions from Atomic.cpp to be used instead.

Reported by:	Mark Millard
PR:		214902

MFC r309835:

Tentatively apply https://reviews.llvm.org/D18730 to work around gcc PR
70528 (bogus error: constructor required before non-static data member).
This should fix buildworld with the external gcc package.

Reported by:	https://jenkins.freebsd.org/job/FreeBSD_HEAD_amd64_gcc/

MFC r310194:

Upgrade our copies of clang, llvm, lld, lldb, compiler-rt and libc++ to
3.9.1 release.

Please note that from 3.5.0 onwards, clang, llvm and lldb require C++11
support to build; see UPDATING for more information.

Release notes for llvm, clang and lld will be available here:
<http://releases.llvm.org/3.9.1/docs/ReleaseNotes.html>
<http://releases.llvm.org/3.9.1/tools/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.html>
<http://releases.llvm.org/3.9.1/tools/lld/docs/ReleaseNotes.html>

Relnotes:	yes

1 files changed, 77 insertions, 8 deletions

diff --git a/contrib/llvm/tools/clang/lib/Lex/PPExpressions.cpp b/contrib/llvm/tools/clang/lib/Lex/PPExpressions.cpp
index c40598c..94075ec 100644
--- a/contrib/llvm/tools/clang/lib/Lex/PPExpressions.cpp
+++ b/contrib/llvm/tools/clang/lib/Lex/PPExpressions.cpp
@@ -33,12 +33,18 @@ namespace {
 /// conditional and the source range covered by it.
 class PPValue {
   SourceRange Range;
+  IdentifierInfo *II;
 public:
   llvm::APSInt Val;
 
   // Default ctor - Construct an 'invalid' PPValue.
   PPValue(unsigned BitWidth) : Val(BitWidth) {}
 
+  // If this value was produced by directly evaluating an identifier, produce
+  // that identifier.
+  IdentifierInfo *getIdentifier() const { return II; }
+  void setIdentifier(IdentifierInfo *II) { this->II = II; }
+
   unsigned getBitWidth() const { return Val.getBitWidth(); }
   bool isUnsigned() const { return Val.isUnsigned(); }
 
@@ -140,6 +146,51 @@ static bool EvaluateDefined(PPValue &Result, Token &PeekTok, DefinedTracker &DT,
     PP.LexNonComment(PeekTok);
   }
 
+  // [cpp.cond]p4:
+  //   Prior to evaluation, macro invocations in the list of preprocessing
+  //   tokens that will become the controlling constant expression are replaced
+  //   (except for those macro names modified by the 'defined' unary operator),
+  //   just as in normal text. If the token 'defined' is generated as a result
+  //   of this replacement process or use of the 'defined' unary operator does
+  //   not match one of the two specified forms prior to macro replacement, the
+  //   behavior is undefined.
+  // This isn't an idle threat, consider this program:
+  //   #define FOO
+  //   #define BAR defined(FOO)
+  //   #if BAR
+  //   ...
+  //   #else
+  //   ...
+  //   #endif
+  // clang and gcc will pick the #if branch while Visual Studio will take the
+  // #else branch.  Emit a warning about this undefined behavior.
+  if (beginLoc.isMacroID()) {
+    bool IsFunctionTypeMacro =
+        PP.getSourceManager()
+            .getSLocEntry(PP.getSourceManager().getFileID(beginLoc))
+            .getExpansion()
+            .isFunctionMacroExpansion();
+    // For object-type macros, it's easy to replace
+    //   #define FOO defined(BAR)
+    // with
+    //   #if defined(BAR)
+    //   #define FOO 1
+    //   #else
+    //   #define FOO 0
+    //   #endif
+    // and doing so makes sense since compilers handle this differently in
+    // practice (see example further up).  But for function-type macros,
+    // there is no good way to write
+    //   # define FOO(x) (defined(M_ ## x) && M_ ## x)
+    // in a different way, and compilers seem to agree on how to behave here.
+    // So warn by default on object-type macros, but only warn in -pedantic
+    // mode on function-type macros.
+    if (IsFunctionTypeMacro)
+      PP.Diag(beginLoc, diag::warn_defined_in_function_type_macro);
+    else
+      PP.Diag(beginLoc, diag::warn_defined_in_object_type_macro);
+  }
+
   // Invoke the 'defined' callback.
   if (PPCallbacks *Callbacks = PP.getPPCallbacks()) {
     Callbacks->Defined(macroToken, Macro,
@@ -164,6 +215,8 @@ static bool EvaluateValue(PPValue &Result, Token &PeekTok, DefinedTracker &DT,
                           bool ValueLive, Preprocessor &PP) {
   DT.State = DefinedTracker::Unknown;
 
