Skip to content
  1. Aug 06, 2013
  2. Aug 05, 2013
  3. Aug 04, 2013
  4. Aug 03, 2013
    • Hal Finkel's avatar
      Fix PPC64 64-bit GPR inline asm constraint matching · b176acb6
      Hal Finkel authored
      Internally, the PowerPC backend names the 32-bit GPRs R[0-9]+, and names the
      64-bit parent GPRs X[0-9]+. When matching inline assembly constraints with
      explicit register names, on PPC64 when an i64 MVT has been requested, we need
      to follow gcc's convention of using r[0-9]+ to refer to the 64-bit (parent)
      registers.
      
      At some point, we'll probably want to arrange things so that the generic code
      in TargetLowering uses the AsmName fields declared in *RegisterInfo.td in order
      to match these inline asm register constraints. If we do that, this change can
      be reverted.
      
      llvm-svn: 187693
      b176acb6
    • Matt Arsenault's avatar
      Minor address space code simplification. · 2f9cce2c
      Matt Arsenault authored
      Remove assertion that the verifier should catch.
      
      llvm-svn: 187692
      2f9cce2c
    • Bob Wilson's avatar
      Regenerate with changes for -rdynamic. · 8d7e6906
      Bob Wilson authored
      llvm-svn: 187687
      8d7e6906
    • Bob Wilson's avatar
      Link with -rdynamic instead of -Wl,-export-dynamic. · 8658b914
      Bob Wilson authored
      Recent versions of the OS X linker support this but follow the existing
      OS X linker convention of using an underscore in the option name, i.e.,
      -export_dynamic. Rather than changing our configure scripts to check for
      that alternate spelling, it is simpler to just use the compiler's -rdynamic
      option and let it deal with translating that to the appropriate linker
      option. One potential disadvantage of this approach is that the compiler
      will typically ignore -rdynamic on platforms where it is not supported, so
      the HAVE_LINK_EXPORT_DYNAMIC in config.h will not necessarily show whether
      that option has any effect or not. I don't see any in-tree uses of that
      macro, so I'm assuming it is OK.
      
      llvm-svn: 187686
      8658b914
Loading