[LLVMdev] [RFC] Stackmap and Patchpoint Intrinsic Proposal

[Philip Reames]

On 10/23/13 5:38 PM, Andrew Trick wrote:
>
> On Oct 23, 2013, at 5:27 PM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com 
> <mailto:listmail at philipreames.com>> wrote:
>
>>> The implementation of the two intrinsics is actually very similar. 
>>> In this case, the difference would be that llvm.stackmap does not 
>>> reserve space for patching, while llvm.patchpoint does.
>> I'm slightly confused by this given that stackmap takes an argument 
>> indicating the number of nops to emit as well, but it's not worth 
>> debating this any more.  Let's move on.  We can revisit this once I'm 
>> actually using the new intrinsics and can provide real concrete 
>> feedback.
>
> I want this to be clear when we expose the intrinsics to other 
> developers. I’ve been making an effort to improve the docs: 
> http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1981. Please let me know where 
> clarification is needed
I responded in the review.  The only big thing that might be worth 
discussion here is the "full resume" semantics which are mentioned at 
the very end.  This seemed to disagree with our previous discussion.  
Let me know if you're either a) unclear at what I was getting at or b) 
believe the "full resume" semantics were a key part of the intrinsic.  
In either case, we should probably hash it out here.

Philip

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20131023/f057327a/attachment.html>