Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

intel-style asm printer for x86 doesn't support jump tables #1431

Closed
lattner opened this issue Dec 19, 2006 · 4 comments
Closed

intel-style asm printer for x86 doesn't support jump tables #1431

lattner opened this issue Dec 19, 2006 · 4 comments
Labels
backend:X86 bugzilla Issues migrated from bugzilla compile-fail Use [accepts-invalid] and [rejects-valid] instead

Comments

@lattner
Copy link
Collaborator

lattner commented Dec 19, 2006

Bugzilla Link 1059
Resolution FIXED
Resolved on Feb 22, 2010 12:48
Version 1.9
OS All
CC @asl

Extended Description

-x86-asm-syntax=intel yields:

$BB1_2451: ;bb740
mov EAX,
mov ECX, DWORD PTR [ESP + 1372]
jmp DWORD PTR [EAX + 4*ECX]

AT&T yields:

LBB1_2451: #bb740
movl $LJTI1_3, %eax
movl 1372(%esp), %ecx
jmpl *(%eax,%ecx,4)

@asl
Copy link
Collaborator

asl commented Dec 19, 2006

Chris, could you please attach failed bytecode. All examples I've tried to
construct by myself lead to assertion (for intel syntax). Need to investigate
more, but it's somehow different task :)

@asl
Copy link
Collaborator

asl commented Dec 19, 2006

Quick'n'-dirty patch
I don't have bytecode to play with (see prev. comment), so this is just some
possible way to fix. Let me know thhe results.

@lattner
Copy link
Collaborator Author

lattner commented Dec 19, 2006

The example in bug 1061 now demonstrates this issue.

@llvmbot llvmbot transferred this issue from llvm/llvm-bugzilla-archive Dec 3, 2021
This issue was closed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backend:X86 bugzilla Issues migrated from bugzilla compile-fail Use [accepts-invalid] and [rejects-valid] instead
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants