r336120 resulted in falling back to SelectionDAG more often due to the G_STORE
MMOs not matching the vreg size. This fixes that by explicitly any-extending the
value.
llvm-svn: 336209
We currently don't any-extend vararg parameters before storing them to the stack
locations on Darwin. However, SelectionDAG however does this, and so user code
is in the wild which inadvertently relies on this extension. This can manifest
in cases where the value stored is (int)0, but the actual parameter is interpreted
by va_arg as a pointer, and so not extending to 64 bits causes the callee to
load additional undefined bits.
llvm-svn: 336120
Discussed here:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-January/120320.html
In preparation for adding support for named vregs we are changing the sigil for
physical registers in MIR to '$' from '%'. This will prevent name clashes of
named physical register with named vregs.
llvm-svn: 323922
This updates the MIRPrinter to include the regclass when printing
virtual register defs, which is already valid syntax for the
parser. That is, given 64 bit %0 and %1 in a "gpr" regbank,
%1(s64) = COPY %0(s64)
would now be written as
%1:gpr(s64) = COPY %0(s64)
While this change alone introduces a bit of redundancy with the
registers block, it allows us to update the tests to be more concise
and understandable and brings us closer to being able to remove the
registers block completely.
Note: We generally only print the class in defs, but there is one
exception. If there are uses without any defs whatsoever, we'll print
the class on all uses. I'm not completely convinced this comes up in
meaningful machine IR, but for now the MIRParser and MachineVerifier
both accept that kind of stuff, so we don't want to have a situation
where we can print something we can't parse.
llvm-svn: 316479
Some platforms (notably iOS) use a different calling convention for unnamed vs
named parameters in varargs functions, so we need to keep track of this
information when translating calls.
Since not many platforms are involved, the guts of the special handling is in
the ValueHandler class (with a generic implementation that should work for most
targets).
llvm-svn: 292283
Matt Arsenault