break;
}
- // TAILJMPr64, CALL64r, CALL64pcrel32 - These instructions have register
- // inputs modeled as normal uses instead of implicit uses. As such, truncate
- // off all but the first operand (the callee). FIXME: Change isel.
+ // TAILJMPr64, CALL64r, CALL64pcrel32 - These instructions used to have
+ // register inputs modeled as normal uses instead of implicit uses. As such,
+ // they we used to truncate off all but the first operand (the callee). This
+ // issue seems to have been fixed at some point. This assert verifies that.
case X86::TAILJMPr64:
case X86::TAILJMPr64_REX:
case X86::CALL64r:
- case X86::CALL64pcrel32: {
- unsigned Opcode = OutMI.getOpcode();
- MCOperand Saved = OutMI.getOperand(0);
- OutMI = MCInst();
- OutMI.setOpcode(Opcode);
- OutMI.addOperand(Saved);
+ case X86::CALL64pcrel32:
+ assert(OutMI.getNumOperands() == 1 && "Unexpected number of operands!");
break;
- }
case X86::EH_RETURN:
case X86::EH_RETURN64: {
goto SetTailJmpOpcode;
SetTailJmpOpcode:
- MCOperand Saved = OutMI.getOperand(0);
- OutMI = MCInst();
+ assert(OutMI.getNumOperands() == 1 && "Unexpected number of operands!");
OutMI.setOpcode(Opcode);
- OutMI.addOperand(Saved);
break;
}
case X86::TAILJMPd_CC:
case X86::TAILJMPd64_CC: {
- MCOperand Saved = OutMI.getOperand(0);
- MCOperand Saved2 = OutMI.getOperand(1);
- OutMI = MCInst();
+ assert(OutMI.getNumOperands() == 2 && "Unexpected number of operands!");
OutMI.setOpcode(X86::JCC_1);
- OutMI.addOperand(Saved);
- OutMI.addOperand(Saved2);
break;
}