Chromium Code Reviews
chromiumcodereview-hr@appspot.gserviceaccount.com (chromiumcodereview-hr) | Please choose your nickname with Settings | Help | Chromium Project | Gerrit Changes | Sign out
(441)

Issue 155631: X64: Implement inline cache of monomorphic constant function call. Mark a de... (Closed)

Created:
11 years, 5 months ago by William Hesse
Modified:
9 years, 7 months ago
Reviewers:
Kasper Lund
CC:
v8-dev
Visibility:
Public.

Description

X64: Implement inline cache of monomorphic constant function call. Mark a debugger test on X64 as failing. Committed: http://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=2485

Patch Set 1 #

Patch Set 2 : '' #

Total comments: 1
Unified diffs Side-by-side diffs Delta from patch set Stats (+337 lines, -8 lines) Patch
M src/x64/macro-assembler-x64.cc View 1 chunk +150 lines, -0 lines 0 comments Download
M src/x64/stub-cache-x64.cc View 1 2 chunks +186 lines, -8 lines 1 comment Download
M test/mjsunit/mjsunit.status View 1 chunk +1 line, -0 lines 0 comments Download

Messages

Total messages: 3 (0 generated)
William Hesse
11 years, 5 months ago (2009-07-16 11:57:01 UTC) #1
Kasper Lund
LGTM! http://codereview.chromium.org/155631/diff/8/11 File src/x64/stub-cache-x64.cc (right): http://codereview.chromium.org/155631/diff/8/11#newcode341 Line 341: // Load the global or builtins object ...
11 years, 5 months ago (2009-07-16 12:36:20 UTC) #2
William Hesse
11 years, 5 months ago (2009-07-16 12:51:04 UTC) #3
These helper methods of StubCompiler are static methods.  If they are only
called from member functions of StubCompiler and its subclasses, with their
macro assemblers, then they could be made member functions, but this would need
to be checked.

As static methods, they don't have access to member fields (of course).


On 2009/07/16 12:36:20, Kasper Lund wrote:
> LGTM!
> 
> http://codereview.chromium.org/155631/diff/8/11
> File src/x64/stub-cache-x64.cc (right):
> 
> http://codereview.chromium.org/155631/diff/8/11#newcode341
> Line 341: // Load the global or builtins object from the current context.
> Why are we passing masm to this function? Isn't the assembler built into the
> StubCompiler? Maybe we should fix that later.

Powered by Google App Engine
This is Rietveld 408576698