[PATCH] D84069: [NFC][PPC][AIX] Add test coverage for _Complex return values

[Chris Bowler via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

cebowleratibm marked an inline comment as done.
cebowleratibm added inline comments.


================
Comment at: llvm/test/CodeGen/PowerPC/aix-complex.ll:36
+  store double %1, double* getelementptr inbounds ({ double, double }, { double, double }* @gcd, i32 0, i32 1), align 8
+  call void bitcast (void (...)* @anchor to void ()*)()
+  ret void
----------------
Xiangling_L wrote:
> Just a question, why we would like to branch to `anchor` here? Does it help us with testing _Complex?
Yes, it's so that there are no stray instructions that weave into the stfd's that are expected to follow the call to dblCmplxRetCallee.

; CHECK-NEXT:    stfd 1, 0([[REG]])
; CHECK-NEXT:    stfd 2, 8([[REG]])

is not ideal because we don't care what order the stfd's come out and

; CHECK-DAG:    stfd 1, 0([[REG]])
; CHECK-DAG:    stfd 2, 8([[REG]])

without the anchor would not require the stfd's to come immediately after the callee.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D84069/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D84069