[PATCH] D58400: [AMDGPU] Implement AMDGPUMCInstrAnalysis

[Scott Linder via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

scott.linder added a comment.

In D58400#1407115 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D58400#1407115>, @arsenm wrote:

> In D58400#1405973 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D58400#1405973>, @scott.linder wrote:
>
> > Does anyone have an opinion on returning negative branch targets (e.g. `<keep_symbol+0xfffffffffffe0018>`)? I don't know how this would ever come up in hardware anyway, or what the hardware would do, but it doesn't seem very helpful in the disassembly.
>
>
> The hardware doesn't know about the symbol? Do you mean for overflow?


Right, I just mean that the notation of an offset from a symbol kind of breaks down with the overflow, and that the "overflow" doesn't represent an overflow in the hardware anyway. At best `<keep_symbol+0xfffffffffffe0018>` is just an odd way to represent a negative offset. I think it makes more sense to just return nothing from `evaulateBranch` if the result would be negative?


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D58400/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D58400