Skip to content

Conversation

@lum1n0us
Copy link
Contributor

Or else, all secondary IRs and machine code will append to the content
of first function

@lum1n0us lum1n0us changed the title Reset JitCompContext [WIP]Reset JitCompContext Mar 25, 2022
}

for (i = 0; i < module->function_count; i++) {
if (!jit_cc_init(cc, 64)) {
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It is better if there is a function like jit_cc_reset() to reset block_stack, jit_frame, every JitBasicBlock.

Or else, a combination of jit_cc_destroy() and jit_cc_init() will do the work.

@wenyongh

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

my bad, jit_cc_destroy fits. No necessary to create a jit_cc_reset()

@lum1n0us lum1n0us force-pushed the reset_JitCompContext branch from a9beda2 to 61097d8 Compare March 25, 2022 06:32
@lum1n0us lum1n0us changed the title [WIP]Reset JitCompContext Reset JitCompContext Mar 25, 2022
@wenyongh wenyongh merged commit 7de695f into bytecodealliance:dev/fast_jit Mar 25, 2022
Or else, all secondary IRs and machine code will append to the content
of first function
@lum1n0us lum1n0us deleted the reset_JitCompContext branch May 10, 2022 14:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants