First set of replies...

http://codereview.chromium.org/1930/diff/1/9
File src/builtins-arm.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/1930/diff/1/9#newcode67
Line 67: __ push(r1);  // constructor function
On 2008/09/11 21:33:13, Feng Qian wrote:
> The constructor function pushed on the stack seems not used. Double
check!

It is used for example on line 78:
__ ldr(r1, MemOperand(sp, kPointerSize));

http://codereview.chromium.org/1930/diff/1/9#newcode100
Line 100: // r3: number of arguments (smi-tagged)
On 2008/09/11 21:33:13, Feng Qian wrote:
> How about adding one more line comment here:
> // r2: caller sp
Fixed

http://codereview.chromium.org/1930/diff/1/18
File src/codegen-arm.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/1930/diff/1/18#newcode3876
Line 3876: ASSERT(args->length() == 1);
On 2008/09/11 21:33:13, Feng Qian wrote:
> Please update comment above function declaration.
Outdated comment removed.

http://codereview.chromium.org/1930/diff/1/8
File src/frames-arm.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/1930/diff/1/8#newcode48
Line 48: return
static_cast<StackFrame::Type>(Smi::cast(marker)->value());
On 2008/09/11 21:33:13, Feng Qian wrote:
> Now this function looks exactly like the on in frame-ia32.cc. Can we
move it to
> frames.cc?

This change is already unwieldy. Some of the cleanup should move to a
follow up change.

http://codereview.chromium.org/1930/diff/1/20
File src/macro-assembler-arm.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/1930/diff/1/20#newcode299
Line 299:
On 2008/09/11 21:33:13, Feng Qian wrote:
> This part is a bit complicated. I can see unnecessary mov instructions
in
> different paths. For example, when both actual and expected are
immediate but
> not equal, there are two instructions that move actual.immediate()
into r0.
>

Removed leftover code from the old calling convention. Thanks for
spotting!

http://codereview.chromium.org/1930/diff/1/20#newcode665
Line 665: Builtins::JavaScript id, bool* resolved) {
On 2008/09/11 21:33:13, Feng Qian wrote:
> Can this function be made that same as in IA32? (non-static).
>
> Part of code looks identical as the same function in IA32. You may
want to
> refactor the common code out.

Factored the common code out into Builtins::GetCode(JavaScript id, bool*
resolved).

http://codereview.chromium.org/1930/diff/1/13
File src/simulator-arm.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/1930/diff/1/13#newcode94
Line 94: OS::Abort();
On 2008/09/11 10:43:23, Kasper Lund wrote:
> Is this intentional?

Yes, this was just needed so that test.py does not wait until the
timeout expires when hitting a stop instruction. Will be removed before
putback.

http://codereview.chromium.org/1930

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

Reply via email to