https://codereview.chromium.org/23710014/diff/1/src/compiler.cc
File src/compiler.cc (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/23710014/diff/1/src/compiler.cc#newcode968
src/compiler.cc:968: ASSERT(FLAG_concurrent_recompilation);
Don't assert flags; they should only be used to turn on functionality.
https://codereview.chromium.org/23710014/diff/1/src/compiler.cc#newcode993
src/compiler.cc:993: FullCodeGenerator::BackEdgeTableIterator
back_edges(shared->code(), &no_gc);
It seems weird to make a BackEdgeTableIterator and then use it to
search. I think that probably means you want a SearchBackEdgeTable
method on Code.
https://codereview.chromium.org/23710014/diff/1/src/compiler.cc#newcode1116
src/compiler.cc:1116: static uint32_t CurrentPcOffset(Isolate* isolate,
Why are you doing a search for the PC of the top frame? This is should
already be on the stack when calling the builtin, and thus available to
be passed in.
https://codereview.chromium.org/23710014/diff/1/src/compiler.h
File src/compiler.h (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/23710014/diff/1/src/compiler.h#newcode505
src/compiler.h:505: osr_pc_offset_(osr_pc_offset),
This is the PC offset of the backedge. It seems weird that it's going be
part of the compiler. Seems like it would fit better in the
CompilationInfo.
https://codereview.chromium.org/23710014/diff/1/src/runtime.cc
File src/runtime.cc (left):
https://codereview.chromium.org/23710014/diff/1/src/runtime.cc#oldcode8601
src/runtime.cc:8601:
Ah, now I see where this code came from. Why is this better in the
compiler? I think the runtime should do the stack munging and the
compiler should stay out of that business.
https://codereview.chromium.org/23710014/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
