search for: 9.897

On Aug 25, 2014, at 8:26 AM, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > On 21 August 2014 19:32, Akira Hatanaka <ahatanak at gmail.com> wrote: >> Is there a way to distinguish between GlobalValues that are user-defined and >> those that are compiler-defined? I am looking for a function that I can use >> to tell if a GlobalValue is user-defined ,

>> The literalN sections were developed long ago to support coalescing of >> unnamed constants like 9.897 in source code for architectures that could not >> embed large constants in instructions. The linker could knew how to break >> up the section (e.g. __literal8 is always 8 byte chunks) and coalesce copies >> by content. >> >> ~6 years ago we

I think this is preventing constants in the constant pool (e.g., floating point literal) from being placed in the mergeable constant sections? We want to keep the const arrays declared in the program (s_dashArraySize1) out of the mergeable constant sections, but don't mind placing constants in the constant pool or constant arrays that the compiler defines, such as switch.table and

Is there a way to distinguish between GlobalValues that are user-defined and those that are compiler-defined? I am looking for a function that I can use to tell if a GlobalValue is user-defined , something like "GlobalValue::isUserDefined", which returns true for user-defined GlobalValue. I'm trying to make changes to prevent llvm from placing user-defined constant arrays in the