[llvm-commits] [llvm] r110259 - /llvm/trunk/lib/Target/ARM/ARMBaseRegisterInfo.cpp

[Jim Grosbach]

Author: grosbach
Date: Wed Aug  4 17:12:43 2010
New Revision: 110259

URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=110259&view=rev
Log:
oops. revert for a moment to clean up tests first.

Modified:
    llvm/trunk/lib/Target/ARM/ARMBaseRegisterInfo.cpp

Modified: llvm/trunk/lib/Target/ARM/ARMBaseRegisterInfo.cpp
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/lib/Target/ARM/ARMBaseRegisterInfo.cpp?rev=110259&r1=110258&r2=110259&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- llvm/trunk/lib/Target/ARM/ARMBaseRegisterInfo.cpp (original)
+++ llvm/trunk/lib/Target/ARM/ARMBaseRegisterInfo.cpp Wed Aug  4 17:12:43 2010
@@ -851,18 +851,13 @@
   // slot of the previous FP. Also, if we have variable sized objects in the
   // function, stack slot references will often be negative, and some of
   // our instructions are positive-offset only, so conservatively consider
-  // that case to want a spill slot (or register) as well. Similarly, if
-  // the function adjusts the stack pointer during execution and the
-  // adjustments aren't already part of our stack size estimate, our offset
-  // calculations may be off, so be conservative.
+  // that case to want a spill slot (or register) as well.
   // FIXME: We could add logic to be more precise about negative offsets
   //        and which instructions will need a scratch register for them. Is it
   //        worth the effort and added fragility?
   bool BigStack =
     (RS && (estimateStackSize(MF) + (hasFP(MF) ? 4:0) >=
-            estimateRSStackSizeLimit(MF))
-     || MFI->hasVarSizedObjects()
-     || (MFI->adjustsStack() && !canSimplifyCallFramePseudos(MF)));
+            estimateRSStackSizeLimit(MF))) || MFI->hasVarSizedObjects();
 
   bool ExtraCSSpill = false;
   if (BigStack || !CanEliminateFrame || cannotEliminateFrame(MF)) {