http://codereview.chromium.org/7021007/diff/11004/src/arm/assembler-arm.h
File src/arm/assembler-arm.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7021007/diff/11004/src/arm/assembler-arm.h#newcode1223
src/arm/assembler-arm.h:1223: static int MaxNumPRInfo() { return
kMaxNumPRInfo; }
No need to make accessors for constants - just make it public. However
the name is quite strange, and will not make much sense. After all I
don't think we need it - see later comments.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7021007/diff/11004/src/arm/lithium-codegen-arm.cc
File src/arm/lithium-codegen-arm.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7021007/diff/11004/src/arm/lithium-codegen-arm.cc#newcode271
src/arm/lithium-codegen-arm.cc:271: // We also need to check that the
jump table will require fewer constant
I think we can avoid this restriction - see below.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7021007/diff/11004/src/arm/lithium-codegen-arm.cc#newcode284
src/arm/lithium-codegen-arm.cc:284: __
bind(&deopt_jump_table_[i].label);
How about avoiding using the const pool all together by emitting a -4 pc
relative load of pc for each table entry.

ldr pc, [pc, #-4]
<address of deopt table entry 0>
ldr pc, [pc, #-4]
<address of deopt table entry 1>
...

http://codereview.chromium.org/7021007/

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

Reply via email to