[LLVMdev] Lying about being expanded?
Duncan Sands
baldrick at free.fr
Sun Aug 21 04:21:33 PDT 2011
Hi Sanjoy,
> I noticed in the LegalizeDAG.cpp (SelectionDAGLegalize::LegalizeOp):
>
> case ISD::INIT_TRAMPOLINE:
> case ISD::FRAMEADDR:
> case ISD::RETURNADDR:
> // These operations lie about being legal: when they claim to be legal,
> // they should actually be custom-lowered.
> Action = TLI.getOperationAction(Node->getOpcode(),
> Node->getValueType(0));
> if (Action == TargetLowering::Legal)
> Action = TargetLowering::Custom;
> break;
>
> What does this mean? Why does a target not request a node to be
> custom lowered if such a thing is needed?
as far as I know all nodes are considered to be legal by default. Thus I
guess the comment is confused: most likely some target forgot to declare
them as custom, and someone hacked this in rather than fixing the target.
> Also, I grepped for 'setOperationAction(ISD::TRAMPOLINE' and the
> operation is 'Custom' in every instance. Should ISD::TRAMPOLINE be
> removed from this case?
Probably they should all be removed, and possibly some targets fixed to
declare them as Custom.
Ciao, Duncan.
More information about the llvm-dev
mailing list