Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "no_callee_sav".
Did you mean:
no_callee_saved
2016 Jun 20
7
Suggestion / Help regarding new calling convention
...ot;);
F->setCallingConv(CallingConv::GHC);
}
but we think threre should be clean and properway to do this perhaps like:
if (F->hasLocalLinkage() && !F->hasAddressTaken()) {
DEBUG(dbgs() << "Function has LocalLinkage \n");
F->setCallingConv(CallingConv::NO_Callee_Saved);
}
So I would like to know any better suggestions and if it is better to add a
new CC for this purpose then what aspects should be considered while
defining a new CC. Actually in this case the new CC does not really
required to define how parameters should be passed or any special rule for
re...
2016 Jun 24
2
Suggestion / Help regarding new calling convention
...gConv::GHC);
> }
>
> but we think threre should be clean and properway to do this perhaps like:
>
> if (F->hasLocalLinkage() && !F->hasAddressTaken()) {
> DEBUG(dbgs() << "Function has LocalLinkage \n");
> F->setCallingConv(CallingConv::NO_Callee_Saved);
> }
>
> So I would like to know any better suggestions and if it is better to add
> a new CC for this purpose then what aspects should be considered while
> defining a new CC. Actually in this case the new CC does not really
> required to define how parameters should be pass...
2016 Jun 21
2
Suggestion / Help regarding new calling convention
...gt;
>> but we think threre should be clean and properway to do this perhaps like:
>>
>> if (F->hasLocalLinkage() && !F->hasAddressTaken()) {
>> DEBUG(dbgs() << "Function has LocalLinkage \n");
>> F->setCallingConv(CallingConv::NO_Callee_Saved);
>> }
>>
>> So I would like to know any better suggestions and if it is better to add a new CC for this purpose then what aspects should be considered while defining a new CC. Actually in this case the new CC does not really required to define how parameters should be passed...