>>> >>> Ah, that's a good idea. Why not do that? :) Generally, putting the >>> attribute on argument "#0" means that the attribute applies to the >>> function or the return value. Given that 'inreg' doesn't make any >>> sense for a function, it would be fine to overload it for this, what >>> do you think? >> >> Sound good if it's that simple. It looked more complicated, but I >> was probably missing something. I'll look again. > > Attaching this to the Function node went smoothly enough, but I > actually need it on the Return node, which it appears isn't > supported in the current IR, but is in the the machine-level RET > node. I could transfer the info from the Function node to the RET > node at some point, or even reference the Function node from the > code that handles RET I suppose, but it seems cleaner to change the > IR; which would break binary compatibility. Considering that this > works as is and is not all that important to begin with, I'm > thinking it's best to wait until we can change the IR and do it > right. Thoughts?
From the current SelectionDAG you can get a pointer to the Function object, which should have the attribute. Lowering for an ISD::RET can thus getting it from following this chain, -Chris _______________________________________________ llvm-commits mailing list llvm-commits@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