+  Result.setIdentifier(nullptr);
+
   if (PeekTok.is(tok::code_completion)) {
     if (PP.getCodeCompletionHandler())
       PP.getCodeCompletionHandler()->CodeCompletePreprocessorExpression();
@@ -177,8 +230,8 @@ static bool EvaluateValue(PPValue &Result, Token &PeekTok, DefinedTracker &DT,
   if (IdentifierInfo *II = PeekTok.getIdentifierInfo()) {
     // Handle "defined X" and "defined(X)".
     if (II->isStr("defined"))
-      return(EvaluateDefined(Result, PeekTok, DT, ValueLive, PP));
-    
+      return EvaluateDefined(Result, PeekTok, DT, ValueLive, PP);
+
     // If this identifier isn't 'defined' or one of the special
     // preprocessor keywords and it wasn't macro expanded, it turns
     // into a simple 0, unless it is the C++ keyword "true", in which case it
@@ -189,6 +242,7 @@ static bool EvaluateValue(PPValue &Result, Token &PeekTok, DefinedTracker &DT,
       PP.Diag(PeekTok, diag::warn_pp_undef_identifier) << II;
     Result.Val = II->getTokenID() == tok::kw_true;
     Result.Val.setIsUnsigned(false);  // "0" is signed intmax_t 0.
+    Result.setIdentifier(II);
     Result.setRange(PeekTok.getLocation());
     PP.LexNonComment(PeekTok);
     return false;
@@ -347,6 +401,7 @@ static bool EvaluateValue(PPValue &Result, Token &PeekTok, DefinedTracker &DT,
       DT.State = DefinedTracker::Unknown;
     }
     Result.setRange(Start, PeekTok.getLocation());
+    Result.setIdentifier(nullptr);
     PP.LexNonComment(PeekTok);  // Eat the ).
     return false;
   }
@@ -356,6 +411,7 @@ static bool EvaluateValue(PPValue &Result, Token &PeekTok, DefinedTracker &DT,
     PP.LexNonComment(PeekTok);
     if (EvaluateValue(Result, PeekTok, DT, ValueLive, PP)) return true;
     Result.setBegin(Start);
+    Result.setIdentifier(nullptr);
     return false;
   }
   case tok::minus: {
@@ -363,6 +419,7 @@ static bool EvaluateValue(PPValue &Result, Token &PeekTok, DefinedTracker &DT,
     PP.LexNonComment(PeekTok);
     if (EvaluateValue(Result, PeekTok, DT, ValueLive, PP)) return true;
     Result.setBegin(Loc);
+    Result.setIdentifier(nullptr);
 
     // C99 6.5.3.3p3: The sign of the result matches the sign of the operand.
     Result.Val = -Result.Val;
@@ -383,6 +440,7 @@ static bool EvaluateValue(PPValue &Result, Token &PeekTok, DefinedTracker &DT,
     PP.LexNonComment(PeekTok);
     if (EvaluateValue(Result, PeekTok, DT, ValueLive, PP)) return true;
     Result.setBegin(Start);
+    Result.setIdentifier(nullptr);
 
     // C99 6.5.3.3p4: The sign of the result matches the sign of the operand.
     Result.Val = ~Result.Val;
@@ -398,6 +456,7 @@ static bool EvaluateValue(PPValue &Result, Token &PeekTok, DefinedTracker &DT,
     Result.Val = !Result.Val;
     // C99 6.5.3.3p5: The sign of the result is 'int', aka it is signed.
     Result.Val.setIsUnsigned(false);
+    Result.setIdentifier(nullptr);
 
     if (DT.State == DefinedTracker::DefinedMacro)
       DT.State = DefinedTracker::NotDefinedMacro;
@@ -446,6 +505,15 @@ static unsigned getPrecedence(tok::TokenKind Kind) {
   }
 }
 
+static void diagnoseUnexpectedOperator(Preprocessor &PP, PPValue &LHS,
+                                       Token &Tok) {
+  if (Tok.is(tok::l_paren) && LHS.getIdentifier())
+    PP.Diag(LHS.getRange().getBegin(), diag::err_pp_expr_bad_token_lparen)
+        << LHS.getIdentifier();
+  else
+    PP.Diag(Tok.getLocation(), diag::err_pp_expr_bad_token_binop)
+        << LHS.getRange();
+}
 
 /// EvaluateDirectiveSubExpr - Evaluate the subexpression whose first token is
 /// PeekTok, and whose precedence is PeekPrec.  This returns the result in LHS.
@@ -459,8 +527,7 @@ static bool EvaluateDirectiveSubExpr(PPValue &LHS, unsigned MinPrec,
   unsigned PeekPrec = getPrecedence(PeekTok.getKind());
   // If this token isn't valid, report the error.
   if (PeekPrec == ~0U) {
-    PP.Diag(PeekTok.getLocation(), diag::err_pp_expr_bad_token_binop)
-      << LHS.getRange();
+    diagnoseUnexpectedOperator(PP, LHS, PeekTok);
     return true;
   }
 
@@ -503,8 +570,7 @@ static bool EvaluateDirectiveSubExpr(PPValue &LHS, unsigned MinPrec,
 
     // If this token isn't valid, report the error.
     if (PeekPrec == ~0U) {
-      PP.Diag(PeekTok.getLocation(), diag::err_pp_expr_bad_token_binop)
-        << RHS.getRange();
+      diagnoseUnexpectedOperator(PP, RHS, PeekTok);
       return true;
     }
 
@@ -605,8 +671,10 @@ static bool EvaluateDirectiveSubExpr(PPValue &LHS, unsigned MinPrec,
     case tok::greatergreater: {
       // Determine whether overflow is about to happen.
       unsigned ShAmt = static_cast<unsigned>(RHS.Val.getLimitedValue());
-      if (ShAmt >= LHS.getBitWidth())
-        Overflow = true, ShAmt = LHS.getBitWidth()-1;
+      if (ShAmt >= LHS.getBitWidth()) {
+        Overflow = true;
+        ShAmt = LHS.getBitWidth()-1;
+      }
       Res = LHS.Val >> ShAmt;
       break;
     }
@@ -722,6 +790,7 @@ static bool EvaluateDirectiveSubExpr(PPValue &LHS, unsigned MinPrec,
     // Put the result back into 'LHS' for our next iteration.
     LHS.Val = Res;
     LHS.setEnd(RHS.getRange().getEnd());
+    RHS.setIdentifier(nullptr);
   }
 }