[llvm-commits] Patch for handling multiple values in ExpandIntegerOperand

[Duncan Sands]

Hi,

> Looks like some target independent code also requires that the number of
> values can't be same. For example: TRUNC:i8 (add:i16) gets replaced by
> the first value of adde:(i8, flag) ignoring the flag.

these routines are defined to return one value.  In the code in question
that value needs to replace one value of N.  If N has more than one value,
how do you know which one to replace?

> So the patch I submitted  is quite generic and only extends the
> functionally to handle the case where the original node had multiple
> values. Our target needs this since we are replacing loads, and a load
> has multiple values. Do you think the patch is unsafe?

Yes, because it assumes that you want to replace the first values of N.
I think it makes more sense to change everything (include the target
independent routines) to return nodes rather than values, and have these
new nodes entirely replace N.

Ciao,

Duncan.