[llvm-commits] [llvm] r120574 - /llvm/trunk/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp

[Duncan Sands]

>> I don't think it makes any sense to assert that the target supports SSE3 here.
>> The user (i.e. whoever generated a call to the intrinsic in the first place) is
>> essentially asking for a particular instruction to be placed in the assembler.
>> If that instruction won't execute on the target machine, that's their problem
>> not ours.  Two buildbots with processors that don't support SSE3 were barfing
>> on the apm.ll test in CodeGen/X86 because of this assertion.
>
> Or we could just make sure the testcase uses sse3 for codegen?

That was the other possibility, but since I don't see the point in asserting
I went for this one instead (nothing else in the code generators blows up if
you do this).  Do you think an assertion is better?  Philosophically an
assertion is wrong since it should only be used in impossible situations which
this is clearly not!

Ciao,

Duncan.