http://codereview.chromium.org/113837/diff/104/109 File src/ia32/register-allocator-ia32-inl.h (right):
http://codereview.chromium.org/113837/diff/104/109#newcode63 Line 63: } On 2009/05/26 13:33:32, William Hesse wrote: > You could map the codes 0,1,2,3, and 7 to the range 0..4 by > (i + 1) & 7, and back by (i+7) & 7. Would this be faster than the lookup > tables? I'll give it a try. It has the side effect of allocating in a different order (changing our bias toward eax into a bias toward edi). http://codereview.chromium.org/113837/diff/104/121 File src/ia32/virtual-frame-ia32.h (right): http://codereview.chromium.org/113837/diff/104/121#newcode152 Line 152: // Sync the range of elements in [begin, end] with memory. On 2009/05/26 13:33:32, William Hesse wrote: > I am surprised that there were no uses of this that incorrectly assumed that > elements[end] didn't get synced. > Is this true, and was this always just an incorrect comment > listing the range as not including end? The comment was incorrect. At some point we changed it to avoid writing +1, but now I've introduced more call sites where we have to write -1. http://codereview.chromium.org/113837 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ v8-dev mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
