[PATCH] D55401: [WebAssembly] Fix assembler parsing of br_table.

[Heejin Ahn via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

aheejin accepted this revision.
aheejin added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.

Probably I don't have the context of what that floating point related assertion means.. Just curious, could you explain? Otherwise LGTM!



================
Comment at: lib/Target/WebAssembly/InstPrinter/WebAssemblyInstPrinter.cpp:227
-    assert(OpNo < Desc.getNumOperands() &&
-           "Unexpected floating-point immediate as a non-fixed operand");
-    assert(Desc.TSFlags == 0 &&
----------------
aardappel wrote:
> aheejin wrote:
> > aardappel wrote:
> > > aheejin wrote:
> > > > Why was this deleted too?
> > > Since we're basically not using variable_ops in the same way as before anymore (not annotated by TSFlags, not used in call in stack mode, and not used in br_table in the same way), keeping these checks didn't make much sense to me.
> > Oh what I asked is about
> > ```
> > assert(OpNo < Desc.getNumOperands() &&
> >        "Unexpected floating-point immediate as a non-fixed operand");
> > ```
> > Is this related to `TSFlags` or `variable_ops` too?
> Yes, that is what I was claiming. We're not using TSFlags at all anymore.
Sorry, but I don't understand, maybe I don't have the context of this assertion. How is
```
assert(OpNo < Desc.getNumOperands() &&
       "Unexpected floating-point immediate as a non-fixed operand");
```
related to TSFlags?


Repository:
  rL LLVM

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D55401/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D55401