Hi Evan,
> > It already had ECX or'd in.
>
> Then plz write something like "0xb8 | 1" and comment it so it's more
> clear (to me at least :-).
this is from the original version - the version I committed before
the holidays already did 0xb8 | 1, and the version I just committed
does it even bet
On Aug 28, 2007, at 11:46 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:
> Hi Evan, thanks for your comments.
>
3. In X86TargetLowering::LowerTRAMPOLINE():
+case CallingConv::X86_StdCall: {
+ Move = 0xb9; // Pass chain in ECX
I assume this is the ModR/M byte?
>>>
>>> Well, it's MOV32ri
Hi Evan, thanks for your comments.
> >> 3. In X86TargetLowering::LowerTRAMPOLINE():
> >> +case CallingConv::X86_StdCall: {
> >> + Move = 0xb9; // Pass chain in ECX
> >>
> >> I assume this is the ModR/M byte?
> >
> > Well, it's MOV32ri.
>
> Then it should be 0xb8?
It already had ECX or'd
On Thursday 2 August 2007 02:55:57 Chris Lattner wrote:
>
> On Jul 31, 2007, at 3:08 PM, Evan Cheng wrote:
>
> >>> Also, isn't the static chain register described in
> >>> X86CallingConv.td?
> >>
> >> It is, but it's hard to use here. The problem is that when
> >> lowering the
> >> init.tram
On Jul 31, 2007, at 3:08 PM, Evan Cheng wrote:
>>> Also, isn't the static chain register described in
>>> X86CallingConv.td?
>>
>> It is, but it's hard to use here. The problem is that when
>> lowering the
>> init.trampoline intrinsic you only have a pointer to the target
>> function.
>> F
On Jul 27, 2007, at 3:38 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:
> Hi Evan,
>
>> Some nit picks.
>>
>> 1. Please don't use "Chain" for stand for function static chain. It
>> confuses backend guys like me. :-) "Chain" stands for control flow
>> dependency in the backend.
>
> I've replaced Chain with Nest everywhe
Hi Evan, I've committed the patches. X86 support was commit r40566.
If you would like me to make any changes please let me know and I will
take care of it when I get back from holidays.
Best wishes,
Duncan.
___
llvm-commits mailing list
llvm-commits@cs
Hi Evan,
> Some nit picks.
>
> 1. Please don't use "Chain" for stand for function static chain. It
> confuses backend guys like me. :-) "Chain" stands for control flow
> dependency in the backend.
I've replaced Chain with Nest everywhere, eg the attribute is now 'nest'.
> 2. Purely a stylis
Hi Duncan,
Some nit picks.
1. Please don't use "Chain" for stand for function static chain. It
confuses backend guys like me. :-) "Chain" stands for control flow
dependency in the backend.
2. Purely a stylistic thing:
+SDOperand X86TargetLowering::LowerTRAMPOLINE(SDOperand Op,
+
There was a small mistake in the X86 error checking: i64 inreg arguments should
count as consuming two registers. Fix:
-InRegCount++;
+InRegCount += (getTargetData()->getTypeSizeInBits(*I) + 31) / 32;
___
llvm-commits mailing lis
10 matches
Mail list logo
