[lld][WebAssembly] update error to continue for R_WASM_FUNCTION_INDEX_I32

[kevinwkt]

with some builds we're getting [libcxx/include/optional:874](libcxx/include/optional): libc++ Hardening assertion this->has_value() failed: optional operator* called on a disengaged value since error() adds the errmsg into the stream and continues, but given it's an unsupported relocation type it eventually crashes.

Given that I see that we're already using Fatal() in some of the other places where it hits unsupported relocation type, my uneducated guess is that this should be fine.

[github-actions]

Thank you for submitting a Pull Request (PR) to the LLVM Project!

This PR will be automatically labeled and the relevant teams will be notified.

If you wish to, you can add reviewers by using the "Reviewers" section on this page.

If this is not working for you, it is probably because you do not have write permissions for the repository. In which case you can instead tag reviewers by name in a comment by using @ followed by their GitHub username.

If you have received no comments on your PR for a week, you can request a review by "ping"ing the PR by adding a comment “Ping”. The common courtesy "ping" rate is once a week. Please remember that you are asking for valuable time from other developers.

If you have further questions, they may be answered by the LLVM GitHub User Guide.

You can also ask questions in a comment on this PR, on the LLVM Discord or on the forums.

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-lld-wasm

Author: Kyungtak Woo (kevinwkt)

Changes

with some builds we're getting [libcxx/include/optional:874](libcxx/include/optional): libc++ Hardening assertion this->has_value() failed: optional operator* called on a disengaged value since error() adds the errmsg into the stream and continues, but given it's an unsupported relocation type it eventually crashes.

Given that I see that we're already using Fatal() in some of the other places where it hits unsupported relocation type, my uneducated guess is that this should be fine.

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/162403.diff

1 Files Affected:

• (modified) lld/wasm/InputChunks.cpp (+1-1)

diff --git a/lld/wasm/InputChunks.cpp b/lld/wasm/InputChunks.cpp
index 009869f1dcde1..74c6c1b7151f9 100644
--- a/lld/wasm/InputChunks.cpp
+++ b/lld/wasm/InputChunks.cpp
@@ -440,7 +440,7 @@ bool InputChunk::generateRelocationCode(raw_ostream &os) const {
       continue;
 
     if (!isValidRuntimeRelocation(rel.getType()))
-      error("invalid runtime relocation type in data section: " +
+      fatal("invalid runtime relocation type in data section: " +
             relocTypetoString(rel.Type));
 
     uint64_t offset = getVA(rel.Offset) - getInputSectionOffset();

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-lld

Author: Kyungtak Woo (kevinwkt)

Changes

with some builds we're getting [libcxx/include/optional:874](libcxx/include/optional): libc++ Hardening assertion this->has_value() failed: optional operator* called on a disengaged value since error() adds the errmsg into the stream and continues, but given it's an unsupported relocation type it eventually crashes.

Given that I see that we're already using Fatal() in some of the other places where it hits unsupported relocation type, my uneducated guess is that this should be fine.

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/162403.diff

1 Files Affected:

• (modified) lld/wasm/InputChunks.cpp (+1-1)

diff --git a/lld/wasm/InputChunks.cpp b/lld/wasm/InputChunks.cpp
index 009869f1dcde1..74c6c1b7151f9 100644
--- a/lld/wasm/InputChunks.cpp
+++ b/lld/wasm/InputChunks.cpp
@@ -440,7 +440,7 @@ bool InputChunk::generateRelocationCode(raw_ostream &os) const {
       continue;
 
     if (!isValidRuntimeRelocation(rel.getType()))
-      error("invalid runtime relocation type in data section: " +
+      fatal("invalid runtime relocation type in data section: " +
             relocTypetoString(rel.Type));
 
     uint64_t offset = getVA(rel.Offset) - getInputSectionOffset();

[kevinwkt]

Updated fatal -> error + continue as suggested

[sbc100]

Where you also seeing this prior to the error being adding in #162117?

[kevinwkt]

No, this was introduced in #162117

[github-actions]

@kevinwkt Congratulations on having your first Pull Request (PR) merged into the LLVM Project!

Your changes will be combined with recent changes from other authors, then tested by our build bots. If there is a problem with a build, you may receive a report in an email or a comment on this PR.

Please check whether problems have been caused by your change specifically, as the builds can include changes from many authors. It is not uncommon for your change to be included in a build that fails due to someone else's changes, or infrastructure issues.

How to do this, and the rest of the post-merge process, is covered in detail here.

If your change does cause a problem, it may be reverted, or you can revert it yourself. This is a normal part of LLVM development. You can fix your changes and open a new PR to merge them again.

If you don't get any reports, no action is required from you. Your changes are working as expected, well done!