hans added inline comments.
> CGBuiltin.cpp:7604
> + case X86::BI__stosb: {
> + // we treat __stosb as volatile memset - it may not generate "rep stosb"
> + // instruction, but it will create a memset that won't be optimized away
Nit: I'd suggest capital w for "We" and ending the sentence with a period. I
see many other comments in the file don't do this, but we can at least set a
good example :-)
> CGBuiltin.cpp:7610
> + Value *SizeVal = EmitScalarExpr(E->getArg(2));
> + EmitNonNullArgCheck(RValue::get(Dest.getPointer()),
> E->getArg(0)->getType(),
> + E->getArg(0)->getExprLoc(), FD, 0);
Hmm, does the __stosb intrinsic require Dest to be non-null (e.g. would
Dest=NULL, Count=0 be OK?) I'm not even sure what llvm's memset requires
actually.
> CGBuiltin.cpp:7613
> + Builder.CreateMemSet(Dest, ByteVal, SizeVal, true);
> + return Dest.getPointer();
> }
Why is it returning Dest here, and not the result of Builder.CreateMemSet?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D25334
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
