[llvm-commits] [LLVMdev] [PATCH] Replacing EVT:s with MVT:s (when possible)

[Patrik Hägglund H]

Thanks!

> One other question: do you think it makes sense to split CodeGen/ValueTypes.h into two files - one for MVT and one for EVT?  That way we could enforce that only lowering stuff > uses EVT by watching #include dependencies.

I don't know. There is still quite a few places where EVT (easily) can be changed into MVT, outside of TargetLowering. I will try to look at that next. I will keep your question in mind, and try to come back to it later. It may be hard to fully enforce, but it may be enough to just start making it more visible.

(As you may have noticed, I reverted my first commits, because bootstraps failed. I have now corrected a few small errors, and started to commit my changes again.)

/Patrik Hägglund


From: Chris Lattner [mailto:clattner at apple.com]
Sent: den 12 december 2012 18:46
To: Patrik Hägglund H
Cc: llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu LLVM
Subject: Re: [llvm-commits] [LLVMdev] [PATCH] Replacing EVT:s with MVT:s (when possible)

On Dec 10, 2012, at 10:07 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com<mailto:clattner at apple.com>> wrote:

On Dec 7, 2012, at 12:34 AM, Patrik Hägglund H <patrik.h.hagglund at ericsson.com<mailto:patrik.h.hagglund at ericsson.com>> wrote:


I have now updated the series to apply cleanly to trunk again. I have also added a new patch at the end, changing AsmOperandInfo::ConstraintVT to MVT.

I think that the only non-obvious parts are the addition of the getSimpleValueType member functions in the first patch, and the changes in the last two patches. The rest is quite mechanical, and should be obvious.

Any objections to the addition of getSimpleValueType (in the first patch)?

LGTM, please do. For future reference, it's best to surface the "questionable" parts before (or after, depending) the mechanical parts of the patch.

Thank you for tackling this Patrik!  One other question: do you think it makes sense to split CodeGen/ValueTypes.h into two files - one for MVT and one for EVT?  That way we could enforce that only lowering stuff uses EVT by watching #include dependencies.

-Chris

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20121213/914890b4/attachment.html>