phoebewang wrote:

I don't fully agree with the points. If fastcc is just (and always) the C 
calling convention, it means its existence is meaningless. I agree with its 
original intention and a well designed ABI doesn't need it at all. But it is 
the exactly reason why we retargeting it for APX. We are solving (almost) the 
same problem: a single calling convention has its design limitations. The 
difference is just, for 32-bit, it's bad design at the beginning; for APX, the 
design cannot fit the new feature. So, IMO, using fastcc for APX is the best 
choice.

The way to use `getOptimalCCForInternalCall` looks like over engineering to me. 
I can't say for other targets, but I believe we don't have the need to 
introduce a second fastcc in 5 years on x86. Noting, we actually has a 
`x86_fastcallcc` that used for C's `fastcall`. We neither use it for fasscc as 
you suggested, nor invent a second fastcc for so many years.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/164768
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to