kernigh added a comment.
I forgot about this diff for a month.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/TargetInfo.cpp:4722
bool isI64 = Ty->isIntegerType() && getContext().getTypeSize(Ty) == 64;
- bool isInt =
- Ty->isIntegerType() || Ty->isPointerType() || Ty->isAggregateType();
+ bool isInt = !Ty->isFloatingType();
bool isF64 = Ty->isFloatingType() && getContext().getTypeSize(Ty) == 64;
----------------
nemanjai wrote:
> nit (feel free to ignore): seems like a better name might be something like
> `isSingleGPR` since it would appear that this is for types that go into a
> (single) general purpose register.
Hi. `isInt` is also true for a 64-bit integer, which goes into a pair of GPRs,
because each register has 32 bits.
================
Comment at: clang/test/CodeGenCXX/ppc32-varargs-method.cpp:15
+// CHECK-NEXT: load i8*, i8** %{{[0-9]+}}, align 4
+// CHECK-NEXT: mul i8 %numUsedRegs, 4
+// CHECK-NEXT: getelementptr inbounds i8, i8* %{{[0-9]+}}, i8 %{{[0-9]+}}
----------------
efriedma wrote:
> Not sure referring to numUsedRegs like this will work in a non-Asserts build.
> Please verify.
I did a build with cmake -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=OFF and verified that the
ppc32*varargs* tests still pass. `%numUsedRegs` is still in the llvm output.
`%numUsedRegs` //does not// appear in the output of `clang -S -emit-llvm ...`
(not cc1), but `%numUsedRegs` //does// appear in the output of `clang -cc1
...`. The test runs cc1 and sees the `%numUsedRegs`. I am confused by how llvm
sometimes erases the name of `%numUsedRegs` and sometimes keeps the name, but I
observe that turning LLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS on or off doesn't affect the test.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D90329/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D90329
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
