[llvm-commits] [llvm] r46764 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/CallingConv.h lib/Target/X86/X86CallingConv.td lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp
dalej at apple.com
Tue Feb 5 14:36:28 PST 2008
On Feb 5, 2008, at 2:34 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Feb 5, 2008, at 2:31 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote:
>>> I think the calling convention stuff that Evan has been working on
>>> powerful enough to model though sort of stuff, but might need minor
>>> extensions. Do you think it would be reasonable do use this
>>> approach? Doing so would eliminate a "magic" calling convention,
>>> which would be nice :)
>> It would, but coercing standard types to a different type strikes me
>> as worse.
>> The IR really ought to be able to handle standard types without
> I don't think it would be a problem in this specific case, but I
> understand what you mean.
>> What I really wanted was to put InReg on the return value.
> Ah, that's a good idea. Why not do that? :) Generally, putting the
> attribute on argument "#0" means that the attribute applies to the
> function or the return value. Given that 'inreg' doesn't make any
> sense for a function, it would be fine to overload it for this, what
> do you think?
Sound good if it's that simple. It looked more complicated, but I
was probably missing something. I'll look again.
More information about the llvm-commits