[LLVMdev] Is address space 1 reserved?

[Philip Reames]

On 01/07/2015 11:28 AM, Pete Cooper wrote:
>
>> On Jan 7, 2015, at 11:18 AM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com 
>> <mailto:listmail at philipreames.com>> wrote:
>>
>> On the review for http://reviews.llvm.org/D6808, majnemer 
>> <http://reviews.llvm.org/p/majnemer/> commented that:
>> "Address space 1 has a special meaning in LLVM, it's identical to 
>> address space 0 except for the fact that "null" may be dereferenced. 
>> You might want to consider a different address space."
>>
>> This is the first I've heard of this and I can't find any 
>> documentation about it being reserved, either in general, or 
>> specifically for x86.  Can anyone clarify?
> First i’ve heard of it...
>>
>> The only address spaces with special meanings I know of are:
>> - 0 (the normal address space, null is not dereferencable)
>> - 256 - TLS, GS relative addressing
>> - 257 - FS relative addressing
> I didn’t even know 256/257 had special meanings.  I thought they were 
> only used by x86.  It would be good to clarify them too just incase 
> other targets ever wanted to use them.
Sorry, let me clarify.  To my knowledge, 256/257 are only reserved on x86.
>
> Thanks,
> Pete
>>
>> Philip
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu <mailto:LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu> http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150107/dac92e71/attachment.html>