http://codereview.chromium.org/6461017/diff/1/src/arm/assembler-arm.cc
File src/arm/assembler-arm.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/6461017/diff/1/src/arm/assembler-arm.cc#newcode355
src/arm/assembler-arm.cc:355: Condition Assembler::GetCondition(Instr
instr) {
On 2011/02/09 13:57:16, Alexandre wrote:
Same as Instruction::ConditionField(). Do we want to redefine this?

This now calls Instruction::ConditionField()

http://codereview.chromium.org/6461017/diff/1/src/arm/assembler-arm.cc#newcode514
src/arm/assembler-arm.cc:514:
On 2011/02/09 13:57:16, Alexandre wrote:
Not sure, but should we move these to the Instruction class in
constants-arm.* ?

I think it will be fine to have these in the Instruction class instead
of the assembler. However leaving them here for now.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6461017/diff/1/src/arm/assembler-arm.h
File src/arm/assembler-arm.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/6461017/diff/1/src/arm/assembler-arm.h#newcode1103
src/arm/assembler-arm.h:1103: static Condition GetCondition(Instr
instr);
On 2011/02/09 13:57:16, Alexandre wrote:
Same as Instruction::ConditionField(). Do we want to redefine this?

This now calls Instruction::ConditionField().

http://codereview.chromium.org/6461017/diff/1/src/arm/code-stubs-arm.cc
File src/arm/code-stubs-arm.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/6461017/diff/1/src/arm/code-stubs-arm.cc#newcode1301
src/arm/code-stubs-arm.cc:1301: Register scratch = r9;
On 2011/02/09 13:57:16, Alexandre wrote:
Is this more readable?
Register scratch = r9.is(tos_) ? r7 : r9;

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6461017/diff/1/src/arm/constants-arm.h
File src/arm/constants-arm.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/6461017/diff/1/src/arm/constants-arm.h#newcode144
src/arm/constants-arm.h:144: kConditionMask = 15 << 28      // Mask for
the condition field.
On 2011/02/09 13:57:16, Alexandre wrote:
kCondMask was already defined  (~line 259).
I think we should keep only one; but I think any of them is fine
though.

Removed this again.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6461017/diff/1/src/arm/full-codegen-arm.cc
File src/arm/full-codegen-arm.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/6461017/diff/1/src/arm/full-codegen-arm.cc#newcode50
src/arm/full-codegen-arm.cc:50: // class has a number of methods the
emit the code which is patchable and the
On 2011/02/09 13:57:16, Alexandre wrote:
typo: "the emit the code" -> "to emit the code" ?

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6461017/diff/1/src/arm/full-codegen-arm.cc#newcode92
src/arm/full-codegen-arm.cc:92: __ cmp_raw_immediate(r0,
delta_to_patch_site % kOff12Mask);
On 2011/02/09 14:35:30, Karl Klose wrote:
The destination register of the cmp should be reg.

Good catch, fixed.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6461017/

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

Reply via email to