Skip to content
  1. Nov 16, 2012
  2. Oct 24, 2012
  3. May 30, 2012
  4. May 08, 2012
    • Jakob Stoklund Olesen's avatar
      s/CSR_Ghc/CSR_NoRegs/ · 276ae140
      Jakob Stoklund Olesen authored
      Share the CalleeSavedRegs defs between all calling conventions having no
      callee-saved registers.
      
      Patch by Yiannis Tsiouris!
      
      llvm-svn: 156382
      276ae140
  5. Feb 22, 2012
  6. Feb 18, 2012
  7. Feb 01, 2012
  8. Jan 17, 2012
  9. Jan 10, 2012
  10. Dec 01, 2011
  11. Jul 01, 2011
  12. Mar 03, 2011
  13. Mar 02, 2011
  14. Dec 10, 2010
    • Nate Begeman's avatar
      Formalize the notion that AVX and SSE are non-overlapping extensions from the... · 8b08f523
      Nate Begeman authored
      Formalize the notion that AVX and SSE are non-overlapping extensions from the compiler's point of view.  Per email discussion, we either want to always use VEX-prefixed instructions or never use them, and are taking "HasAVX" to mean "Always use VEX".  Passing -mattr=-avx,+sse42 should serve to restore legacy SSE support when desirable.
      
      llvm-svn: 121439
      8b08f523
  15. Oct 31, 2010
  16. Oct 01, 2010
    • Dale Johannesen's avatar
      Massive rewrite of MMX: · dd224d23
      Dale Johannesen authored
      The x86_mmx type is used for MMX intrinsics, parameters and
      return values where these use MMX registers, and is also
      supported in load, store, and bitcast.
      
      Only the above operations generate MMX instructions, and optimizations
      do not operate on or produce MMX intrinsics. 
      
      MMX-sized vectors <2 x i32> etc. are lowered to XMM or split into
      smaller pieces.  Optimizations may occur on these forms and the
      result casted back to x86_mmx, provided the result feeds into a
      previous existing x86_mmx operation.
      
      The point of all this is prevent optimizations from introducing
      MMX operations, which is unsafe due to the EMMS problem.
      
      llvm-svn: 115243
      dd224d23
  17. Aug 06, 2010
  18. Jul 05, 2010
  19. May 16, 2010
  20. Mar 11, 2010
  21. Dec 15, 2009
  22. Aug 03, 2009
  23. Jun 12, 2009
    • Arnold Schwaighofer's avatar
      Fix Bug 4278: X86-64 with -tailcallopt calling convention · e3a018d7
      Arnold Schwaighofer authored
      out of sync with regular cc.
      
      The only difference between the tail call cc and the normal
      cc was that one parameter register - R9 - was reserved for
      calling functions through a function pointer. After time the
      tail call cc has gotten out of sync with the regular cc. 
      
      We can use R11 which is also caller saved but not used as
      parameter register for potential function pointers and
      remove the special tail call cc on x86-64.
      
      llvm-svn: 73233
      e3a018d7
  24. Mar 24, 2009
    • Dan Gohman's avatar
      I was convinced that it's ok to allow a second i8 return value · efd2d44a
      Dan Gohman authored
      to be returned in DL. LLVM's multiple-return-value support is
      not ABI-conforming; front-ends that wish to have code emitted
      that conforms to an ABI are currently expected to make
      arrangements for this on their own rather than assuming that
      multiple-return-values will automatically do the right thing.
      This commit doesn't fundamentally change this situation.
      
      llvm-svn: 67588
      efd2d44a
  25. Mar 23, 2009
  26. Feb 23, 2009
  27. Feb 22, 2009
  28. Feb 01, 2009
  29. Dec 03, 2008
  30. Nov 20, 2008
  31. Sep 26, 2008
  32. Sep 25, 2008
  33. Sep 22, 2008
  34. Sep 05, 2008
Loading