[llvm-commits] [llvm] r55292 - in /llvm/trunk: lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp test/CodeGen/X86/fold-call-2.ll
evan.cheng at apple.com
Mon Aug 25 14:57:40 PDT 2008
callseq_start is completely eliminated unless there is an alloca, but
in that case FP is used to do reload. I think we are safe. Can you
think of an unsafe situation?
On Aug 25, 2008, at 12:51 PM, Dan Gohman wrote:
> On Aug 24, 2008, at 12:19 PM, Evan Cheng wrote:
>> Author: evancheng
>> Date: Sun Aug 24 14:19:55 2008
>> New Revision: 55292
>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=55292&view=rev
>> Move callseq_start above the call address load to allow load to be
>> folded into the call node.
> What happens if the callseq_start involves a non-trivial stack
> pointer adjustment and the load's address is spilled and needs
> to be reloaded? Could this change cause the reload to happen
> from the wrong stack location?
> llvm-commits mailing list
> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
More information about the llvm-commits