[llvm-commits] [llvm] r61129 - /llvm/trunk/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/LegalizeDAG.cpp

[Mon Ping Wang]

Hi Duncan,

Yes, it would be cleaner to use  SELECT_CC instead of  SETCC+SELECT  
pair.  I'll do the cleanup soon for it.

Thanks,
-- Mon Ping

On Jan 13, 2009, at 5:58 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:

> Hi Mon Ping,
>
>> Fix expansion of vsetcc to set the high bit for true instead of 1.
> ...
>>         SDValue In1 = DAG.getNode(ISD::EXTRACT_VECTOR_ELT, TmpEltVT,
>>                                   Tmp1, DAG.getIntPtrConstant(i));
>>         Ops[i] = DAG.getNode(ISD::SETCC, TLI.getSetCCResultType 
>> (In1), In1,
>> -                              DAG.getNode(ISD::EXTRACT_VECTOR_ELT,  
>> TmpEltVT,
>> -                                          Tmp2,  
>> DAG.getIntPtrConstant(i)),
>> -                              CC);
>> -        Ops[i] = DAG.getNode(ISD::SIGN_EXTEND, EltVT, Ops[i]);
>> +                             DAG.getNode(ISD::EXTRACT_VECTOR_ELT,  
>> TmpEltVT,
>> +                                         Tmp2,  
>> DAG.getIntPtrConstant(i)),
>> +                             CC);
>> +        Ops[i] = DAG.getNode(ISD::SELECT, EltVT, Ops[i],
>> +                             DAG.getConstant 
>> (EltVT.getIntegerVTBitMask(),EltVT),
>> +                             DAG.getConstant(0, EltVT));
>
> wouldn't it make more sense to use a SELECT_CC rather than a SETCC 
> +SELECT pair?
>
> Ciao,
>
> Duncan.