Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "b32e085f".
Did you mean:
932e08ff
2012 Dec 03
0
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Replacing EVT:s with MVT:s (when possible)
...at are "pre-legalization" because they can represent arbitrary IR types. Anything that takes a legal machine type should take an MVT.
-Chris
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20121203/b32e085f/attachment.html>
2012 Dec 03
2
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Replacing EVT:s with MVT:s (when possible)
There seems to be quite a few places where the EVT type is used, but the code asserts if the variable/parameter is assigned something else than an MVT. Are there any general objections to replace EVT with MVT in these cases?
For example, a quick look at TargetLowering.h give me this list of (member) functions, taking an EVT parameter, that asserts if the argument is not an MVT:
getRegClassFor,