Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "108039".
Did you mean:
10039
2010 Aug 27
0
[LLVMdev] What does this error mean: psuedo instructions should be removed before code emission?
...RET instruction still stays in the
> end.
> RET is skipped by visit but I guess stays in the list. Where should
> it be destroyed?
Ahh, this is a bug in FastISel, which I didn't have turned on, that's
why I wasn't seeing this. Looks like the rewrite to go bottom-up,
108039, introduced this. The logic there doesn't work with tail
calls. Dan, could you look?
Minimal example:
; ModuleID = '<stdin>'
target datalayout = "e-p:64:64:64-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-
i64:64:64-f32:32:32-f64:64:64-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-s0:64:64-
f80:...
2010 Aug 27
2
[LLVMdev] What does this error mean: psuedo instructions should be removed before code emission?
On 08/27/2010 12:13, Dale Johannesen wrote:
> I don't think I believe this; emitPrologue should not be generating a
> TCRETURN at all, and line 1037 is generating a PROLOG_LABEL. Why do
> you say it's a TCRETURN?
Sorry, my bad. I have set breakpoints by MI addresses. But it turns out
that these addresses were reused and the second MIs created at these
particular addressed