Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "fieldcallback".
2007 Nov 06
4
[LLVMdev] Dynamic (JIT) type resolution
...an also face the
problem of code optimization, where the store/load would not be next to
the callback call.
Will I also have these issues with 2)? I don't know if LLVM does
optimization on DAG nodes. The dag nodes that I would like to generate
for a llvm.loadfield.{type} would be:
DAG.getCall(FieldCallback); // Or something similar, I don't know
exactly the syntax ;-)
DAG.getLoad();
When (if possible) can I be sure that these two instructions are next to
each other in the native code?
(Oh, and also, I would like codegen to not clobber caller-saved
registers when doing the call. Is that ev...
2007 Nov 06
0
[LLVMdev] Dynamic (JIT) type resolution
...ation, where the store/load would not be next
> to
> the callback call.
>
> Will I also have these issues with 2)? I don't know if LLVM does
> optimization on DAG nodes. The dag nodes that I would like to generate
> for a llvm.loadfield.{type} would be:
>
> DAG.getCall(FieldCallback); // Or something similar, I don't know
> exactly the syntax ;-)
> DAG.getLoad();
>
> When (if possible) can I be sure that these two instructions are
> next to
> each other in the native code?
>
> (Oh, and also, I would like codegen to not clobber caller-saved
>...
2007 Nov 06
2
[LLVMdev] Dynamic (JIT) type resolution
...d not be next
>> to
>> the callback call.
>>
>> Will I also have these issues with 2)? I don't know if LLVM does
>> optimization on DAG nodes. The dag nodes that I would like to generate
>> for a llvm.loadfield.{type} would be:
>>
>> DAG.getCall(FieldCallback); // Or something similar, I don't know
>> exactly the syntax ;-)
>> DAG.getLoad();
>>
>> When (if possible) can I be sure that these two instructions are
>> next to
>> each other in the native code?
>>
>> (Oh, and also, I would like codegen...