[patch] Pass an ArrayRef to MCDisassembler::getInstruction

[Greg Clayton]

That would be fine with us.

> On Nov 11, 2014, at 5:26 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> This should be fine. A remote process would be (if I'm reading correctly) shipping the bytes to disassemble over the wire via an ArrayRef in this model. I think that's ok, but cc'ing Greg to double check. At the least, it's no different than what's going on right now.
> 
> The existing MemoryObject could be used to do all of that itself and keep a nice clean virtual interface, but we could also just redo that if we end up having a need.
> 
> Greg? Thoughts?
> 
> -eric
> 
> On Mon Nov 10 2014 at 10:22:56 AM Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:
> The attached patches change  MCDisassembler::getInstruction to take an
> ArrayRef<uint8_t> instead of a MemoryObject.
> 
> Even on X86 there is a maximum size an instruction can have. Given
> that, it seems way simpler and more efficient to just pass an ArrayRef
> to the disassembler instead of a MemoryObject and have it do a virtual
> call every time it wants some extra bytes.
> 
> Cheers,
> Rafael
> _______________________________________________
> llvm-commits mailing list
> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits