search for: sdt_x86call

Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "sdt_x86call".

2007 Sep 11
0
[LLVMdev] RFC: Tail call optimization X86
...d make sure every line fits in 80 columns. 3. enum NameDecorationStyle { None, StdCall, - FastCall + FastCall, + FastCC // the normal fastcc calling convention }; Why is FastCC necessary? Can't you just use FastCall? 4. def X86tailcall: SDNode<"X86ISD::TAILCALL", SDT_X86Call, [SDNPHasChain, SDNPOutFlag, SDNPOptInFlag]>; +def X86truetailcall: SDNode<"X86ISD::TRUETAILCALL", SDT_X86Call, + [SDNPHasChain, SDNPOutFlag, SDNPOptInFlag]>; + Please use X86tailcall. It's not currently used so feel free...
2007 Sep 06
2
[LLVMdev] RFC: Tail call optimization X86
Hi Evan, first off thanks to you and Chris for taking time. On 6 Sep 2007, at 00:57, Evan Cheng wrote: > We'd like to see tail call optimization to be similar to the target > independent lowering of ISD::CALL nodes. These are auto-generated > from ???CallingConv.td files. Some target specific details such as > function address register (ECX in your example) should be coded in
2007 Sep 11
2
[LLVMdev] RFC: Tail call optimization X86
...m not mistaken. I needed to differentiate between a normal fastcc and the x86_fastcall semantics in an older version of my code. I no longer depend on that so it can be removed as you suggest. sorry for the code corpse :) > 4. > def X86tailcall: SDNode<"X86ISD::TAILCALL", SDT_X86Call, > [SDNPHasChain, SDNPOutFlag, SDNPOptInFlag]>; > +def X86truetailcall: SDNode<"X86ISD::TRUETAILCALL", SDT_X86Call, > + [SDNPHasChain, SDNPOutFlag, SDNPOptInFlag]>; > + > > Please use X86tailcall. It's not...