search for: bbb9144a

On Oct 18, 2011, at 5:22 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: >> As for why it should be an IR pass, mostly because once the selection dag runs through the code, we can never recover all of the freedom we have at the IR level. To start with, splicing MBBs around requires known about the terminators (which we only some of the time do), and it requires re-writing them a touch to account for the

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Jakob Stoklund Olesen <stoklund at 2pi.dk>wrote: > > On Oct 18, 2011, at 3:07 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Cameron Zwarich <zwarich at apple.com>wrote: > >> I think this should really live as a CodeGen pass. Is there any good >> reason to make it an IR pass? >> > > So, as it

...erminator, and the targets of the switch can be freely intermingled with other MBBs? I'll attach an updated patch to work on MBBs when I have one... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20111019/bbb9144a/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: block_placement_ir.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 24170 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20111019/bbb9144a/attachment.bin>