[BOLT][AArch64] Fixes assertion errors occurred when perf2bolt was executed

BOLT only checks for the most common indirect branch pattern during
the branch analyzation. Needs to extend the current logic with other cases
which slightly differs from the expected one.
This instruction sequences comes from libc,
it occurs when the binary is static.

As a workaround mark it as UNKNOWN branch and add support for them
in a follow up PR later.

Fixes: #83114

Author: kaadam

bolt/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64MCPlusBuilder.cpp

@@ -702,8 +702,20 @@ class AArch64MCPlusBuilder : public MCPlusBuilder {
     unsigned ShiftVal = AArch64_AM::getArithShiftValue(OperandExtension);
     AArch64_AM::ShiftExtendType ExtendType =
         AArch64_AM::getArithExtendType(OperandExtension);
-    if (ShiftVal != 2)
-      llvm_unreachable("Failed to match indirect branch! (fragment 2)");
+    if (ShiftVal != 2) {
+      // TODO: handle that case where ShiftVal != 2.
+      // The following code sequence below has no shift amount,
+      // the range could be 0 to 4.
+      // The pattern comes from libc, it occurs when the binary is static.
+      //   adr     x6, 0x219fb0 <sigall_set+0x88>
+      //   add     x6, x6, x14, lsl #2
+      //   ldr     w7, [x6]
+      //   add     x6, x6, w7, sxtw => no shift amount
+      //   br      x6
+      errs() << "BOLT-WARNING: "
+                "Failed to match indirect branch: ShiftVAL != 2 \n";
+      return false;
+    }
 
     if (ExtendType == AArch64_AM::SXTB)
       ScaleValue = 1LL;
@@ -748,6 +760,19 @@ class AArch64MCPlusBuilder : public MCPlusBuilder {
       return true;
     }
 
+    if (DefJTBaseAdd->getOpcode() == AArch64::ADR) {
+      // TODO: handle that case when we do not have adrp/add pair.
+      // It also occurs when the binary is static.
+      //  adr     x13, 0x215a18 <_nl_value_type_LC_COLLATE+0x50>
+      //  ldrh    w13, [x13, w12, uxtw #1]
+      //  adr     x12, 0x247b30 <__gettextparse+0x5b0>
+      //  add     x13, x12, w13, sxth #2
+      //  br      x13
+      errs() << "BOLT-WARNING: Failed to match indirect branch: "
+                "nop/adr instead of adrp/add \n";
+      return false;
+    }
+
     assert(DefJTBaseAdd->getOpcode() == AArch64::ADDXri &&
            "Failed to match jump table base address pattern! (1)");
 

bolt/test/AArch64/test-indirect-branch.c

@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+// Test how BOLT handles indirect branch sequence of instructions in
+// AArch64MCPlus builder.
+// This test checks that case when we have no shift amount after add
+// instruction. This pattern comes from libc, so needs to build '-static'
+// binary to reproduce the issue easily.
+//
+//   adr     x6, 0x219fb0 <sigall_set+0x88>
+//   add     x6, x6, x14, lsl #2
+//   ldr     w7, [x6]
+//   add     x6, x6, w7, sxtw => no shift amount
+//   br      x6
+// It also tests another case when we use '-fuse-ld=lld' along with '-static'
+// which produces the following sequence of intsructions:
+//
+//  nop   => nop/adr instead of adrp/add
+//  adr     x13, 0x215a18 <_nl_value_type_LC_COLLATE+0x50>
+//  ldrh    w13, [x13, w12, uxtw #1]
+//  adr     x12, 0x247b30 <__gettextparse+0x5b0>
+//  add     x13, x12, w13, sxth #2
+//  br      x13
+
+// clang-format off
+
+// REQUIRES: system-linux
+// RUN: %clang %s -o %t.exe -Wl,-q -static -fuse-ld=lld \
+// RUN: --target=aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu
+// RUN: llvm-bolt %t.exe -o %t.bolt --print-cfg \
+// RUN:  -v=1 2>&1 | FileCheck --match-full-lines %s
+
+// CHECK: BOLT-WARNING: Failed to match indirect branch: nop/adr instead of adrp/add
+// CHECK: BOLT-WARNING: Failed to match indirect branch: ShiftVAL != 2
+
+int main() { return 42; }