Implement hardfloat calling convention in macro assembler and simulator.

src/arm/code-stubs-arm.cc

Index: src/arm/code-stubs-arm.cc
diff --git a/src/arm/code-stubs-arm.cc b/src/arm/code-stubs-arm.cc
index edc2741849154e441bfdca03dc2cab313f6791b4..9a36b4a655a7c7b14ce077782f705cb759a508c5 100644
--- a/src/arm/code-stubs-arm.cc
+++ b/src/arm/code-stubs-arm.cc
@@ -831,13 +831,22 @@ void FloatingPointHelper::CallCCodeForDoubleOperation(
   // through pop(pc) below.
   __ push(lr);
   __ PrepareCallCFunction(4, scratch);  // Two doubles are 4 arguments.

[Søren Thygesen Gjesse, 2011/04/27 08:19:01]

We should probably pass 0 instead of 4 here for hardfloat. Maybe we should try
to change PrepareCallCFunction to communicate the signature better, but leave
that for a separate change.

This goes for all PrepareCallCFunction below.

[Karl Klose, 2011/04/27 12:54:13]

Changed to PrepareCallCFunction(0, 2, scratch).

+  if (FLAG_hardfloat) {

[Søren Thygesen Gjesse, 2011/04/27 08:19:01]

As far as I can see CallCCodeForDoubleOperation is only used if VFP3 is not
available. How about asserting this and not support --novfp3 --hardfloat?

[Karl Klose, 2011/04/27 12:54:13]

It is used from the TRBO stub, also with VFP3.

+    __ vmov(d0, r0, r1);
+    __ vmov(d1, r2, r3);
+  }
   // Call C routine that may not cause GC or other trouble.
   __ CallCFunction(ExternalReference::double_fp_operation(op, masm->isolate()),
                    4);
   // Store answer in the overwritable heap number. Double returned in
-  // registers r0 and r1.
-  __ Strd(r0, r1, FieldMemOperand(heap_number_result,
-                                  HeapNumber::kValueOffset));
+  // registers r0 and r1 or in d0.
+  if (FLAG_hardfloat) {
+    __ vstr(d0,
+            FieldMemOperand(heap_number_result, HeapNumber::kValueOffset));
+  } else {
+    __ Strd(r0, r1, FieldMemOperand(heap_number_result,
+                                    HeapNumber::kValueOffset));
+  }
   // Place heap_number_result in r0 and return to the pushed return address.
   __ mov(r0, Operand(heap_number_result));
   __ pop(pc);
@@ -1180,6 +1189,10 @@ static void EmitTwoNonNanDoubleComparison(MacroAssembler* masm,
     // Call C routine that may not cause GC or other trouble.
     __ push(lr);
     __ PrepareCallCFunction(4, r5);  // Two doubles count as 4 arguments.
+    if (FLAG_hardfloat) {
+      __ vmov(d0, r0, r1);
+      __ vmov(d1, r2, r3);
+    }
     __ CallCFunction(ExternalReference::compare_doubles(masm->isolate()), 4);
     __ pop(pc);  // Return.
   }
@@ -2829,7 +2842,11 @@ void TranscendentalCacheStub::GenerateCallCFunction(MacroAssembler* masm,
 
   __ push(lr);
   __ PrepareCallCFunction(2, scratch);
-  __ vmov(r0, r1, d2);
+  if (FLAG_hardfloat) {

[Søren Thygesen Gjesse, 2011/04/27 08:19:01]

I think we should consider changing the TranscendentalCacheStub to take the
argument in d0 instead of d2 to avoid this move. But again leave it for a
separate change.

+    __ vmov(d0, d2);
+  } else {
+    __ vmov(r0, r1, d2);
+  }
   switch (type_) {
     case TranscendentalCache::SIN:
       __ CallCFunction(ExternalReference::math_sin_double_function(isolate), 2);
@@ -3056,8 +3073,7 @@ void MathPowStub::Generate(MacroAssembler* masm) {
                           &call_runtime);
     __ push(lr);
     __ PrepareCallCFunction(3, scratch);
-    __ mov(r2, exponent);
-    __ vmov(r0, r1, double_base);
+    __ SetCallCDoubleArguments(double_base, exponent);
     __ CallCFunction(
         ExternalReference::power_double_int_function(masm->isolate()), 3);
     __ pop(lr);
@@ -3086,8 +3102,7 @@ void MathPowStub::Generate(MacroAssembler* masm) {
                           &call_runtime);
     __ push(lr);
     __ PrepareCallCFunction(4, scratch);
-    __ vmov(r0, r1, double_base);
-    __ vmov(r2, r3, double_exponent);
+    __ SetCallCDoubleArguments(double_base, double_exponent);
     __ CallCFunction(
         ExternalReference::power_double_double_function(masm->isolate()), 4);
     __ pop(lr);