From: David Majnemer <david.majnemer@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 20:08:27 +0000 (+0000)
Subject: [X86] Use a better sentinel offset for the FrameAddr index
X-Git-Url: http://plrg.eecs.uci.edu/git/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=7fa889dd8799a5db053d011031f8a1cdebed0e60;p=oota-llvm.git

[X86] Use a better sentinel offset for the FrameAddr index

Other pieces of CodeGen want to negate frame object offsets to account
for architectures where the stack grows down.  Our object is a pseudo
object so it's offset doesn't matter.  However, we shouldn't choose an
offset which results in undefined behavior if you negate it.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@237474 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
---

diff --git a/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp b/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp
index 2b5c60019e3..5ec719bbd8c 100644
--- a/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp
+++ b/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp
@@ -15637,7 +15637,7 @@ SDValue X86TargetLowering::LowerFRAMEADDR(SDValue Op, SelectionDAG &DAG) const {
       // Set up a frame object for the return address.
       unsigned SlotSize = RegInfo->getSlotSize();
       FrameAddrIndex = MF.getFrameInfo()->CreateFixedObject(
-          SlotSize, /*Offset=*/INT64_MIN, /*IsImmutable=*/false);
+          SlotSize, /*Offset=*/0, /*IsImmutable=*/false);
       FuncInfo->setFAIndex(FrameAddrIndex);
     }
     return DAG.getFrameIndex(FrameAddrIndex, VT);