[PATCH] Add sign/zero extend to mips fast-isel
mcrosier at codeaurora.org
Thu Aug 28 17:36:57 PDT 2014
>>! In D4827#12, @rkotler wrote:
> I don't think that any of the proposed changes to my patch are necessary and I don't really agree with them helping the code and to the contrary I think they just make it more complicated and relying on things that may not always be true even, in the future.
I very much agree with Reid.
> Regarding not using the output of clang; this is something i can look into but i'm more comfortable at this time doing it the way I'm doing it and would have to get better at writing LLVM IR by hand.
I don't think this is a serious blocker.
> I would like to submit the patch as is and we can revisit some of this later after the basic Mips fast-isel port is done. A lot of this will change anyway by then and certainly when we add mips64 which is not that far off.
I'm not giving the LGTM as I haven't closely followed the patch, but I am backing Reid's comments about the code refactoring being unnecessary and in fact harmful.
More information about the llvm-commits