LGTM, with comments.  I can make the changes, if you want.  It looks
like the test result changes for x64 were mainly made in an earlier
changelist.


http://codereview.chromium.org/155346/diff/1/3
File src/x64/disasm-x64.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/155346/diff/1/3#newcode509
Line 509: int DisassemblerX64::PrintImmediate(byte* data, OperandSize
size) {
I would call the argument immediate_size, since the operand size of the
instruction can be larger than the size of the immediate data.

http://codereview.chromium.org/155346/diff/1/3#newcode622
Line 622: OperandSize op_size = byte_size_immediate ? BYTE_SIZE :
operand_size();
immediate_size, not op_size.

http://codereview.chromium.org/155346/diff/1/3#newcode732
Line 732: if (imm8 > 0) {
This seems wrong.  Why aren't we testing the opcode to see if it encodes
using cl as the shift amount?  Won't this guarantee that a shift of 0
(or is that 64?) is disassembled wrong?  We may not generate that, but
it may as well be disassembled correctly.

http://codereview.chromium.org/155346

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to