What I am saying is that the int version should take any int, and mask off
all but 3 bits.
Then it is safer, and can take the register code directly when implementing
the register version.
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 3:13 PM, wrote:
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/115920/diff/1008/1011
> File sr
http://codereview.chromium.org/115920/diff/1008/1011
File src/x64/assembler-x64.cc (right):
http://codereview.chromium.org/115920/diff/1008/1011#newcode275
Line 275: ASSERT_EQ(rm & 0x07, rm);
I'd rather fail than silently correct errors. The caller should know
that the argument is valid.
http:/
LGTM. Comments are optional changes.
http://codereview.chromium.org/115920/diff/1008/1010
File src/x64/assembler-x64-inl.h (right):
http://codereview.chromium.org/115920/diff/1008/1010#newcode77
Line 77: emit(0x48 | (rm_reg.code() >> 3));
There was never a good reason for putting these in -inl
http://codereview.chromium.org/115920/diff/1/3
File src/x64/assembler-x64-inl.h (right):
http://codereview.chromium.org/115920/diff/1/3#newcode76
Line 76: emit(0x48 | (reg.code() >> 3));
I agree that there should be only one implementation.
I would prefer it to be the one taking a numeric argume
Fast progress on the assembler. Some drive-by comments.
http://codereview.chromium.org/115920/diff/1/4
File src/x64/assembler-x64.cc (right):
http://codereview.chromium.org/115920/diff/1/4#newcode600
Line 600: void Assembler::nop(int n) {
It is unclear how you are implemenenting nops of variou
http://codereview.chromium.org/115920/diff/1/2
File src/ia32/assembler-ia32.cc (right):
http://codereview.chromium.org/115920/diff/1/2#newcode1491
Line 1491: emit_rex_64(adr);
I don't think this belongs in the ia32 compiler.
http://codereview.chromium.org/115920/diff/1/3
File src/x64/assembler-
